Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 26780

 1                           Wednesday, 8 October 2008

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           --- Upon commencing at 9.04 a.m.

 5             JUDGE AGIUS:  Good morning, Madam Registrar.  Could you call the

 6     case, please.

 7             THE REGISTRAR:  Good morning, Your Honours.  This is case

 8     IT-05-88-T, The Prosecutor versus Vujadin Popovic, et al.

 9             JUDGE AGIUS:  Thank you so much, ma'am.  All the accused are

10     present.  Now, Prosecution it's Mr. McCloskey and Mr. Vanderpuye as

11     yesterday.  From the Defence teams I noted the absence of Ms. Tapuskovic,

12     Mr. Nikolic, Mr. Bourgon, Mr. Petrusic and Mr. Haynes.  I don't see the

13     witness in the courtroom, does that mean there is a preliminary or

14     something.  Yes, Mr. Gosnell.

15             MR. GOSNELL:  Just a brief scheduling note.  One of the three

16     witnesses who was scheduled to testify for this week after the current

17     witness was denied a visa for entry into Holland.

18             JUDGE AGIUS:  It never rains but pours, you know.

19             MR. GOSNELL:  Which means we have one less witness than we

20     expected this week and so I would simply wish to notify the Chamber that

21     there is a possibility that we may be finishing earlier than expected on

22     Friday.  Particularly in light of some of the discussions we've had with

23     the Defence about -- or the Prosecution about the length of

24     cross-examination of the current witness.

25             JUDGE AGIUS:  All right, okay.  Thank you for keeping the Trial

Page 26781

 1     Chamber informed.  If we can be of any assistance to you, please let us

 2     know.  Now, the witness.

 3                           [The witness entered court]

 4             JUDGE AGIUS:  Good morning, Professor.  Welcome back.

 5     Mr. Lazarevic will finish his examination-in-chief.  Go ahead.

 6                           WITNESS:  MLADEN BAJAGIC [Resumed]

 7                           [Witness answered through interpreter]

 8             MR. LAZAREVIC:  Good morning, Your Honours.  Good morning

 9     everybody.

10                           Examination by Mr. Lazarevic:  [Continued]

11        Q.   Good morning, Professor Bajagic.

12        A.   Good morning.

13        Q.   I hope you had a good rest after yesterday.  And I'm convinced

14     that we will be able to finish your examination today.  I am sure of

15     my -- on my own behalf, I don't know about the others but we will do our

16     best to finish your examination today.

17        A.   Thank you.

18        Q.   Yesterday we left it off with the topic of the education centre

19     in Mount Jahorina.  I would like to pursue that same topic with a few

20     questions to round the topic off.  In your expert report, and I'm talking

21     about paragraph 163 which is Exhibit 4D499, you have stated that there

22     were actually two categories of military conscripts who had to be

23     educated in the education centre on Mount Jahorina.  The first category

24     are recruits, young men who are being sent for compulsory military

25     service who were supposed to do it in the Ministry of the Interior.

Page 26782

 1     That's the first category.  And the second category, are deserters, i.e.,

 2     military conscripts who were brought from Serbia and sent for education

 3     pursuant to documents that we saw yesterday.  I would like to look at

 4     another document which is under tab 33 in your binder.  This is Exhibit

 5     4D352.

 6             While we are waiting for this to appear in e-court, I'm going to

 7     say that this is information sent by the assistant commander Dusko Jevic.

 8     The date is 13 July 1995, and the information was sent to the Ministry of

 9     the Interior to the special police brigade at the Jahorina training camp.

10     This is actually a daily report as we have said.  What I would like to

11     look at with regard to this document is the first paragraph thereof, the

12     last sentence.  It says according to the list, 201 conscripts and 35

13     recruits doing their military service, so conscripts is here represented

14     by what abbreviation?

15        A.   VO.

16        Q.   35 recruits doing their military service in the MUP are currently

17     staying at the Jahorina mission and training centre.  Is that exactly

18     what you're talking about in your paragraph 163?  Are these the two

19     categories that you mentioned?

20        A.   Yes, these are the two categories of persons who were sent to the

21     Jahorina training camp.

22        Q.   Very well, and now could you please look at paragraph 165 of your

23     expert report, you say in it that the deserters in the Jahorina training

24     camp had nothing but basic military training.  The training that they had

25     to undergo, did it have anything to do with the education of MUP members,

Page 26783

 1     especially members of the special police?

 2        A.   In my paragraph 165, I presented this fact and say that military

 3     conscript training had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with what was

 4     supposed to be education for any kind of engagement in the Ministry of

 5     the Interior.

 6        Q.   Very well.

 7        A.   Especially it didn't have anything to do with the education of

 8     future members of any special police unit because we know from various

 9     experiences across the world that it takes a lot of time to train

10     somebody to become a member of a special police unit.  In this case, a

11     special police brigade.  It takes anything between one year and three

12     years for such education.

13        Q.   And just one more question, a rather general one with regard to

14     this topic.  We have already heard many times that when it comes to this

15     mixed unit that was placed under the command of Mr. Borovcanin

16     encompassed the second detachment of the special police Sekovic, the

17     first company of the Zvornik special units and a company of military

18     conscripts who had been in training at the Jahorina camp.  Could you

19     please tell us what your conclusion was in your expert report with this

20     regard?  Was this unit a unit with homogeneous nature?

21        A.   In any case, this unit that Mr. Borovcanin received pursuant to

22     an order was not [Realtime transcript read in error "was"] homogeneous

23     because there were three different groups or members in that unit.  It

24     was an ad hoc unit.  One group were members of the special police

25     brigade, another group were members of the PJP, and the third part were

Page 26784

 1     those who had arrived from the training camp who had never been in any

 2     other education and they were only informed with the basic rules of

 3     service at Jahorina training camp.  This did not last more than 15 or 20

 4     days and they were not prepared to act at a level that a homogenous unit

 5     should have and they were not allowed to participate in any kind of

 6     engagement.

 7        Q.   Just for the record, I would like to say that when we are talking

 8     about units that --

 9             THE INTERPRETER:  Could the counsel please slow down especially

10     when quoting numbers.  Thank you.

11             MR. LAZAREVIC:  [Interpretation]

12        Q.   I would now like to -- yes.  The exhibit that I mentioned is

13     4D337.  This is order 64/95, but I did not think it necessary to show it

14     again because we have had several occasions to look at that particular

15     document that I was referring to in this particular question?

16             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yes, Mr. Vanderpuye.

17             MR. VANDERPUYE:  Thank you, Mr. President.  I apologise for

18     intervention to my colleague, but I notice in page 5, it appears to be

19     line 5 that the witness's answer doesn't appear to reflect what he said

20     and it specifically refers to homogenous unit at that line, homogenous

21     unit should have and they were not allowed to participate in any kind of

22     activity, I don't believe that is what the witness actually testified to,

23     and so I wonder if my colleague could clarify that.

24             MR. LAZAREVIC:  Yes, my colleague is right.  I am grateful.  I

25     believe that we all need to have a clear record on this.

Page 26785

 1             JUDGE AGIUS:  Thank you.

 2             MR. LAZAREVIC:  [Interpretation]

 3        Q.   You see, Mr. Bajagic, in the transcript we have it that you were

 4     talking about the unit composed of deserters and it says here in the

 5     transcript that they were not allowed to participate in any form of

 6     activity but I believe that you said that they were not adequately or

 7     sufficiently trained do that?

 8        A.   I said that they were not adequately and sufficiently trained, I

 9     didn't say that they were not allowed to be engaged.

10             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yes, Mr. Vanderpuye.

11             MR. VANDERPUYE:  Thank you, Mr. President.  I appreciate that.

12     But it's still unclear as to what activity the witness is talking about.

13     I know that wasn't in the original answer but I would also ask if my

14     colleague would clarify that as well.

15             JUDGE AGIUS:  Thank you.  Yes, Mr. Lazarevic.

16             MR. LAZAREVIC:  [Interpretation] I believe it's clear now.  It's

17     just -- activities were not mentioned at all in the witness's answer.

18             JUDGE AGIUS:  They were not mentioned but this is precisely what

19     Mr. Vanderpuye is asking.  Perhaps the witness can state exactly what

20     kind of activity/activities we were talking about or we could be talking

21     about.

22             MR. LAZAREVIC:  [Interpretation]

23        Q.   Professor, I'll try and clarify this matter.  When we are talking

24     about activities of this mixed unit, combat activities, were they

25     adequately trained to participate in such activities?

Page 26786

 1        A.   The part of the unit or members of that unit who had arrived from

 2     the Jahorina training centre on mount Jahorina were not adequately

 3     trained.  They were deserters, they were not adequately trained in order

 4     to be able to respond to any such task.  That would be my answer.

 5             MR. LAZAREVIC:  Is my colleague satisfied with the answer or do I

 6     need further clarifications.

 7             MR. VANDERPUYE:  No, it's fine.  If there's any cross, I'll

 8     undertake it.  Thanks.

 9             MR. LAZAREVIC:  [Interpretation] Thank you.

10        Q.   Professor Bajagic, my next topic, since I believe that we have

11     exhausted the training centre on Jahorina is the training centre of the

12     MUP of the Republika Srpska in the period of immediate threat of war or

13     the conditions of war.  I would like to go to that rather first.  I would

14     like to say that we are talking about paragraphs between 169 and 195 of

15     your expert report.

16             In this regard, I would like you to look at the document under

17     tab 15.  It is 4D413.  I would like to look at a few articles of the law

18     on the implementation of the Law on the Interior during an immediate

19     threat of war or war.

20             Let's first look at Article 2.  Looking at this article, could

21     you tell me whether pursuant to Article 2 when war is proclaimed or an

22     imminent threat of war, the Law on the Interior continues to be applied

23     unless differently specified by another law.

24        A.   Yes.  The provisions of other laws are applied unless this law

25     strictly specifies something else.  The answer is yes.  The provisions of

Page 26787

 1     the Law on the Interior are still applied.

 2        Q.   Thank you very much.  With this regard, in order to be as

 3     expeditious as possible, I would like to look at Article 12 of the same

 4     law.  Article 12 defines and says that in addition to the special units

 5     of the police, the Minister of the Interior can also establish other

 6     special police units who will be engaged in combat.  Please, could you

 7     tell us pursuant to this law, these are the only two categories of police

 8     units that appear in this law?

 9        A.   Yes.  Special police units and specialised police units, that's

10     what is provided for by the law.

11        Q.   Thank you very much.  I will not dwell upon this point.  I would

12     like to move on to the third chapter of your report, which is command and

13     control in the MUP of Republika Srpska.  Again to be expeditious, I'd

14     like to say that before this Trial Chamber we have heard a lot about the

15     terms of command and control.  I'll skip the terminology and the

16     determinants of the terms control command and management and I will move

17     on to the control and command in the police.  I would just like to point

18     your attention to paragraphs between 196 and 205 of your expert report

19     which are on pages 54 to 57, or rather 53 to 56 in e-court.  And I would

20     also like to say that in your expert report, you speak about the command

21     and control in police in general terms in paragraphs 206 and 226, I will

22     not further analyse these paragraphs in this examination-in-chief, I

23     would just like to analyse paragraph 228.  Do you have that in front of

24     you?

25        A.   Yes.

Page 26788

 1        Q.   In your paragraph 228 you -- I apologise, you have analysed the

 2     functions of command and control in the police and you mention nine

 3     subfunctions.  Just for the record could you please quote your nine

 4     functions that you mention in this paragraph and that fall under command

 5     and control?

 6        A.   Command and control implicate tasks and duties that supervising

 7     officers and chiefs perform in the course of their work.  These functions

 8     are as follows:  Under 1 monitoring and assessment.  Number 2,

 9     decision-making.  Number 3, planning.  4, organising.  5, order issuing.

10     6, coordination.  7, controlling.  8, affirmation and representation.

11     And finally number 9, analysis and evaluation.

12        Q.   Very well.  You are now talking about control?

13        A.   Yes, precisely so.  I specified that this is control rather than

14     command.  So this is control.

15        Q.   I apologise, there seems to be -- it is okay.  I'm just trying to

16     follow the record in order to make it absolutely clear to anybody who may

17     be reading it in the future.  The next topic that you dealt with in your

18     expert report is the control of the police when performing special

19     security tasks.  I'm not going to ask you anything about that.  I would

20     just like to address everybody's attention to paragraphs 266 to 284 in

21     your expert report.

22             THE INTERPRETER:  Interpreter's correction:  Paragraphs 268 to

23     paragraph 284.

24             MR. LAZAREVIC:  [Interpretation]

25        Q.   I would like to look at paragraph 286 of your expert report

Page 26789

 1     dealing with the control in the MUP of Republika Srpska at the level of

 2     the police forces staff.  In paragraph 286, you define the police force

 3     staff.  Could you please tell us how you define it in your own words?

 4        A.   In my paragraph 286, I say that the police force staff as an

 5     organ of control and command in organ of police units is defined as a

 6     provisional body which is activated when police units are engaged more

 7     extensively in combat actions and in discharging more complex police

 8     duties in special security circumstances.

 9        Q.   Very well.  I would now like us to look at a document which is in

10     your binder under tab 36, and in e-court it is Exhibit 4D179.  This is an

11     order, the date is 15 May 1992.  On page 2 we can see that it was signed

12     by the Minister of the Interior of the then Serbian republic of Republika

13     Srpska Mr. Mico Stanisic.  Do you have the document in front of you?

14        A.   Yes, I do.

15        Q.   I would like us to look at bullet point 9 in this document.

16     Could you please read that paragraph for us, and also who are the members

17     of the staff envisaged by this order?

18        A.   This order speaks about the establishment of the staff, amongst

19     other things.  And it says that in order to command and control the

20     overall forces of ministry staff shall be established comprising;

21     Minister of the Interior, as its commander; under secretary for public

22     security, deputy commander; under secretary for national security,

23     member.  Assistant ministers for crime, police, communications, and

24     crypto protection, materiel and finance.  These assistants are members.

25     Commander of the police detachment, member; deputy commander of the

Page 26790

 1     police detachment, member; chiefs of security service centres, members,

 2     and also chef de cabinet of the minister as the secretary.  This would be

 3     the full composition of the staff.

 4        Q.   Therefore this is the composition of the police force staff?

 5        A.   Yes.

 6        Q.   Thank you.  The next document I would like us to analyse is your

 7     tab 37.  It is Exhibit 4D189.  The date is the 25th of August 1992 sent

 8     to the chief of the public security station in Prijedor.  The title is

 9     "Instruction on the Training and use of Public Security Units in Banja

10     Luka or the Banja Luka CSB."  I'd like us to look at page 3 of the

11     document, items 3.1 and 3.2 which are on page 4 in your document.

12        A.   I found it.

13        Q.   It is page 7 in the English e-court version.  As for the use of

14     wartime units, well, that was the title that preceded these points.  Can

15     you please comment 3.1 and 3.2?

16        A.   This concerns the use of wartime units.  Under 3.1 it says that

17     the Banja Luka CSB shall govern the use of war units within the Banja

18     Luka CSB and the SJB staff shall govern the use of SJB units.  That was

19     3.1.  Under 3.2, it says that the commander, his deputy or chief, or the

20     Chief of Staff shall order -- I'll repeat.

21             3.2:  The commander, his deputy or chief or the Chief of Staff

22     shall order the use of CSB units in collaboration with the armed forces

23     of the Serbian republic.  The Ministry of the Interior of the Serbian

24     republic shall be informed of this as a matter of urgency.  This means

25     the very top of the ministry [Realtime transcript read in error

Page 26791

 1     "military"] will be notified.

 2        Q.   Very well.  We have a designation of who has the commanding

 3     authority over the use of wartime units; is that correct?

 4        A.   Yes.

 5             MR. LAZAREVIC:  A correction for the transcript.  It's on page

 6     11, line 25 said ministry will be notified.  Line 23, I apologise.  Says

 7     at the very top the ministry will be notified.

 8             JUDGE AGIUS:  Thank you, Mr. Lazarevic.  All right, okay, thank

 9     you.  Let's proceed.

10             MR. LAZAREVIC:  [Interpretation]

11        Q.   Next is paragraph 289 in your expert report.  In it you state

12     that given the centralised model of organisation of the RS MUP there was

13     a relation of hierarchy between the MUP police force staff of the RS and

14     the CJB staffs.  Is it the same type of hierarchy which exists, as you've

15     already explained on your charts, between the MUP at headquarters and the

16     centres for public security?

17        A.   I fail to understand your question.

18        Q.   I apologise.  I'll reformulate.  I presume you have paragraph 289

19     of your report in front of you?

20        A.   I do.

21        Q.   Therein you state -- well, I wanted to draw a parallel between

22     the hierarchy concluding the MUP at headquarters and CSBs, and to see

23     whether the same kind of hierarchy exists between the RS MUP staff in

24     relation to the various CJB staffs.

25        A.   Yes, the hierarchy is the same.

Page 26792

 1        Q.   Very well.  Let us move on to the next topic, and that is the

 2     regulations regulating the use of MUP units in wartime activities.  We've

 3     had occasion to see the law from 1994 which is the law on the

 4     implementation of the Law on Internal Affairs.  It is your tab 15.  Let

 5     us have a look at item 3.2, that is to say, Article 13, paragraph 2.  It

 6     is page 5 in e-court.  In the English page 12.

 7             MR. LAZAREVIC:  It's 4D413.  I apologise.

 8        Q.   [Interpretation] In item 2 of Article 13 it says that the

 9     Ministry of the Interior controls police units through the police force

10     staffs at the headquarters; is that correct?

11        A.   Yes.

12        Q.   And this ties in with the units of the police special police

13     units and specialized police units that we discussed?

14        A.   Yes, that's correct.

15        Q.   And this only refers to those units which were not resubordinated

16     in keeping with this regulation to the military unit within whose area of

17     responsibility they were engaged in combat?

18        A.   Yes, this refers to the units of the police which acted

19     independently in pursuing their tasks and duties.

20        Q.   Very well.  The next document I'd like to have a look at is your

21     tab 38.  In e-court it is 4D138.  The date on the document is first the

22     29th of October 1994 and then the 31st of October 1994.  MUP of the RS

23     Sarajevo.  Can you tell me who is on the distribution list?

24        A.   This document, order was sent to all administrations of the state

25     security department and the public security department to all public

Page 26793

 1     security centres, and to all state security department centres, to all

 2     public security stations, and to the school of the interior in Banja

 3     Luka.  That is to say, to everyone.

 4        Q.   Thank you.  I wanted to go briefly through the document.  Sorry

 5     to interrupt.  Let us look at the preamble.  What does it say?

 6        A.   It says that this is a very urgent document.  Do you mean that?

 7        Q.   No, go on.

 8        A.   Well, it says in accordance with an order issued by the minister,

 9     and the order of the president of the republic declaring a state of war.

10     It means that this order is created on the basis of the previous two

11     orders specified.

12        Q.   And we see that it has to do with the proclamation of a state of

13     war in at least one part of the republic which is the AOR of the 2nd

14     Corps.  Can you please look at item 1 of the order?

15        A.   According to item 1 of the order, all public and state security

16     centres shall form joint staffs which will control all police forces in

17     their respective areas and will be subordinated to the police forces

18     command staff of the MUP of Republika Srpska.  That is to say, the

19     headquarters at the seat of the ministry.

20        Q.   According to the second paragraph of item 1, who is included in

21     such staffs?

22        A.   The staffs comprise the following:  Chief of the CJB as the head

23     of staff, then deputy chief of the CJB as deputy head of staff, chief of

24     the state security department centre as member.  Next is chief of the

25     police department or sector as member.  And then we have the commander.

Page 26794

 1        Q.   Yes, but that is because it spills over to the next page.

 2        A.   Yes.  Commander of the PJP as member.  Then chief of the crime

 3     police sector as member.  And chief of the communications department as

 4     member.

 5        Q.   And this document sets out the composition of such staffs?

 6        A.   Yes.  This is the composition of such a staff at the level of a

 7     public security centre.

 8        Q.   In relation to this document, let us look at its last paragraph.

 9     Can you tell us what it prescribes?

10        A.   It defines that any further operational or operative plan of all

11     staffs will be drafted by the Chief of Staff of the MUP of Republika

12     Srpska.

13        Q.   Therefore, the Chief of Staff of the police forces of the RS is

14     assigned a function here specifying his authority in the order.

15        A.   Yes.

16        Q.   As regards the staffs, let us look at the next document which is

17     tab 39 in your binder.  It is Exhibit 4D280.  It is a dispatch, number

18     K/5-1-248/95 dated 1 June 1995.

19        A.   I see it.

20        Q.   I believe you have the document in front of you.

21        A.   I do.

22        Q.   Let us see the distribution list.

23        A.   The document was sent to the heads of the two departments, that

24     is to say, the state security and public security department, to the

25     staff of the police forces command in Bijeljina, to the special police

Page 26795

 1     brigade at Jahorina, to the SJB at Pale, and then we have three police

 2     stations and so on and so forth.

 3        Q.   Perhaps we can stop here.  Let's look at who sent this dispatch.

 4        A.   It says that it was sent by minister Zivko Rakic.

 5        Q.   In the first paragraph it says that the minister is forming a

 6     staff to command and control the police forces in Pale comprising the

 7     following people, among other names we can see Mr. Borovcanin's name on

 8     the list.  I'm interested in particular in the last sentence of the

 9     dispatch.  Can you tell us what was the reason to establish this staff?

10        A.   As we can see from the last sentence, this staff was formed in

11     view of the newly created complex security situation in the wider

12     location of Pale municipality as a consequence of the NATO bombardment.

13        Q.   Very well.  We are done with this document.  Let us look next at

14     your tab 42.  In e-court it is Exhibit 4D139.  Do you have the document

15     before you?

16        A.   I do.

17        Q.   On the first page of the document the date is 17 June 1995.  Sent

18     by head of office Nenad Radovic.  It says:  "Please find enclosed the

19     conclusions from the Minister of the Interior specialist staff meeting

20     held on 16 June 1995 in Pale.  You must comply with them and inform the

21     office of the minister about their implementation."

22             I'd like us to look at the next page.  The date there is the 16th

23     of June.  We can see the conclusions from the specialist staff meeting

24     referred to on page 1.  Let's look at item 1, subitem (4).

25        A.   I can see it.

Page 26796

 1        Q.   What is this about?  What conclusion was reached at this meeting?

 2        A.   The conclusion was that staff should be established to control

 3     the police forces.  Its seat would be in the Tron facility in Pale.

 4        Q.   Very well, let's move on to the following document which is under

 5     tab 40 in your binder.  This is Exhibit 4D140 dispatch number K/5 --

 6             THE INTERPRETER:  Interpreter's correction:  K/P307/95 dated 19

 7     June 1995.

 8             MR. LAZAREVIC:  [Interpretation]

 9        Q.   It is obvious that this document is connected with the previous

10     one.  Could you please tell us in the first paragraph which starts with

11     "we wish to inform you that ..."  What is this about?

12        A.   It says that a staff has been formed to command police forces in

13     the zone in which a state of war has been declared and a list is given of

14     its composition.

15        Q.   Very well.

16        A.   There are seven names here, am I supposed to read them?  I don't

17     think this would be necessary.

18        Q.   Of course not, everybody can see it.  But after the names it says

19     and it lists the duties of the Sarajevo CJB and the Srbinje [Realtime

20     transcript read in error "Serbia"] CJB have in keeping with the dispatch,

21     what would these be, also these include the special brigade?

22        A.   The Sarajevo and Srbinje [Realtime transcript read in error

23     "Serbia"] CJB's have a duty to inform the CJBs in their areas about the

24     existence of that staff, i.e., that the staff has been established.  And

25     also the command of the special police brigade is also duty-bound to

Page 26797

 1     inform all special police detachments.

 2        Q.   Very well, we will continue and pursue this topic but I need to

 3     make a correction in the transcript, which is on page 17, line 22, it

 4     says here Serbia and we were talking about Srbinje; am I correct?

 5        A.   Yes.

 6        Q.   Very well.  Let's look at the penultimate paragraph of this

 7     dispatch which says the staff's headquarters are in the Tron facility in

 8     Pale, is that correct?

 9        A.   This confirms that the conclusion reached at the ministry

10     meeting, i.e., one of the orders contained therein.

11        Q.   When we are talking about this staff headquartered in Tron this

12     would be the same staff that effectively was in command of the police

13     forces or in control of the police forces in June 1995 as it is referred

14     to in paragraph 295 of your expert report.  This would be the same staff?

15        A.   Yes, there was no other staff established.  It's the one and the

16     same staff.

17        Q.   In order to simplify things for the Trial Chamber when it comes

18     to the staff, I would like us to look at the thing that can be found

19     under tab 72 in your binder, which is the schematic that can be found in

20     Exhibit 4D459.  Do you have the schematic in front of you?

21        A.   Yes.

22        Q.   Could you please explain the schematic for us.  Here we have two

23     types of lines.  One is the lines of command or control responsibility

24     which is represented by a full line and the second schematic is

25     represented by a dotted line which depicts the line of cooperation or

Page 26798

 1     influence.  Wouldn't that be correct?

 2        A.   Yes.  You are absolutely right there.

 3        Q.   Could you please provide some explanation.  In the upper part of

 4     this schematic there's the Supreme Command from which an arrow leads to

 5     the line of command or control responsibility towards the minister.

 6        A.   In the upper part we have an elliptic circle depicting the words

 7     Supreme Command and a line leading to the Minister of the Interior.  We

 8     also have a dotted line leading in the opposite direction which shows the

 9     position of the Minister of the Interior in the Supreme Command as a

10     member of the Supreme Command.  Further on we follow the line of command

11     under the minister, there is the staff of the police forces and again it

12     says here that the minister is also the commander and this staff also has

13     its chief and its members.  We already spoke about that either yesterday

14     or the day before.  We mentioned the exact composition of that staff.

15             And below that is special police brigade staff controls the units

16     of the Ministry of the Interior as one of the two components of the armed

17     forces, we are talking about the bolded square or rectangular.  Further

18     on we have two lines leading towards the special police brigade in the

19     left lower corner and right of that and below the units of the Minister

20     of the Internal Affairs, we also have separate police units or PJPs.

21             Between the special police brigade and the separate police units

22     or PJPs, there is a dotted line with arrows on both ends of that line,

23     which implies that these two types of police units do engage in certain

24     form of cooperation but there is no other hierarchical or command or

25     subordination relationship between the two.  In other words, they are at

Page 26799

 1     an equal footing because they stand on the same line, so to speak.

 2        Q.   Very well then.  Could you please explain the right part of this

 3     schematic starting with the police forces staff.  Could you please

 4     explain the command line towards the public security centre?

 5        A.   There is a full line between the minister and the public security

 6     sector and from there to the police administration which is only natural

 7     given the organisational structure of the ministry.

 8             From the police forces staff, there is a line on the right-hand

 9     side leading to the public security centres.  You see that it says the

10     commander of PJP which is only natural because the police forces staff

11     should have a control line leading to the commander of the PJP and the

12     chief of the public security centre and somewhat further to the left, we

13     also have a situation that from the public security sector there is a

14     line with very short arrows leading to the administration of the centre

15     of the public security centres because they are part of the sector of

16     public security, and we also have a very short dotted line from the

17     police administration towards public security centres and this represents

18     the model of cooperation and influence which is normal in planning and

19     some other activities that are undertaken by the two, which means that

20     the administration of the police as a professional organ within the

21     security sector has a capacity to be able to realise a form of

22     cooperation in professional terms and they have influence on the level

23     that implies the public security centres and this is what this schematic

24     represents.

25        Q.   [Microphone not activated].

Page 26800

 1             THE INTERPRETER:  Off mic, the counsel is off mic.

 2             MR. LAZAREVIC:  [Interpretation] I believe that we will no longer

 3     need this document.

 4             JUDGE KWON:  According to this schematic, the special police

 5     brigade is directly subordinate to the units of the Ministry of Internal

 6     Affairs but theoretically speaking but special police brigade is not a

 7     subordinate organ of the unit of the MUP.  Rather, it is directly

 8     subordinate to the ministry or minister?

 9             MR. LAZAREVIC:  Your Honours, if maybe we can -- maybe we can

10     explain.

11             JUDGE KWON:  I understand.  I would understand the witness wanted

12     to emphasize the units of the ministry as one of the component of armed

13     forces.  But if you look at the PJP in this schematic, while it is

14     directly subordinated to CJB or public security centre, it is also

15     directly subordinated to the minister or the units of The Ministry of

16     Internal Affairs.  If you could clarify that.

17             MR. LAZAREVIC:  Yes, I'll do my best.

18        Q.   [Interpretation] We have already had an opportunity to talk about

19     the law on the application of the Law on the Interior or the Law on

20     Internal Affairs, and we have already emphasized that the minister

21     through the staff controls the police units that are engaged in combat.

22     Wouldn't that be correct?

23        A.   Yes, absolutely correct.

24        Q.   Now, if we look at the command line here in the schematic leading

25     from the minister, it leads across the police forces staff to the unions

Page 26801

 1     of the Ministry of the Internal Affairs?

 2        A.   Yes.

 3        Q.   And as far as I can understand, you have only separated the units

 4     of the Ministry of the Internal Affairs into special police brigade of

 5     the police and separate police units or PJPs in keeping with the law on

 6     the application of the Law on Internal Affairs during an imminent threat

 7     of war or war?

 8        A.   Yes, that is correct.

 9        Q.   In other words, the minister also controls the special and

10     separate police units through the police forces staff?

11        A.   The minister controls all police units through the police forces

12     staff according to this law.

13        Q.   Irrespective of the nature of the police units, be it the special

14     police brigade which is under the direct command of the minister or

15     separate police units?

16        A.   That's why the police forces staff has been established in the

17     first place.

18        Q.   And at the same time the minister is also the commander of the

19     police forces staff; is that correct?

20        A.   Yes, it is clear.  Here below the minister it says commander, in

21     brackets, minister and I believe it is self-explanatory.

22             JUDGE KWON:  If I can be more clear.  So the thing is that the

23     minister can command and control PJP either directly or through CJB,

24     that's what the witness emphasized.  Thank you.

25             MR. LAZAREVIC:  [Interpretation] Very well.

Page 26802

 1        Q.   Let's move on to the next document which is under tab 41 in your

 2     binder, and the exhibit number in e-court is 4D295.  This is a decision

 3     by the president of Republika Srpska on the proclamation of the state of

 4     war in the zone of responsibility of the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps dated 17

 5     June 1995.  What I would like us to look at in particular is item 3 of

 6     this decision.

 7        A.   Yes.

 8        Q.   What armed forces are referred to herein?  In what zone, rather.

 9        A.   This is referring to the zone of the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps.

10     This decision on declaring a state of war provides that all armed forces

11     are duty-bound to take on necessary measures to achieve the defined aims

12     and in light of the date which is 17 June 1995, we know what had been

13     provided by the law dating from autumn 1994.  We know what is implied by

14     armed forces.  Armed forces imply two components, those are the Army of

15     Republika Srpska is the first component of the armed forces, and units of

16     the Ministry of the Interior as the second components of the armed

17     forces.

18        Q.   Very well.  Now, I would like to move on to the next document in

19     your binder.  It is number 44 and in e-court it is 4D294.  This is a

20     dispatch from the command of the Herzegovina Corps conveying the decision

21     of the president of Republika Srpska on the proclamation of a state of

22     war in the municipalities of [indiscernible], Srbinje, Cajnice, Ruda,

23     Visegrad, Gorazde and Rogatica.  This dispatch bears the date of the 17

24     of June 1995 and now let's look at page 2 under bullet point 1.

25        A.   Yes.

Page 26803

 1        Q.   Where were these municipalities, in the zone of what corps?

 2        A.   The municipalities listed in this document are in the zone of the

 3     Drina Corps and parts of the zone of the Herzegovina Corps.

 4        Q.   With this regard, I would like us to look at the following

 5     document which is number 45 in your binder, and in the e-court system it

 6     is Exhibit number 4D340.  This is a decision on declaring a state of war

 7     in the municipalities of Srebrenica and Skelani.  The date is 14 July

 8     1995, and let's just look at the first bullet point of this decision.

 9        A.   I can see this.  According to this decision, a state of war is

10     proclaimed in the territory of the municipalities of Srebrenica-Skelani.

11        Q.   Is this document in relation with the previous one on declaring a

12     state of war in the municipalities falling in the AOR of the Drina and

13     Herzegovina Corps?

14        A.   Yes.  This is another decision on the declaration of a state of

15     war in one part of the RS territory.

16        Q.   To conclude with this set of documents, the next one I'd like us

17     to look at is tab 46 in your binder.  In e-court it is 4D351.  The date

18     is the 28th of July 1995.  Decision on the proclamation of a state of war

19     in the territory of the whole of Republika Srpska declared by president

20     of the republic Karadzic.  Is this in relation with the previous two

21     documents?

22        A.   Yes, it is.  However, for the first time in this decision, a

23     state of war is being declared in the territory of the whole of Republika

24     Srpska.

25        Q.   I have a few documents left that have to do with the declaration

Page 26804

 1     of a state of war.  This is tab 74 in your binder, whereas in e-court it

 2     is 4D218.

 3        A.   I have the document.

 4        Q.   It is a decision on the establishment of war presidencies in the

 5     municipalities during a state of war.  Let's look at item 1.

 6        A.   I can see it.

 7        Q.   Very well.  Have a look at item 4 as well whereby there is some

 8     mention of cooperation on the part of the war presidencies.

 9        A.   Yes, it says that during the state of war --

10             THE INTERPRETER:  Interpreter's correction, item 1.

11             THE WITNESS:  -- that war presidencies will be established in the

12     municipalities of the Serbian city of Sarajevo.  In item 4 certain

13     obligations of such presidencies are mentioned entailing standing and

14     direct cooperation with unit commands in the area of the municipalities

15     with a view to coordinating and informing all state institutions in the

16     territory of the given municipality in matters important for defence and

17     life of the population.

18        Q.   Did war presidencies have any command competencies over say MUP

19     units?

20        A.   No.  Although they were called war presidencies, these were

21     civilian organs.  They had no authority over any structures of the MUP or

22     the army of the RS.

23        Q.   Thank you.  Let's go to tab 75 next.  In e-court it is 4D354.  It

24     is a dispatch from the office of the Minister of the Interior of the RS

25     dated the 2nd of August 1995.  It was sent to all RJBs, CJBs, and SJBs.

Page 26805

 1     Do you have the document?

 2        A.   I do.

 3        Q.   Let's look at the part of the document which says:  "Pursuant to

 4     these guidelines ..."  What does this document refer to when mentioning

 5     such guidelines?

 6        A.   It is in direct relation with my previous statement.  From the

 7     level of the ministry, this dispatch is being sent to those mentioned on

 8     the distribution list stating that municipal war presidencies cannot

 9     issue any orders to centres and stations of public security, since those

10     are MUP units and such are part of the Armed Forces of Republika Srpska.

11     Those forces are controlled by the minister, as stated herein.  It is

12     also stressed by this dispatch that the minister executes the orders of

13     the president of the republic who is the Supreme Commander.

14        Q.   Let us move to the next document next.  It is your tab 47.  In

15     e-court 4D247.  It is an order signed for the minister Zivko Rakic who

16     was the then internal minister of the RS.  The date is the 30th of March

17     1995.  Let's have a look at the order.  It talks about the first Jahorina

18     special police detachment to be sent in combat against sabotage and

19     terrorist groups in the area of Konjevic Polje?

20        A.   Yes.

21        Q.   I'm interested in the second paragraph.  It says that:  "The

22     police forces staff of the Zvornik CJB is to control all the MUP forces

23     in executing a combat task along the axis Vlasenici-Zvornik."

24        A.   I can see it.

25        Q.   This document entitles the CJB centre with controlling all MUP

Page 26806

 1     forces along that axis?

 2        A.   Yes, that's correct.

 3        Q.   In relation to that, let's have a look at another document which

 4     is tab 48.

 5             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yes, Mr. Vanderpuye.

 6             MR. VANDERPUYE:  Thank you, Mr. President.  I apologise again for

 7     the intervention but it appears to me that the record is unclear that the

 8     witness's conclusion that it entitles the police forces staff of the

 9     Zvornik CJB to control all the MUP forces when that axis should be tied

10     to the particular order and the particular date.  That is the assignment

11     that is specified in the order.

12             JUDGE AGIUS:  Okay, I understand.

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

14             JUDGE AGIUS:  Thank you.  Yes, Mr. Lazarevic would you look into

15     that, please.  I think Mr. Vanderpuye is right.

16             MR. LAZAREVIC:  Yes, but the document is self-explanatory.  It

17     says I think what are the capacity of the MUP staff from CJB Zvornik in

18     this respect in this very particular operation from March 1995.  I'm not

19     suggesting anything other than that.

20             JUDGE AGIUS:  No, no, I think --

21             MR. VANDERPUYE:  That's fine, Mr. Lazarevic.  I just want the

22     record to be clear.

23             JUDGE AGIUS:  That's fine.  Let's proceed then, please, thank

24     you.

25             MR. LAZAREVIC:  [Interpretation]

Page 26807

 1        Q.   Do you have the document before you?  It should be your tab 48.

 2        A.   I do.

 3        Q.   It is 4D387.  A dispatch sent from the CJB Zvornik sent by head

 4     of centre Dragomir Vasic on the 21st of March 1995.  As stipulated

 5     therein, it says that the subject is a report from the meeting of the

 6     centre police forces staff.  I'm interested in the first paragraph.  It

 7     says:  "Acting on your order, on the 21st of March 1995, a meeting of the

 8     police forces staff of the Zvornik public security centre was held ... "

 9     and then there is an analysis provided.  We can conclude from the

10     document that on the 21st of March 1995, there had already been a police

11     forces staff at the Zvornik public security centre in existence?

12        A.   Yes, that is obvious.

13        Q.   Let's look at the next document.  It is your tab 49.  The Exhibit

14     number is 4D333.  Do you have it in front of you?

15        A.   I do.

16        Q.   Very well.  Briefly then it is a dispatch sent on the 9th of July

17     1995 sent from the public security centre in Zvornik.  What was the

18     function or the capacity of Dragomir Vasic given the fact that he signed

19     the document?

20        A.   Mr. Dragomir Vasic signed this as the staff commander of the

21     police forces of the public security centre in Zvornik.

22        Q.   Very well.  Let's look at the next document.  It is your tab 50.

23     The date is the 10th of July 1995.  Again we see that it was signed for

24     staff commander Dragomir Vasic but it was signed by someone else.

25        A.   That is correct.

Page 26808

 1        Q.   Is this in relation to ...

 2        A.   Yes, we can see that the first one was the 9th of July, the

 3     second was 10th of July.  We see that the staff was in operation and the

 4     documents were signed by Dragomir Vasic.

 5        Q.   Let's look at the next document.  It is your tab 51, 4D339.

 6     Another dispatch of the 12th of July 1995 sent from Zvornik and let's

 7     look again at the signature block.  Who signed the document and in what

 8     capacity?

 9        A.   It says Dragomir Vasic, he signed it as the staff commander of

10     the police forces of the public security centre in Zvornik.

11        Q.   To round off the topic, we'll use the next document, which is tab

12     52.  In e-court it is 4D --

13             THE INTERPRETER:  Interpreter's correction:  P66.

14             MR. LAZAREVIC:  [Interpretation]

15        Q.   The date is 1 August 1995.  It is sent by Dragomir Vasic.  Let's

16     focus on the first paragraph which reads:  "Pursuant to your dispatch, we

17     held a meeting of the war staff of the centre that has been in operation

18     as of the date of your order of the 21st of March 1995."

19             Based on the documents we just saw, it is obvious that the war

20     staff at the centre existed at that time.  According to the documents we

21     saw, it began functioning at the latest on the 21st of March 1995, and it

22     was also operational in the month of August of 1995?

23        A.   That is correct.  These are the facts.  It says here the 21st of

24     March.  It means that it was the latest day as of which it started

25     operating and it lasted at least until August as referred to in the

Page 26809

 1     documents.  That is my conclusion, that the staff was in operation at

 2     least during that period of time.

 3        Q.   In order to deal with all the issues that need to be clarified

 4     thoroughly, I ask you this.  This staff controlled all MUP units that

 5     were in the territory of Zvornik municipality save for the police units

 6     that were sent to various AORs and were under the command of the various

 7     corps?

 8        A.   Yes, the police forces staff of the centre in Zvornik was the

 9     controlling body of all police units that were in the territory of the

10     centre of Zvornik.  All police units that were in the area were under the

11     command of that staff except of course for the units which were made part

12     of the army of the RS, which were of a different nature.

13        Q.   Very well.  To round off the topic of staffs, let's look at the

14     next document, which is your tab 53.  In e-court it is 4D245.  A dispatch

15     sent from the command of the staff of police forces.  The date is the

16     25th of March 1995.  Do you have it before you?

17        A.   I do.

18        Q.   According to this document, can we conclude that there were

19     certain problems with the procedure of police forces being engaged in

20     combat, as specified herein, it says that certain personnel in managerial

21     positions tried to bypass the prescribed procedure requesting the use of

22     police forces?

23        A.   Judging by this document, I conclude that certain people tried to

24     bypass the prescribed procedure requesting and arranging for the police

25     forces in combat operations.  In the latter part of the dispatch we can

Page 26810

 1     see that minister Zivko Rakic is requesting that all engagement of MUP

 2     forces in combat be arranged only through the main command of the police

 3     forces of the MUP as the only body competent and responsible for such

 4     matters.

 5        Q.   Very well.

 6             MR. LAZAREVIC:  I think I'll be able to finish within 20 to 25

 7     minutes.  This was a very serious topic and I really needed to cover it

 8     deeply.

 9             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yes, we wouldn't restrain you in any way,

10     Mr. Lazarevic.  We'll have a 25-minute break starting from now.  Thank

11     you.

12                           --- Recess taken at 10.29 a.m.

13                           --- On resuming at 10.58 a.m.

14             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yes, Mr. Lazarevic.

15             MR. LAZAREVIC:  Thank you, Your Honour.

16        Q.   [Interpretation] Mr. Bajagic, I will do my utmost to move

17     speedily.  In order to clarify a couple of things from your testimony

18     which -- concerning some things which took place this morning, let's go

19     back to your tab 47.  It is 4D00247.  Let us look at the distribution

20     list of this order.

21        A.   This order was sent to the command of the special police brigade

22     to the command of the first detachment of the special police at Jahorina

23     and to the centre for training of police dogs and horses.

24        Q.   And it transpires from this order as it does from the schematic

25     that we have already analysed, let's not go back to it, that there is the

Page 26811

 1     first special police detachment as seated on Jahorina, is that correct?

 2        A.   Yes.

 3        Q.   And this first detachment has nothing whatsoever to do with the

 4     centre for education on Jahorina?

 5        A.   That's correct.  It has nothing whatsoever to do -- the first

 6     detachment has nothing whatsoever to do with it.  It's just one of the

 7     nine detachments of the special police brigade which is located on

 8     Jahorina just like the centre was located on Jahorina, but these are two

 9     different things.

10        Q.   In other words, this is a geographical coincidence?

11        A.   Yes, the same area.

12        Q.   Very well, I believe and I hope that this is now clear, and now I

13     would like to move on to the next chapter in your expert report, which is

14     reporting in the Ministry of the Interior, and I would like us to look at

15     a document that is under tab 57 in your -- 54 in your binder.

16             THE INTERPRETER:  The Interpreter's correction.

17             MR. LAZAREVIC:  [Interpretation]

18        Q.   This is 4D193 in e-court.  This is an instruction on urgent

19     ongoing and statistical reporting.  This is a rather comprehensive

20     document.  My question to you is this:  The basic document that regulates

21     the issue of reporting within the Ministry of the Interior?

22        A.   Yes.  This is the basic document in the form of an instruction

23     about all forms of reporting within the Republika Srpska MUP.

24        Q.   In order to speed things along, I would like us to look at your

25     expert report, paragraph 304 in your expert report.  The Exhibit number

Page 26812

 1     is 4D499.  In keeping with this instruction that we have just seen in

 2     e-court, could you please tell us firstly in paragraph 304 you have

 3     explained the notion of urgent reporting.  What are the two types of

 4     urgent reporting within the Ministry of the Interior?

 5        A.   Among the four main aspects of reporting in the Ministry of the

 6     Interior of Republika Srpska, one of them is urgent reporting which can

 7     be carried out in two ways.  The first one would be written reporting by

 8     way of documents also known as dispatches, and secondly, orally by way of

 9     means of communications, mostly telephone.

10        Q.   Very well, let's move on to paragraph 308 on the following page

11     of your expert report.  Here you deal with current and ongoing or

12     occasional reporting.  Could you please tell us in keeping with the book

13     of rules that we have just had an opportunity to look at, what would be

14     the definition of current reporting as opposed to occasional reporting?

15        A.   These are two aspects of reporting within the MUP.  The first one

16     is current reporting which implies written information or sending of

17     written information about one or several security events and measures

18     that were undertaken with respect to any of these events.

19             On the other hand, the written information can be collective

20     analysis or overviews, as well as all forms of urgent reporting.  On the

21     other hand, occasional reporting is carried out in the form of various

22     types of analyses and reports about certain incidents or events or a

23     single event, phenomenon or integral information submitted by the

24     regional organs of the interior and I'm referring here to public security

25     centres and stations.  As well as some other information that concern the

Page 26813

 1     activities of the Ministry of the Interior.

 2        Q.   Now let's move on to paragraph 310 of your expert report which is

 3     statistical reporting.  And just briefly in keeping with this

 4     instruction, what are the forms or aspects of statistical reporting and

 5     how is statistical reporting carried out?

 6        A.   Statistical report is carried out by means of sending various

 7     reports on previously designed statistical forms.  There are several

 8     forms of statistical reporting.  Under 1 it would be regular reporting,

 9     under number 2 it would be monthly, number 3 would be quarterly, number 4

10     would be half yearly, and number 5 would be annual statistical reporting.

11        Q.   Very well.  And now I would like to ask you this:  Based on the

12     documents that you perused and analysed would you say that there were

13     some problems with the application of this instruction when it comes to

14     the reporting within the MUP of Republika Srpska?

15        A.   In the last paragraphs of this chapter of my expert report I have

16     mentioned some examples of operation from the established procedure which

17     is defined by the instruction on reporting and informing.  I'm talking

18     about several or just a few situations that I have singled out based on

19     the documents that I had an occasion to use when drafting my report.

20        Q.   Very well.  These are the two or three documents that I would

21     like us now to see.  First of all, let's look at tab 55 in your binder.

22     In e-court this is 4D204.  This is a dispatch by the assistant minister

23     Tomislav Kovac dated 24 July 1993 sent to all CSB chiefs and to all SJB

24     chiefs.  I would like to draw your attention to the first paragraph

25     starting with the words "public security stations".  Could you please

Page 26814

 1     read the sentence starting with the words "public security stations do

 2     not submit their reports in time or not at all and they in turn do not

 3     report to the MUP headquarters"?

 4        A.   I can see that.

 5        Q.   Does this refer to the reporting procedure envisaged by the

 6     instruction from the public security stations to the security services

 7     centres and then to the MUP headquarters?

 8        A.   Yes, this is how things should have been in keeping with the

 9     instruction.  However, some omissions in the procedure have been noticed

10     and addressed here.

11        Q.   Very well.  And now let's look at the second paragraph, referring

12     to an order that is being issued to the chiefs mentioned in the dispatch.

13     It says here that public security stations are hereby ordered that as of

14     1st of August 1993, and can you please look at the rest of the sentence,

15     "... daily informed the authorised CSBs about security events in their

16     areas, and the centres will then process information received from the

17     stations in the form of a 'daily bulletins' and deliver them by dispatch

18     to the MUP by no later than 2400 hours of the day in question."  Is this

19     what you've just spoken about in regard to the procedure?

20        A.   Yes.  This is just another reinforcement of the order issued to

21     the public security stations and security services centres asking them to

22     adhere to the procedure on future reporting starting with the 1st of

23     August 1993.

24        Q.   Very well then.  Let's look at the penultimate paragraph of the

25     dispatch.

Page 26815

 1        A.   It says here that the SJBs and centres are still obliged to

 2     inform the MUP about certain important occurrences as soon as they learn

 3     about such occurrences.

 4        Q.   And now, the last paragraph of this dispatch.  According to this

 5     dispatch, who will be responsible for the execution of this assignment?

 6        A.   The SJB chiefs and the CSB chiefs are directly responsible for

 7     the execution of this order.

 8        Q.   The next document that I would like us to look at should be under

 9     tab 56 in your binder.  These are the provisions of the instruction on

10     all kinds of reporting and other documents.  The date is 19 April 1995,

11     and let's not go and repeat the addressees.  Just below that, there's

12     something that I would like to look at.  The sentence starts with the

13     words:  "We are drawing your attention once again ..." I apologise, this

14     is Exhibit 4D256.

15        A.   Yes, I can see that.

16        Q.   It says here reiterate the need to strictly observing reporting

17     regulations.  Would this confirm what you've already spoken about?

18        A.   Yes, this confirms that there have been occurrences when

19     instructions were not observed, and attention is once again drawn to the

20     need to obey the procedure when it comes to all sorts of reporting, i.e.,

21     the instruction that we just looked at.

22        Q.   And now, let's look at the last document that I've prepared for

23     the examination-in-chief with regard to the topic of informing and

24     reporting in the MUP.  It's under tab 57 in your binder, and this is

25     Exhibit 4D273 in the e-court system.

Page 26816

 1        A.   Yes, I can see that.

 2        Q.   This is another dispatch by minister Zivko Rakic bearing the date

 3     25 -- 20 of September 1995.  It is clear who the addressees are.  Let's

 4     look at the first paragraph for the time being, the starting words are:

 5     "We hereby inform you of the need for consistent implementation of the

 6     instruction on urgent, current, occasional and statistical reporting."

 7     Does this point to the fact?

 8        A.   Yes, it does.  This is already the third situation that I became

 9     aware of.  Dispatches sent to reiterate the need to strictly observe the

10     instruction.

11        Q.   Let's look at the last paragraph of this dispatch, what does it

12     say?

13        A.   It says here that the dispatch is to be considered an amendment

14     to the previously mentioned instruction and it also says here that a

15     failure to abide by all the provisions of that instruction shall

16     constitute a violation of duty within the Ministry of the Interior.

17        Q.   Very well then.  Let's on move on to the next -- actually the

18     last part of your expert report dealing with ranks and functional

19     insignia in the MUP of Republika Srpska, my general first question is

20     this:  When it comes to ranks and functional insignia in the MUP can they

21     be compared with the military ranks and functional insignia?  I

22     apologise.  There are no functional insignia in the military at all so

23     just dealing with ranks.

24        A.   According to what I could conclude drafting my report and

25     otherwise ranks and functional insignia in the Ministry of the Interior

Page 26817

 1     including the Ministry of the Interior of Republika Srpska differ from

 2     the ranks in the Armed Forces, i.e., the military.

 3        Q.   Very well.  Let's look at your tab 58 which is Exhibit 4D103.

 4     This is an order on uniform functions and insignia in the police.  Number

 5     is 404/76-92 dated 21 October 1992.  And obviously this provides for the

 6     wearing of uniforms and functional insignia in the MUP.  Let's

 7     immediately go to page 20 in B/C/S or page 10 in the English version of

 8     this document.

 9             You have them on the screen in front of you?

10        A.   Yes.

11        Q.   Are these the functional insignia worn by the police?

12        A.   Yes.  These are insignia of positions or functional insignia in

13     the Ministry of the Interior.

14        Q.   Very well.  And now can we look at Article 13 of this decree.  In

15     e-court this is on pages 9 and 10 in B/C/S and on pages 5 and 6 in

16     English.  As may be seen in the title, the chapter deals with functions

17     and functional insignia.  I'm not going to go into the details of all of

18     these functions.  I would just like to ask you this:  According to this

19     decree, there are no ranks of captain major, captain or lieutenant in the

20     police?

21        A.   You are right.  Functional insignia do not imply the use of those

22     particular terms.

23        Q.   In order to explain the genesis of functional relationships and

24     ranks, I would like us to look at the following document which concerns

25     this particular matter.  This is the law on the promulgation of the law

Page 26818

 1     on amendments to the Law of Interior dated 31st of December 1994.  In

 2     your case this is tab 59.  On page 2 we can see Article 1178 [as

 3     interpreted].  This is on page 2 of the B/C/S version and in English it

 4     is on page 3.  What can you tell us about that?

 5        A.   I apologise, could you please repeat the number of this article?

 6        Q.   1178 [as interpreted].  This is Exhibit number 208 in e-court,

 7     page 2 in B/C/S, page 3 in English.

 8        A.   Article 117A speaks about the introduction of ranks in the

 9     ministry for authorised officials, that is to say, for several categories

10     of authorised officials.

11        Q.   Let us move on to the next tab in your binder.  It is number 60.

12     It is 4D279.  While we are waiting for the English version, tell us this,

13     please, this regulation, in its lower right-hand corner includes

14     corrections to the law on the amendments to the Law on Internal Affairs,

15     isn't that so?

16        A.   Yes.  There were several corrections and amendments to the law.

17        Q.   The date is the 28th of May 1995?

18        A.   Yes.

19        Q.   The next document I'd like us to look at is your tab 61.  It is

20     4D259.  Decision on the establishment of ranks and functions and

21     promotion to police ranks of authorised officials of the MUP.  The number

22     is 01-713/95 dated the 20th of April 1995.  Let's have a look at Article

23     25.  It is the last article.  In its final provisions it says that the

24     Minister of the Interior within 30 days following the decision will issue

25     the table of ranks for authorised officials?

Page 26819

 1        A.   Yes.

 2        Q.   Therefore the deadline was set at 30 days?

 3        A.   Yes, 30 days.

 4        Q.   Very well.  Were there any problems in the field when

 5     implementing this task of conferring the ranks?

 6        A.   I presume there was a problem.  All of the events in the first

 7     and the second half of 1995 must have slowed down the implementation of

 8     all administrative acts put in force by the ministry as regards such

 9     administrative nature tasks which had to be implemented in the field.

10        Q.   Let us move to the next document.  It is tab 62.  Exhibit 4D243.

11     It is a dispatch of minister Zivko Rakic.  The date is 14 of March 1995.

12     In item 1 it says that on the 18th of March 1995 there will be a session

13     of the expanded collegium of the MUP.  Let us look at the agenda.  It's

14     item 3.

15        A.   Yes.

16        Q.   What is it about?

17        A.   Among other items on the agenda of the meeting of the expanded

18     collegium of the ministry, the item 3 should have been dedicated to

19     information on the draft decision on the establishment of ranks in the

20     MUP.

21        Q.   Let's look at the next document.  It is 63 in your binder.

22     Exhibit 4D257.  It is another dispatch by minister Zivko Rakic.  The date

23     is the 19th of April 1995.

24        A.   Yes.

25        Q.   The beginning of the dispatch says:  "In order to amend the rules

Page 26820

 1     on job specification and assignment of lowest and highest ranks for each

 2     post of authorised official at the Ministry of the Interior, I hereby

 3     appoint the following commission ..."  And we have five members listed.

 4        A.   Yes.  The commission was being formed in order to amend the rules

 5     on job specification and assignment of ranks.  According to the document,

 6     the commission had five members.

 7        Q.   Let's look at the penultimate paragraph, what is the deadline set

 8     for the proposal?

 9        A.   It is the 30th of April 1995.

10        Q.   Let us have the next document.  It is your tab 64.  Exhibit 4D77.

11     Do you have it in front of you?

12        A.   I do.

13        Q.   Have a look at the date of the document.

14        A.   We can see that the number is strictly confidential K/P-101695.

15     The date is 2 August 1995.

16        Q.   I see another date, the date when the document was received which

17     is the 15th of August 1995.

18        A.   Yes.

19        Q.   Subject is regulations on the classification of tasks and duties

20     in the Ministry of the Interior directed at lower organisational units?

21        A.   Yes, that's correct.

22        Q.   Therefore on 15 August, they still did not have the new

23     regulations on the classifications of tasks and duties based on which

24     they could pursue that exercise in their units?

25        A.   Yes.  This document points to the fact that by mid-August, there

Page 26821

 1     had been no application of the regulations under classifications of tasks

 2     because it had to be in keeping with all of the documentation of the MUP

 3     that had to do with the classification of tasks and duties.  This

 4     document was sent to all employees of the MUP for information.

 5             THE INTERPRETER:  The counsel is off mic.

 6             MR. LAZAREVIC:  [Interpretation]

 7        Q.   A few last questions about the documents you analysed.  When were

 8     the ranks finally confirmed in the Ministry of the Interior of Republika

 9     Srpska?

10        A.   The timing was rather slow.  In the end, the ranks were regulated

11     as late as October 1995.

12        Q.   Very well.  Let's look at the last two documents.  The first is

13     your tab 65.  Exhibit 4D361.  Let us look at the date of the document.

14     It is the 20th of October 1995.  Is that so?

15        A.   Yes, it is.

16        Q.   According to this decision, on early promotion to higher rank, it

17     is obvious that a Mr. Borovcanin was early promoted to the rank of

18     colonel, but his first established rank had been that of major?

19        A.   That is correct.

20        Q.   The last document I wanted to look at is tab 66.  It is 4D531.

21     It is a decree number 01-197/97 of the RS president Biljana Plavsic dated

22     the 21st of April 1997.  By this decree Colonel Ljubomir Borovcanin is

23     being promoted early to the rank of police major-general?

24        A.   That is correct.

25             MR. LAZAREVIC:  Thank you, Mr. Bajagic, I have no further

Page 26822

 1     questions for you.

 2             JUDGE AGIUS:  Thank you, Mr. Lazarevic.  Mr. Zivanovic.

 3             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  I shan't cross-examine this witness, thank you.

 4             JUDGE AGIUS:  Thank you.  Mr. Ostojic.

 5             MR. OSTOJIC:  I do have a few questions, Mr. President, if I may.

 6     I would need the podium.

 7                           Cross-examination by Mr. Ostojic:

 8        Q.   Good morning, professor.  My name is John Ostojic.  I represent a

 9     gentleman who is a colonel in the VRS in 1995 by the name of Ljubisa

10     Beara.  How are you?

11        A.   Good morning to you, too.

12        Q.   I have a couple of questions and just bear with me here.  First,

13     I'd like to ask you about your CV ever so briefly.  I noticed that you

14     worked in the MUP in Serbia.  I just don't have the dates there in your

15     CV, so if you could just give me those dates again that would be helpful.

16     If you turn to your CV and I'll direct you exactly to the section I'm

17     referring to.  Under the employment it says MUP of the Republic of Serbia

18     police academy assistant intern and assistant.  What year was that?

19        A.   It was from September 1996, I was hired as an intern assistant at

20     the police academy which had certain organisational functional ties with

21     the ministry of the Internal Affairs.  That is why I referred to the MUP.

22        Q.   The one below that sir, it says state security service of the MUP

23     of the Republic of Serbia, what year was that where you did the training

24     research centre, lecture?

25        A.   It was not the state security service but the state security

Page 26823

 1     department.  I taught there intelligence and counterintelligence at their

 2     educational centre.  I was there as a lecturer.

 3        Q.   What years?

 4        A.   I think it was in 2002.

 5        Q.   Now, because what I'd like to go and focus some of my questions

 6     to you on the issue of reporting and the obligations of MUP personnel to

 7     report things that they may have seen or heard.  But I'd like to know

 8     first if the same reporting requirements that you discuss in your rather

 9     exhaustive report also are similar to those that are in Serbia.  Are they

10     the same or do the rules change from Serbia to the Republika Srpska, if

11     you know, in 1995?

12        A.   I never had occasion to study any rules of reporting for the

13     Republic of Serbia.  As you can see from my CV, I focused on completely

14     different areas as a lecturer.  I never analysed any documents referring

15     to the Republic of Serbia as regards these issues.

16        Q.   Okay.  Because in your report you talk and you make some

17     comparisons to Great Britain and what their rules and obligations may be,

18     as well as the United States of America.  Are you telling me that you

19     don't know what the reporting requirements are of MUP personnel from the

20     Republic of Serbia?

21        A.   The examples of Great Britain, Germany and Croatia, I believe,

22     were there as regards to administrative police activities, and it was

23     specific to this report.  I analysed those only so as to be able to

24     provide a comparative view.  As for reporting and informing, I never read

25     any manuals for the MUP of Serbia because I was never operationally

Page 26824

 1     involved with the MUP of Serbia.  I do believe, however, that for the

 2     most part, they are similar to the similar regulations of the countries

 3     and its environs in times of peace.  In Serbia, there was no state of

 4     national necessity as it was the case with Republika Srpska.

 5        Q.   And I'll move away from that subject.  Thank you.  Sir, I'd like

 6     us to look at a couple of documents, but first I want to ask you, because

 7     you looked at some documents from a person by the name of Dragomir Vasic.

 8     Are you familiar or have you seen documents from Dragomir Vasic where he

 9     reports that there was no cooperation from the VRS in July of 1995?

10        A.   I don't know precisely.  Perhaps I could look at the document and

11     then offer a comment.

12        Q.   We'll get to the document in a second.  Are you aware that

13     Dragomir Vasic also in July of 1995 reports to his superior in the MUP

14     that there was no assistance from the VRS?  Are you aware of that?

15        A.   When drafting the report, I read a plethora of documents but it

16     doesn't necessarily mean that all are being referred to in the report

17     itself.  I stress again, if we are talking about a specific document,

18     please let me have a look at it and then I may provide you with a

19     comment.

20        Q.   And I will.  You will get a chance to look at it and I would

21     appreciate your comment on it, but I just wanted to know if you were

22     familiar with it just generally speaking or if you have a recollection of

23     it.  Now, are you familiar at all or do you recall seeing a document

24     where -- go ahead.

25        A.   Well, probably there were some.  Some were singled out in my

Page 26825

 1     report as well.  But without the specific document at hand, I can't

 2     provide anything more precise than this, any conclusions.

 3        Q.   I understand that.  And are you aware that Dragomir Vasic also in

 4     a report in July, I think 13th, of 1995 states that the MUP was acting

 5     alone in certain operations or in a certain operation.  Are you aware of

 6     that?

 7             MR. LAZAREVIC:  I would just like to be fair to the witness.

 8     This is an expert witness.  He was talking about procedures.  He was

 9     talking about laws and rules which were in application at the time.  He

10     didn't talk at all about any particular events.  So if I don't know what

11     kind of -- if my colleague is trying to impeach the witness's credibility

12     with this.

13             MR. OSTOJIC:  Of course not, of course not.  I am just asking him

14     if he recalls it and my next question is to ask the Court to place P62 on

15     the screen.  But I wanted to know if he has an independent recollection

16     of it, but if he speaks of procedures he should also know the procedures

17     if there was a detachment from MUP and the VRS at any time, specifically

18     in July of 1995.

19             JUDGE AGIUS:  Let me consult with my colleagues.

20                           [Trial Chamber confers]

21             JUDGE AGIUS:  Okay.  Mr. Ostojic, you need to put the document

22     and any other documents that you have to the witness and ask him directly

23     on those documents.

24             MR. OSTOJIC:  Oh, okay.  Thank you, Mr. President.  Can we have

25     P62, please, on the e-court.

Page 26826

 1        Q.   Professor, we have both or soon the English version as well but

 2     you are looking at the B/C/S version of this document that's dated the

 3     13th of July 1995.  We'll give you an opportunity to review it.  Let me

 4     know when you've had that chance.

 5        A.   Yes, I've read the document.

 6        Q.   Because the next document I think follows this document but just

 7     maybe you could help me.  If you see the number on the top where it says

 8     actually "number" in B/C/S, it's 282/95.  Do you see that?

 9        A.   Yes.

10        Q.   Do you know what that means?

11        A.   This is the year and probably the document number and the

12     document was sent that year from an organisational unit.

13        Q.   Now, having read this document, to whom is Dragomir Vasic sending

14     this report to?

15        A.   To the MUP of Republika Srpska to the office of the minister at

16     Pale or also to the police forces staff in Bijeljina as well as to the

17     public security department.  There are three addressees or at least that

18     is what is indicated here.

19        Q.   And I think you said "or" and it was correctly typed out but I

20     think you meant "and" also to the police forces staff in Bijeljina,

21     right, it's "and," not that he is sending it to one or the other, he is

22     sending it to all three; correct?

23        A.   Yes.  To the police forces staff in Bijeljina, to the office of

24     the minister in Pale, and to the public security department.

25        Q.   Okay.  Now, I want to really focus on the second paragraph in

Page 26827

 1     this Exhibit P62 and there's several words maybe you could help me with.

 2     You see in the first sentence it states:  "We have no cooperation or

 3     assistance from the VRS ... "  Do you see that?

 4        A.   Yes.

 5        Q.   We had no cooperation and no assistance with the VRS in doing

 6     what, sir?  Well, read on.

 7             MR. LAZAREVIC:  I have to object at this point.  I mean, these

 8     are facts that Mr. Bajagic simply -- in my humble opinion he really

 9     cannot testify about these particular events.  As for the formal right,

10     as for to whom it was sent, as to everything about the facts, he is not a

11     factual witness and he is not aware of anything of the kind.

12             JUDGE AGIUS:  Do you wish to reply, Mr. Ostojic?

13             MR. OSTOJIC:  No, not really.

14                           [Trial Chamber confers]

15             JUDGE AGIUS:  Mr. Vanderpuye.

16             MR. VANDERPUYE:  Thank you, Mr. President, I appreciate that.  I

17     do support Mr. Ostojic's position with respect to this matter.  This

18     document contains a specific content which I think is the witness

19     entitled to opine about concerning the appropriate subject matter for the

20     reporting requirements which he has identified in this case, and I

21     support Mr. Ostojic in that application.

22             JUDGE AGIUS:  Thank you.  Our decision is as follows:  Assuming

23     all -- or assuming that the witness is in a position to answer this

24     question, he must limit himself to the generics, you answer within a

25     generic way without going into specifics for the time being, unless you

Page 26828

 1     are asked for them.

 2             MR. OSTOJIC:  I'm not sure I fully understand but I'll try my

 3     best here, Mr. President.

 4             JUDGE AGIUS:  Let's see whether he is in a position to answer

 5     your question to start with.

 6             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] At the first reading of this

 7     document, I can see that Mr. Dragomir Vasic has noticed some problems,

 8     but I wouldn't be able to engage in any further analysis because in my

 9     expert report I did not deal with any facts or relationships on the

10     ground.  My main concern was the legal framework, that was the subject of

11     my analysis.  However, I can say based on logic that there were problems,

12     but I wouldn't be able to tell you what problems those were.

13             MR. OSTOJIC:

14        Q.   Okay.  Well, Mr. Vasic goes on and says the problems he expects

15     he is going to have, but we won't ask you that fact.  Let's keep it a

16     little generic.  When Dragomir Vasic creates these reports and those that

17     you reviewed, they are required to be honest and factual, are they not?

18             MR. LAZAREVIC:  I don't know how this witness can answer this

19     thing.  I mean, whether Mr. --

20             JUDGE AGIUS:  He could answer it based on his experience.

21             MR. OSTOJIC:  Generically, I mean generally speaking do you --

22             MR. LAZAREVIC:  Otherwise --

23             JUDGE AGIUS:  He could have information which in his mind could

24     cast doubts on the reliability of this document and the author of the --

25     and its author.  But it's up to you to tell us whether you have

Page 26829

 1     sufficient information to be able to answer Mr. Ostojic's question.

 2             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know anything about

 3     Dragomir Vasic, save for what I could read about what he was at a given

 4     moment in the public security centre.  I don't know anything else to be

 5     able to tell you whether he was honest or dishonest, sincere or not

 6     sincere.  I don't know how you put it.  I don't know anything about that.

 7     I only know and that is what I said in my report when I spoke about the

 8     modalities of informing and reporting that somebody who was in charge of

 9     the centre, the chief of that centre was duty-bound to inform the top

10     echelons at the ministry about any possible events or occurrences and

11     that's all.  I don't know whether this is a satisfactory answer, sir.

12             MR. OSTOJIC:

13        Q.   It is what it is.  Let me ask you this, sir, if he reports or --

14     strike that.

15             You spent a lot of time in your report and your testimony these

16     couple of days talking about how there was this special unit that was

17     moved over under the auspices purportedly of the VRS.  Did you find

18     anywhere in any of the documents, other than the one you are looking at,

19     that the MUP was working alone?  Did you find those words by anybody that

20     they made that declaration, as opposed to with the VRS?

21             But to be fair to you, I invite you to look at that document and

22     again that second paragraph and it's in the second to the last line of

23     that paragraph.

24             JUDGE AGIUS:  I see that the witness may have some difficulties

25     in reading the documents.  Could we zoom in the B/C/S.  Okay.  All right.

Page 26830

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] According to Mr. Dragomir Vasic's

 2     words, in the sentence that the MUP is independent in the section, the

 3     answer would be yes.  But that's the only thing I can see in this

 4     dispatch.

 5        Q.   Well, based on your experience and work in this case, what does

 6     it mean when MUP works alone?  Is that going back to the structures that

 7     you've highlighted when they are not directed to go back or not directed

 8     to attach themselves as a combat group with the VRS?

 9        A.   There were several situations so far when we have stated that the

10     units of the Ministry of the Interior were parts of the Armed Forces.

11     That certain units or parts of these units in particular situations acted

12     in concert with the Army of Republika Srpska.  According to the principle

13     of resubordination and the other part of those units could act pursuant

14     to the orders of the Supreme Command which were conveyed via the Minister

15     of the Interior as a commander of the staff of the Armed Forces of the

16     ministry, which means that not all the units acted as parts of the army.

17     There were some parts of the units or some units that were engaged along

18     the lines of command from the top of the ministry to the public security

19     stations depending on the situations on the ground.

20        Q.   Professor, what you are telling me is theoretical and I

21     understand that and it's based upon the laws and the regulations that

22     you've highlighted for us these last few days, but I'm talking about

23     factually speaking looking at this document, if we accept it as being

24     true that here is a guy Dragomir Vasic reporting to the MUP, and I can

25     tell you, although you probably know this, there was no response from the

Page 26831

 1     minister of interior denying that MUP should be working alone or

 2     questioning whether or not MUP is working alone, but take that as a given

 3     for my hypothetical, what does it mean when he says MUP is working alone?

 4             MR. LAZAREVIC:  It's a call for speculation.  Obvious one.

 5                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 6             JUDGE AGIUS:  Can you answer this question or not?  Because if

 7     you can only speculate, then we don't need it, we don't need your answer.

 8             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I cannot provide any further

 9     explanations.  I've already said everything I know.

10             MR. OSTOJIC:

11        Q.   Okay, Professor.  Let me try with this Exhibit, P886.  If we

12     could have both the English and the B/C/S version up.  As it's being

13     brought up I'll just give you a little background on it.  It's a letter

14     or a report from Dragomir Vasic dated the 13th of July 1995.  I'm going

15     to ask to you see what the serial number is on top or the number we refer

16     to, because the one we just looked at was 282/95, which was Exhibit P62,

17     this is P886, and just give us that number, if you could see it.

18        A.   Yes, throughout 1995.  But the last digit in the number is 3, I

19     believe.

20        Q.   Looks like --

21        A.   Or I could assume that it could also be 8.  It could be either 3

22     or 8.  I can't see the first one fully, it's not clear.  It's not

23     legible.

24        Q.   And in English also they were not sure so they put a question

25     mark 83/95, and that's fair.  I just wanted to know if you could see it.

Page 26832

 1     But it would seem that this report follows the prior one in any event

 2     because it talks about the same thing and I'd like you to read it but to

 3     direct your attention again to the first paragraph where it talks about

 4     what the army was doing and they were continuing towards Zepa and then it

 5     goes on to say "... and leaving all other work to the MUP as follows."

 6     We'll get into the things below that but I wanted you to focus on that

 7     sentence there.

 8        A.   I can see the bottom part of the document.

 9        Q.   I think he is asking to see the bottom part.  Thank you.

10        A.   Okay.  It's fine, I've seen the document, yes.

11        Q.   I want to focus on paragraph number 2 of this document for a

12     moment, where Dragomir Vasic after saying everything is being left -- all

13     the work is being left for MUP, he talks about "... killing of about

14     8.000 Muslim soldiers whom we blocked in the woods near Konjevic Polje.

15     Fighting is going on.  This job is being done solely by MUP units."  Do

16     you see that?

17        A.   Yes, I can see this as item 2.

18        Q.   Well, generically speaking, I guess, if a MUP person such as

19     Dragomir Vasic reports to his superior, and I know you went through this

20     analysis of I think it was horizontal, vertical and diagonal reporting,

21     and we will get to that in a little bit, but when he makes this report,

22     is he reporting it in all three-ways, horizontally, vertically, and

23     diagonally?

24        A.   I don't know.  I cannot put myself in the head of Mr. Dragomir

25     Vasic.  I really don't know.

Page 26833

 1        Q.   I'm not asking you to do that because we are talking generic now.

 2     Is he required to report it in those three manners, vertically,

 3     horizontally, and diagonally?  I mean we could also look at the top of

 4     that page and see whom he really sends this report to, can we not, and

 5     then deduce from that that indeed he does do it all three ways?  But

 6     let's talk generically, and you tell me, sir, do you think that he is

 7     required to send it in those three manners?

 8        A.   This is not what is requested from him.  He is duty-bound to

 9     abide by the instruction on reporting within the Ministry of the

10     Interior.  This is his duty.  There should be no particular special

11     requests or orders upon him to do it.

12        Q.   And I --

13        A.   And this is just one type or kind of reporting.

14        Q.   Now, I want to not backtrack, but now put it maybe in more focus.

15     If we could look at 4D339, please.  And as it's being brought up, I'll

16     just let you know that this is also a report from Dragomir Vasic but from

17     the day before.  And you are welcome to read the whole report, sir, if

18     you wish, but really I want to focus on the three subparagraphs in the

19     second half of this report which bear the numbers 1, 2, and 3.  Do you

20     see that?

21               Again, this is one day before this discussion we had about

22     where Dragomir Vasic says no cooperation, no assistance on the 13th, they

23     are working alone.  I want to look at those three paragraphs and really

24     highlight the fact that in paragraphs 1 and 3 he mentions actions that

25     were undertaken that were in cooperation with the VRS, but on number 2 he

Page 26834

 1     clearly doesn't state that; correct?

 2        A.   Yes.  I've read all the three items.  If you are referring to the

 3     lower part of the dispatch under 1, 2 and 3.  Under 2 it says that one --

 4     and it is only natural, my only comment can be general.  These are some

 5     special security tasks dealing with providing security for roads.  This

 6     is not an exclusively combat task.  And number 2 speaks about the

 7     engagement of certain units of the Ministry of the Interior in

 8     cooperation of the units of the VRS.  This is what I see.  And this is

 9     something that Mr. Dragomir Vasic reports about and sends a report to

10     others.  These are general facts.  I can see that there is cooperation.

11     I can see that one part of the unit is independent and that its other

12     part is in cooperation with the army.  This is all I can say.  None of

13     these facts, facts about the traffic, roads, some of these settlements,

14     none of it, this is too familiar to me and there's nothing in particular,

15     no particular conclusion I can draw upon reading this.

16        Q.   Okay.  Well, let me just then at the very least try to correct

17     the record, because on page 54, lines 25 and then proceeding on page 55,

18     lines 1 and 2, they recorded you as saying that paragraph number 2

19     indicates that there was cooperation with respect to this operation with

20     the VRS, but plainly, sir, that's not accurate and I'm not suggesting

21     that you said it wrong.  I'm just suggesting perhaps it was just recorded

22     wrong.

23             With respect to the ambushes in number 2, there is no language

24     whatsoever that indicates there was any cooperation with the VRS;

25     correct?

Page 26835

 1        A.   It is obvious it transpires from item 2, however.

 2        Q.   I just wanted to correct the record because I think they misheard

 3     you, that's all, and so I'm not challenging you on it and I think it's

 4     pretty obvious myself.

 5        A.   Very well then.

 6        Q.   Thanks.  I read your report and I really had a little trouble

 7     with a couple of paragraphs and I want to direct your attention if I may

 8     to paragraph 256 which is on page 65 of your report.  And I think it may

 9     be, sir, that it was translated, with all due respect, somewhat awkwardly

10     but I don't know what your point was in the next ten paragraphs.  It

11     says, and I'll read it:  "Information in the police understands in

12     general sense a planned set of the procedures by which is gathered,

13     processed (analysis, classification, checking, and uniting) the

14     information relating to:  Security situation, phenomenon, and events, the

15     work and results of the police station work, and the situation in the

16     police station."  I read this, honestly, 20 times.  I don't understand

17     what you are trying to say here.  And I apologise for having to ask you.

18        A.   Are we talking about paragraph 256?

19        Q.   Correct.

20        A.   This means that informing implies a group of procedure intended

21     to collect, process, safeguard, use and provide security information and

22     data which relate to what, security situation, events, occurrences, the

23     work of the police stations and situation in the police station.  I don't

24     know what is not clear.  In parentheses --

25             THE INTERPRETER:  This is too fast for the interpreter and we

Page 26836

 1     apologise.

 2             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The processing of any kind of

 3     information implies --

 4             MR. OSTOJIC:

 5        Q.   Excuse me.  The translators just give us an indication you may be

 6     speaking too fast.  I'm not going to cut you off and just before you

 7     answer if I can just make a preliminary -- I'm not, sir, challenging you

 8     on this.  I just wanted to understand it and honestly in English it's a

 9     little difficult to understand the way it's written so I'm just trying to

10     have you help me fully understand it.  But if you can please just speak a

11     little slower, that may help all of us to understand it.

12        A.   Very well, I'll try to be as clear as possible.

13             JUDGE AGIUS:  I don't think we are going to waste much time.  I

14     think that the problem with paragraph 256, the translation into English;

15     otherwise I think if you read it a second time, it's sufficient to

16     understand what it means.

17             MR. OSTOJIC:  Okay, I'll move on, Mr. President.

18             JUDGE KWON:  Excuse me, excuse me.  The paragraph 256 as it

19     appears in the monitor is different from what I have as a final or

20     translation.  I think this is an unofficial translation, and this is

21     different from what I have in hard copies.  Probably this is older

22     version.

23             MR. OSTOJIC:  Honourable Judge Kwon, I'll take a look at it that.

24     I wanted clarification on this one paragraph because it begins a process

25     of other things, but I -- we'll look at that again.

Page 26837

 1             JUDGE PROST:  And, Mr. Ostojic, if you look at the one that's in

 2     e-court, it reads differently from what you read out as well, so I think

 3     it may be a translation issue.

 4             MR. OSTOJIC:  Fair enough.

 5             MR. LAZAREVIC:  Maybe I can just explain, one Mr. Bajagic filed

 6     his report in B/C/S, it was unofficially translated by the Defence in

 7     order to comply to Trial Chamber's order regarding deadlines for filing

 8     the reports.  After that the CLSS provided with their official

 9     translation which is in the EDS system.

10             MR. OSTOJIC:  That's very fair.  I apologise for that.

11             JUDGE AGIUS:  Let's proceed.

12             MR. OSTOJIC:  Thank you, sir.  I just wanted to understand it

13     because I didn't.

14        Q.   Now, if we look at paragraph 260 of your report on that same

15     page, and I am working with the apparently non-updated version, but it

16     doesn't matter.  I'm not going to pick on the language.  You say within

17     information reporting has a special place.  Pretty much the same.  Why

18     and how does it have a special place?

19        A.   Yes.  Reporting is one of the actions within the system of

20     informing.  It implies informing starting with the bottom to the top and

21     as a rule reports are sent about a concrete task, the implementation of a

22     concrete task that had been given to members of the police, either

23     uniformed police, crime prevention police and so on and so forth.  Or, if

24     an order has been issued to the members of the police to carry out a task

25     immediately upon the completion of the task, they have to report about

Page 26838

 1     the status of the task, whether it has been fully completed, partly

 2     completed, so this is an activity by way of which lower levels report to

 3     the higher levels within the hierarchy of command.

 4        Q.   Well, we -- it's like the reports we saw from Dragomir Vasic

 5     reporting to the minister; correct?

 6        A.   Yes, that would be one of the forms of reporting.

 7        Q.   Now, these reports, they are required to be clear and precise;

 8     correct?

 9        A.   Yes.

10        Q.   And also they are required to be a fair and adequate reflection

11     of what is transpiring, is it not?

12        A.   In general terms the answer would be yes, of course.

13        Q.   Now, when I look at your paragraph 262, you also talk about

14     elements from the environment in the second line, I hope, at least in my

15     copy.  I just wanted you to explain it to me because I didn't fully

16     understand it.

17        A.   It has to do with a head of a certain organisational unit in the

18     ministry represents that unit before the higher organisational levels, as

19     well as in communication with the organisations at the same level and

20     below.  He represents his organisational unit before the other

21     organisational levels within the police system.  It can be, as I said,

22     internally, meaning inside the ministry, and externally if there is a

23     possibility for the head of a certain level organisation of the ministry

24     for him to meet representatives of some other institutions.  On such

25     occasions, he is also there to speak on behalf of his organisational

Page 26839

 1     unit.  I tried to make this as clear as possible.

 2        Q.   Well, generally speaking, what types of information are required

 3     or mandated to be put in such reports that you are referring to, both the

 4     external and internal, and I don't know that it really matters, but

 5     really during the state of war or imminent threat of war?  What type of

 6     information are they required to report?

 7        A.   Internal representation is quite different from external

 8     representation especially when we are talking about the MUP.  Internally

 9     it can include anything that is of importance for the conducting of tasks

10     and duties of the police.  External representation doesn't deal with such

11     issues.  External representation is representing a certain part of the

12     ministry when communicating with some other ministries or bodies during

13     meetings.  Therefore the facts discussed at such meetings are not the

14     same as would be during an internal representation event.  This would be

15     a global information with far less details.

16        Q.   Okay.  Well, let's talk about like if there was an ambush or a

17     legitimate combat engagement that was going on in July of 1995.  What

18     would the reporting requirements be in the MUP now, just in the MUP, as

19     to what kind of information should be contained within that report to

20     their superiors?

21        A.   Important information needed to be included in order to report to

22     a higher level of management within the MUP.

23        Q.   Okay.  And now --

24        A.   Anything that would be necessary for efficient functioning in the

25     field.

Page 26840

 1        Q.   Certainly one of the things they would possibly report - I'll let

 2     you answer it - is if there were any casualties or wounded of MUP

 3     personnel; correct?

 4        A.   Yes, of course.

 5        Q.   And I agree of course it would be.  And also they would highlight

 6     where certain MUP units were acting alone or acting in conjunction with

 7     some other groups, would it not?  That would be significant to report to

 8     your superior?

 9        A.   I presume so.

10        Q.   You are the expert though, so you help me with that.  They would

11     also report, would they not, if they were involved in any operations such

12     as ambushes or capturing or killing the enemy combatants, would they not?

13             MR. LAZAREVIC:  Your Honours, maybe I'm a bit late with my

14     objection but I believe that this asks for some incomplete hypothetical

15     speculation.

16             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yes.  Mr. Ostojic, do you wish to move on?

17             MR. OSTOJIC:  Fair enough.

18        Q.   Just describe for me, if you will, what you meant on paragraph

19     256 when you talked about the information representation relating to

20     phenomenon and events, if we could just scroll down so I could see it

21     because I'm not sure if it's translated that way again, the English

22     version.

23             JUDGE KWON:  Next page.

24             MR. OSTOJIC:

25        Q.   What do you mean by that, what events and what phenomenon?

Page 26841

 1        A.   Yes.  I hereby say security situation, events, and phenomenon.

 2     Well, that includes anything that takes place in a given territory that

 3     is of importance for the functioning of the MUP units as one of the

 4     security actors or subjects.

 5        Q.   I'm not sure if you said it right but I thought I heard it in

 6     B/C/S and it's recorded as being any, but you are saying everything,

 7     right, as opposed to anything?  Although it may be a slight difference.

 8     They are supposed to report on everything, are they not, Professor?

 9             MR. LAZAREVIC:  I apologise, this question is not clear.  Who is

10     Mr. Ostojic referring it?

11             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yes, Mr. Ostojic.

12             MR. OSTOJIC:

13        Q.   It's pretty obvious I think if the Professor in his report sets

14     forth that there are certain requirements that go in three different

15     manners both vertically and horizontally, so whoever is preparing the

16     report such as Dragomir Vasic, but we don't want to include him right now

17     in this, but any of the people who are either the -- in the CJP or PJP or

18     SJP, whatever those centres are, are they required to report and what are

19     they required to put in their report, that's all I'm trying to get from

20     you.  I think it's in your report but I just wanted to know in a war

21     situation what types of things are they really supposed to report?

22        A.    As I stated in paragraph 256, that these are occurrences and

23     events.  I've primarily had those in mind which are important for the

24     security in the territory and anything else that can be important for the

25     work and functioning of the Ministry of the Interior.  In that regard, I

Page 26842

 1     wrote the security information, what does it mean to inform?  That means

 2     that the security situation can be reported as improving or

 3     deteriorating.  Then there are developments and events that the number of

 4     traffic accidents increased and so on and so forth.  This information and

 5     representation, generally speaking, refers to information being

 6     circulated through the police bodies not only at times of war but also at

 7     peacetime and during imminent threat of war.  As for such particular

 8     information should include that exact period, I can't say.  I can only

 9     speak hypothetically.  It is impossible for me to answer that because I

10     have no such specific experience with those modes of reporting.

11        Q.   All right.  Thank you very much.  Professor, I have no further

12     questions.

13             JUDGE AGIUS:  Ms. Nikolic.

14             MS. NIKOLIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.  I have no

15     questions for this witness.

16             JUDGE AGIUS:  Madam Fauveau?

17             MS. FAUVEAU:  [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President ...

18             JUDGE AGIUS:  Go ahead.

19                           Cross-examination by Ms. Fauveau:

20        Q.   [Interpretation] I am Natasha Fauveau-Ivanovic.  I represent

21     General Miletic.  I wish to ask you a few questions which are

22     theoretical.  You spoke on the 6th of October, on first day of your

23     testimony on the task of the police, in particular the task which the

24     police accomplish when there is an threat of imminent war and you also

25     spoke a moment or two ago of those tasks in particular, the traffic

Page 26843

 1     regulation, special regulation of traffic.  I would like you to look at

 2     the document 5D1318.  We do not have an official translation of this

 3     document, but we have a draft translation which I have here, and I have a

 4     hard copy for the member of the Chamber.

 5             So this document is an order from the Ministry of the Interior

 6     which concerns stopping the traffic on the Sokolac on the 26 June 1995

 7     and what I would like you to do is to read this document and also tell us

 8     if this order -- the task given by the police in this order fits in the

 9     normal task of the police in the situation which is described here, that

10     is to say, in a situation where you have sabotage groups and terrorist

11     groups which have come into the territory.

12        A.   This is one of the tasks of the police.  The police has authority

13     to implement such tasks, special security circumstances.  We can see what

14     is being requested from the order and we see that it doesn't entail any

15     combat but regulating the traffic, setting up a checkpoint and

16     controlling the traffic on certain roads.  These are special security

17     circumstances because of the terrorist groups.  But it is a non-combat

18     administrative activity on the part of the police.

19        Q.   Activities which or so it means stopping the traffic on that

20     particular road, this is what can be read in the first sentence of the

21     document?

22        A.   Precisely so.  To stop the traffic on a particular road.

23     According to the law on the application of the Law on Internal Affairs

24     from 1994, the authorities of the police in the state of imminent threat

25     of war or in the state of war.  One of the authorities described is this

Page 26844

 1     one.

 2             THE INTERPRETER:  Ms. Fauveau needs to wait for the English

 3     translation to finish, please.

 4             MR. LAZAREVIC:  I need to apologise to Madam Fauveau.  I really

 5     hate to interrupt someone cross-examining, but we still haven't received

 6     the list of documents which are to be used in the cross-examination of

 7     the Defence or the translation of these documents.  Maybe she can take

 8     care of that.

 9             JUDGE AGIUS:  We have received it.  So I don't know what to tell

10     you, Mr. Lazarevic.  But to my knowledge it has been circulated.  The

11     other thing is the interpreters drew our attention to tell you that you

12     need to wait until the English translation is finished before you proceed

13     with your question, please, Madam Fauveau.

14             MS. FAUVEAU:  [Interpretation] Yes, thank you.

15             MR. LAZAREVIC:  I apologise.

16             MS. FAUVEAU:  [Interpretation]

17        Q.   I would like now to show you document 51319 for which there is an

18     official translation.  Sir, I don't want to ask anything about the

19     contents of the document but the only thing I'm interested in is to know

20     whether this document which it's a document which in the province of the

21     state security, I think, is this document based on information obtained

22     by the intelligence services?  Is this type of information coming,

23     rather, from intelligence sources?

24             JUDGE AGIUS:  That means if you are in a position to tell us,

25     please.  If you are not, don't speculate.

Page 26845

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It is quite clear from the very

 2     same abbreviation, the RDB which is the state security department, that

 3     this information arrived from that direction and is of intelligence or

 4     counterintelligence nature.

 5             MS. FAUVEAU:  [Interpretation]

 6        Q.   Thank you very much, this is quite sufficient for what I wish to

 7     know.  Could one say indeed that the activities of the intelligence

 8     services or the principle main [indiscernible] in the sector of the state

 9     security?

10        A.   Yes.

11        Q.   I wish to ask you a few questions concerning the engagement of

12     police units in activities in combats.  You spoke about this yesterday.

13     I don't think you need to repeat what was already said.  I wish you to

14     see document 5D1320.  We still have here an unofficial translation here,

15     and we have a hard copy translation for the members of the Chamber.

16             Here we have a document from the Ministry of Interior

17     transmitting, forwarding a dispatch from the staff of the army of the

18     Republika Srpska.  You explained to us yesterday all the procedure for

19     the engagement of police units in the combat activities.  Could you

20     simply have a look at this document, one-page document, and tell us

21     whether this procedure was conforming to the procedure prescribed by law,

22     by the law?

23        A.   Yes, we can see that the president of the republic did order the

24     units to be used and that it was requested that certain units be put

25     under the 14th, but I don't know what the abbreviation stands for.

Page 26846

 1             THE INTERPRETER:  Interpreters apologise.  Under the commander's

 2     request -- the speakers should not overlap and they should wait for the

 3     English translation.  Thank you very much.

 4             MS. FAUVEAU:  [Interpretation] I apologise to the interpreters.

 5        Q.   Sir, this is my fault.  I interrupted you and therefore you

 6     couldn't hear.  Could you please repeat the last part of your answer.

 7     Does this document show that the procedure was conforming to the

 8     procedure which the law had provided for?

 9        A.   Yes, the president of the republic ordered it and it was followed

10     up according to the established procedure.

11             MS. FAUVEAU:  [Interpretation] Your Honour, I see that it's time

12     for the break but I only need a couple of minutes.  Could I continue and

13     finish?

14             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yes, I would suggest that you do that and we have

15     the break after that.  Thank you.

16             MS. FAUVEAU:  [Interpretation] Thank you very much.

17        Q.   Lastly, I would like to examine the document 1321.  This is still

18     dealing with the same topic that is the engagement of police units in

19     combat.  Again I have an unofficial translation for the Chamber.

20             While we are waiting, could you have a look at the document,

21     perhaps we need to have a zoom.

22        A.   I read the document.

23        Q.   According to this document, the public security centre in Zvornik

24     sent on June 21st a unit to the front where the Republika Srpska was

25     having -- was losing soldiers and they sent a dispatch and another unit

Page 26847

 1     was sent from Zvornik.  Do you agree that according to this document, you

 2     cannot see that there was any request coming from the army so that these

 3     units be sent to fight side by side with the army of the Republika

 4     Srpska?

 5        A.   I can't see from the document that there were any written

 6     requests.  It probably all took place in the field presumably.  However,

 7     the police forces staff commander of the CSB in Zvornik according to some

 8     legal provisions has the right to engage certain units but he urgently

 9     needs to notify the minister and the police forces staff at headquarters.

10     It was probably due to a certain situation in the field.  I do know what

11     the law states as to what the public security centre commander of the

12     police forces staff can do, he can do it but he needs to urgently report

13     to the ministry and headquarters.  This is all I can tell you.

14             MS. FAUVEAU:  [Interpretation] Thank you very much.  I have no

15     further questions.

16             JUDGE AGIUS:  Thank you.  Mr. Krgovic or Mr. Josse, do you have

17     any questions for this witness?

18             MR. JOSSE:  We don't.

19             JUDGE AGIUS:  And Mr. Sarapa?

20             MR. SARAPA:  Briefly, Your Honour.

21             JUDGE AGIUS:  You have some questions?

22             MR. SARAPA:  Yes.

23             JUDGE AGIUS:  Okay.  All right.  We'll have your questions

24     immediately after the break, and then -- do you wish to state something,

25     Mr. Lazarevic?

Page 26848

 1             MR. LAZAREVIC:  No, Your Honour, not really, yes.

 2             JUDGE AGIUS:  All right.  Thank you.  How long do you think you

 3     will be cross-examining this witness?

 4             MR. VANDERPUYE:  Well, I'll confer with Mr. McCloskey, but I

 5     anticipate about half an hour to 40 minutes.  I don't know if we can make

 6     it but I'll do my best, Mr. President.

 7             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yes.

 8             MR. LAZAREVIC:  I can release the witness who is waiting here

 9     since the morning.

10             JUDGE AGIUS:  This is why I have asked the question.  As it is,

11     shall we send the witness.  For the rest of this week you've got this

12     next witness and another one.

13             MR. LAZAREVIC:  And another one.

14             JUDGE AGIUS:  And another one.  All right.  Can you just make me

15     a rough calculation, okay, I will ask my staff to do it.  How long they

16     will be testifying.  Okay.  We'll have a 25-minute break.

17                           --- Recess taken at 12.34 p.m.

18                           --- On resuming at 1.02 p.m.

19             JUDGE AGIUS:  Okay.  Mr. Sarapa.  For the record, we have now the

20     company of Mr. Bourgon.  Yes, Mr. Sarapa.

21             MR. SARAPA:  Thank you.

22                           Cross-examination by Mr. Sarapa:

23        Q.   [Interpretation] I'm Djorde Sarapa and I represent Vinko

24     Pandurevic.  Dr. Bajagic, I have just one question for you.  Members of

25     the security and intelligence organs and services of the Army of

Page 26849

 1     Republika Srpska had legal authorities in acting within their purview

 2     which were adequate to the authorities of members of the MUP of Republika

 3     Srpska within the department of state security.  Please tell us what

 4     authorities were those when it comes to the members of the MUP of

 5     Republika Srpska within the state security department?

 6        A.   May I start?

 7             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yes, go ahead.

 8             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know whether the

 9     authorities were the same because I never analysed that matter.  And as

10     far as the state security department is concerned, that element of the

11     Ministry of the Interior had a task to collect information, i.e.,

12     intelligence and counterintelligence that concerned the security of

13     Republika Srpska and the implementation of its interest.  This is in very

14     general terms.

15        Q.   And in operative sense, would you please be more precise?

16        A.   Yes, I can try.  Collecting intelligence and counterintelligence

17     by all methods known to all intelligence and counterintelligence services

18     in the world.  I can give you their list.

19        Q.   Please do.

20        A.   Collection of intelligence from human sources or human

21     intelligence as it is theoretically known, collection of intelligence

22     from open sources, or open search intelligence.  Collection of

23     intelligence by technical methods in a narrow and broader sense, method

24     of collaboration or cooperation with informants, and all the other

25     scientific methods that are normally used in the processing of

Page 26850

 1     intelligence and counterintelligence.  In general terms, those are

 2     methods of intelligence services and security department applied all

 3     these matters when it came to collecting intelligence within its purview.

 4             MR. SARAPA: [Interpretation] Thank you, I have no further

 5     questions.

 6             JUDGE AGIUS:  Thank you.  Mr. Vanderpuye.

 7             MR. VANDERPUYE:  Thank you Mr. President.  Good afternoon to you,

 8     good afternoon, Your Honours.  Good afternoon to my colleagues and good

 9     afternoon to you, Dr. Bajagic.

10                           Cross-examination by Mr. Vanderpuye:

11        Q.   My name is Kweku Vanderpuye on behalf of the Prosecution.  I'm

12     going to put some questions to you in relation to your direct examination

13     as well as your cross-examination by some of my colleagues in the

14     Defence.  If there's anything I ask you that is not clear, please let me

15     know.  I'll do my best to try and clarify things so that we can

16     understand each other a little bit better.  I hope to be able to finish

17     with you so let's get right to it.

18             You said, I believe in your direct examination that you were an

19     operative in the national security service which then became the public

20     security state security service, is that right, and that was in 1992 that

21     you began there?

22        A.   Yes.

23        Q.   All right.  And during the course of the war, is that where you

24     were -- well, tell us where you were and what you did.

25        A.   I worked as an operative which means I was a professional in the

Page 26851

 1     service which was the national security service first and then became the

 2     skate security service.  In more concrete terms, if you are asking me for

 3     the region, I was posted in Sarajevo in Ilidza and I was dealing with

 4     collection of intelligence and counterintelligence as any operative will

 5     do, and this was within the purview of the state security department and

 6     this purview had legal foundations.  It was regulated by law.

 7        Q.   And during the period of that period of time, you tell us who was

 8     the Minister of the Interior?

 9        A.   Are you referring to the entire period that I spent working in

10     the department?

11        Q.   If I could ask you that and then I will be more specific.

12        A.   I'll try and remember.  There were some shakeups in the

13     organisation.  The first minister I believe was Mico Stanisic at the very

14     beginning in 1992 and I would not be able to follow the right sequence.

15     I know that at one point it was Zivko Rakic.  I know that at some other

16     point it was another gentleman whom I can't remember.  I can't remember

17     his name.  I believe that his family name was Adzic.  I don't know when

18     he was in office and I also know that about the time when I was leaving

19     the state security sector and the Ministry of the Interior, Dragan Kijac

20     was about to be appointed or just took up the position and this is all I

21     can remember.

22        Q.   Do you remember if a Zivko Rakic was the Minister of the Interior

23     in 1995 at any point?

24        A.   I really can't remember but since we have analysed certain

25     documents, I believe that he is referred to as the Minister of the

Page 26852

 1     Interior, Republika Srpska in office in 1995.

 2        Q.   Okay.  And in relation to that, do you recognise the name of

 3     Tomislav Kovac?

 4        A.   Yes.

 5        Q.   Do you know what his position was in July 1995?

 6        A.   I believe that Tomislav Kovac was deputy minister of the interior

 7     of Republika Srpska.

 8        Q.   Thank you for that.  Now, you know that during the course of the

 9     war, 1995, there was a front in Sarajevo, around Sarajevo that was within

10     the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps; right?

11        A.   Yes.  Well ...

12        Q.   And you came into that information I take it, during the course

13     of your employment in the state security service; right?

14        A.   Well, yes.  I was in the territory of Sarajevo so not just me but

15     everybody else knew that Sarajevo was within the zone of the

16     Sarajevo-Romanija Corps.

17        Q.   And with respect to your knowledge of how the state security

18     service operated, was it the case that the state security service shared

19     information with other organs, such as the public security service,

20     public security sectors, police directorate, and so on and so forth?

21        A.   I'm sure of that but I personally did not have the right to share

22     any information.  The information was sent to my supervisors and further

23     up to the top of the state security.  I never participated in any

24     exchange of information.  I had to act in keeping with the rules of the

25     service.  But I'm sure that there was cooperation.  It is only natural

Page 26853

 1     that information was exchanged.

 2        Q.   Is the nature of the information that is exchanged information

 3     that is gathered on the ground, for example, through operatives with the

 4     state security?

 5        A.   Not only that.  This included information gathered through

 6     operatives, but this is not the only way intelligence was collected.

 7     There are other ways as well.

 8        Q.   Well, in particular I'm interested in knowing how the

 9     intelligence was shared and with whom it was shared from the state

10     security services.  So if you could, just briefly tell us with what

11     agencies, what organs in information was shared?

12        A.   As an operative, I could send the intelligence that I collected

13     to my supervisors.  As for them, who they shared the intelligence with

14     according to the rules of service or how the exchange took place with the

15     state security services from the top to the public security, I really

16     don't know how it went, whether it was daily, weekly monthly.  I

17     personally was not in a position to participate in the exchange of

18     information of intelligence at the level at which I operated.

19        Q.   Well, it is the case that you've given lectures in respect of

20     intelligence practices, no?

21        A.   Of course.

22        Q.   You published in that area, isn't that true?  Think you said you

23     have over 50 publications?

24        A.   Of course.  Precisely so, yes.  Particularly dealing with the

25     process of collection of intelligence.  Not every work of mine deals with

Page 26854

 1     that, but the main body of my work is concerned with that particular

 2     issue.

 3        Q.   Well --

 4        A.   I can give you more specific details about the entire process of

 5     collecting intelligence.

 6        Q.   No, I'm not interested in the specific details of how -- well, I

 7     am but I don't think I have time to get into that.  But what I'd like to

 8     know specifically is in the context of your experience and your expertise

 9     in the area of intelligence work, what agencies corresponded with the

10     state security services in terms of sharing information?

11        A.   Surely it would be the public security department through the

12     office of the minister and the minister himself.  And surely it would be

13     through the department of state security that other agencies which were

14     provided for by the law to deal with the protection of security in

15     Republika Srpska.

16        Q.   All right.  So in the context of security, it is the case that

17     the state security service or sector would provide information to the

18     public security department, right, and the public security department

19     would forward that information within its own chain?  That's correct,

20     isn't it?

21        A.   I would sooner say that within the office of the minister, the

22     head of the department of state security would brief the Minister of the

23     Interior and the chief of the public security department, and whether

24     things were done in a similar way at lower levels both of the RDB and the

25     security services centres following some specific set of instructions, I

Page 26855

 1     really wouldn't be able to tell you.

 2        Q.   Within say, for example, the CJB in Zvornik, now, is there --

 3     sorry, the CSB.  I'm sorry.  Can you tell us what information it is --

 4     well, could that particular service share information with the public

 5     security sector of that division?

 6        A.   I don't think that you have worded your question well, but I'm

 7     still getting the drift.  If you are referring to Zvornik, you are

 8     talking about the relationship between the security services centre and

 9     the public security centre.  I'm not sure that I got the meaning right.

10     I'm sorry.

11        Q.   What I'm talking about is I'm talking about the public security

12     centre in Zvornik.  That's the CJB.  Did they receive information from

13     the intelligence -- did they receive information from state security?

14        A.   I suppose so because the state security informs public security

15     and then this goes to the CJB in Zvornik.  That was the line that

16     communication went down on, so I suppose the answer would be yes.

17        Q.   All right.  Can you tell us who was the head of state security in

18     Zvornik?

19        A.   I can't remember the name.  I wouldn't be able to tell you for

20     most of the chiefs.  I could probably remember the person in Sarajevo,

21     but no, not for Zvornik.

22        Q.   And did state security have a parallel or similar chain down from

23     the regional to the municipal and to the local, as you've indicated

24     public security did?

25        A.   We can say that it is similar, but it is still very specific

Page 26856

 1     because every intelligence and counterintelligence service is

 2     particularly engaged in protecting its information system and channels.

 3     I'm sure that the manners of internal exchange of information was

 4     different in the state security.  I believe that they followed much

 5     stricter rules.

 6        Q.   Are you saying you don't actually know whether or not the state

 7     security services were organised on a regional and municipal level, or

 8     are you saying that you just don't know who in particular was working

 9     say, for example, in July 1995?

10        A.   Oh, I thought you asked me about informing so I would like to

11     confirm that the state security service was organised at the regional and

12     territorial levels in state security centres and departments thereof.

13     For example, the headquarters of the state security is one thing.  The

14     centre of the state security centre in Sarajevo is one step below

15     according to the territorial system of organisation.  And there would

16     also be a department or several departments within the regional centre.

17     But the departments did not consign with municipalities.  For example one

18     department could comprise two municipalities or just one.

19        Q.   Do you know the name Sinisa Glogovac?

20        A.   Yes.

21        Q.   Tell us who he is.

22        A.   He was a member of the state security department just like me

23     from 1992 to 1992 [as interpreted] and he worked for the state security

24     services of the Socialist Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina even before

25     the war.

Page 26857

 1        Q.   And what is reflected in the record page 77, line 9 is that he

 2     worked from 92 to 92, but I'm sure that can't be right.  So I wonder if

 3     you could just clarify that?

 4        A.   It should be 1995, the second year should be 1995.

 5        Q.   And in 1995, do you know where he was working?

 6        A.   I don't know exactly where he was working in 1995, in which

 7     department or centre, which of these he was affiliated with.

 8        Q.   Are you familiar with the name Vitomir Tomic?

 9        A.   No.

10        Q.   All right.  Now, you indicated that you were assigned to work in

11     Sarajevo and that's throughout your tenure with state security; is that

12     right?

13        A.   Yes, that's correct, because I also resided in Sarajevo.  To be

14     more precise, I resided in the municipality of Ilidza.

15        Q.   I'd like to show you a document if I could in e-court.  65 ter

16     3792.  Just to let you know, I guess while it's being loaded in e-court,

17     this is a document that was written by Ljubisa Borovcanin and it's dated

18     30 June 1995.  I think it will be up in just a minute.  Okay.  And you

19     can see in this document it's dated the 30th of June 1995.  The number of

20     it is 114/95 and it's directed to the Minister of the Interior for

21     information.  It's also directed to the head of RJB.  It's directed to

22     the police forces headquarters from Pale.  It's directed to the police

23     force headquarters chief of Bijeljina MUP, and the police forces

24     headquarters of Vogosca.

25             Now, in this document you can see the first paragraph he talks

Page 26858

 1     about having informed these organs or individuals about a situation in

 2     the field in the zone of responsibility kept by five of our PJP companies

 3     and one company comprised of MUP members.  What he talks about if you

 4     look further down the document, is he lists several units.  He says, "We

 5     emphasize that the unit came to the field in the following order:  One

 6     Trebinje PJP company, one MUP company in the headquarters, one Bijeljina

 7     CJB PJP company, one Srbinje PJP company, one Banja Luka PJP company.

 8     Just above his signature he talks about the current situation in the

 9     field, the level of moral, the PJP members are firmly holding the

10     achieved positions.  In the context of this document, can you tell us who

11     it is -- well, who is in charge of these PJP companies?

12        A.   According to what I can see in the heading, could we go back to

13     the top of the document.  We have the units and on the top we have the

14     police forces staff.  This in turn means that these units were put under

15     that particular staff.

16        Q.   Just above his signature he talks about how they are holding

17     their achieved positions.  Is that suggesting that these units are

18     engaged in combat?

19        A.   When we are talking about positions occupied, that's probably

20     what they had in mind.

21        Q.   And that being the case, it would make sense that those units

22     would be subordinated to the VRS corps in that area.  Does that make

23     sense?

24        A.   It could make sense but there are two situations in which MUP

25     units can be engaged in a time of war.  They can act independently, and

Page 26859

 1     they can act as a part of the VRS based on the principle of

 2     resubordination.  I see nothing here that would make me able to conclude

 3     which of these two actually took place.

 4        Q.   All right.  Well, under Article 14 of the law on implementation

 5     of the Law of Internal Affairs, if they were engaged in combat they would

 6     be under the immediate command of Mr. Borovcanin; right?

 7        A.   If engaged in combat and if it was indeed the units mentioned

 8     here.

 9        Q.   All right.  And --

10        A.   That would be my general conclusion based on the document.  If

11     they participated in combat, it is known that they were subordinated to

12     the above-mentioned police reserves force.  However, from the document,

13     you can't see whether these units were resubordinated to the VRS or

14     whether they acted independently.  I truly can't argue either way based

15     on the information I have.

16        Q.   All right.  Well, let me show you another document, if I could.

17     Thank you, that's 3794.  This, as you can see, is another report, and it

18     is authored by Mr. Borovcanin.  Was directed to the Ministry of the

19     Interior, deputy minister in Bijeljina, Pale police staff directed to the

20     commander, Vogosca police force staff and it says Janja special police

21     brigade, it's dated 1st of July 1995.  In this document you can see that

22     it says refers to activities commenced the previous day which were

23     continued at the Trnovo battle field on 30th of July 1995 and he talks

24     about a combat group which included 5th Special Police Detachment.  He

25     talks about two platoons from the Kajman detachment, Plavi, and Skorpija,

Page 26860

 1     Serbian MUP attacked the facility in Lucevik.  He continues on it and

 2     says in the middle of this document, the problem of respecting the

 3     agreement with the RSK Sarajevo-Romanija Corps over joint actions in

 4     overtaking lines is still present, and then in the end of the document he

 5     talks about the situation with respect to the special police brigade

 6     forces and he says they are exhausted and proposes withdrawal of some of

 7     them to the home base.  Now, in this respect can you tell us who would

 8     have been in command of the Serbian MUP?

 9        A.   I don't understand.

10        Q.   All right.  Let me back up then.  In the context of this

11     particular document, is it apparent to you who is in charge of these

12     units, who commands these units?

13        A.   As far as I can tell, these units acted in concert and it is

14     stipulated which units took part in individual operations.  However, I

15     can't see who was in direct command of those units.  This is one type of

16     informing in which it is explained what took place during the course of a

17     single day in a given area, but it doesn't necessarily mean that all the

18     units referred to were commanded by a single person.  The document is not

19     clear in that regard.

20        Q.   All right.  But from the document, it is certainly a possibility

21     that the person that is making the report is in charge of these units?

22     It's possible?

23             MR. LAZAREVIC:  I believe it's a call for speculation.  I believe

24     the witness already said it's not clear from the document.

25             MR. VANDERPUYE:  Mr. President.

Page 26861

 1             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yes, Mr. Vanderpuye.

 2             MR. VANDERPUYE:  The question is specific as to the content and

 3     the nature of the communication.  So I think that he is perfectly within

 4     his expertise to opine on the possibility, given the nature of the

 5     document, the content of the document, as to whether or not the author of

 6     the document is possibly in charge of these units.

 7             JUDGE AGIUS:  We think the witness can answer the question.  As

 8     far as he knows obviously.  But the question being asked is based on his

 9     knowledge whether there is this possibility or not.  It's not

10     speculation.

11             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I wouldn't want to speculate.  As I

12     said, the document is unclear in that regard.

13             MR. VANDERPUYE:

14        Q.   Well, in terms of the content of the document, it is consistent

15     with a commanding officer, the nature of that information is consistent

16     with the type of information that would be included in a document that

17     is -- a report that is made by a commanding officer, isn't it?

18        A.   It may be, but reports are not drafted solely by commanders and

19     commanding officers.  Reports are drafted also by services.  If you have

20     in mind all of the different types of informing that can be in place.

21     This is a dispatch.  Or an information sheet of sorts.  I don't know what

22     to call it exactly.  Yes, it could be done by the commander, but also by

23     others.

24        Q.   All right.  Well, it would be consistent that a commander would

25     have a duty to report what the situation concerning the conduct in a

Page 26862

 1     battle field would be, right, to his superiors?

 2        A.   That is right.

 3        Q.   It would be consistent for a commander to report to his superiors

 4     what his expectations are with respect to the mission that he has been

 5     assigned to carry out and when he expected it would be completed; right?

 6        A.   Well, yes, it can contain all those elements, but it is difficult

 7     to give an assessment of when a given task is to be concluded in such war

 8     circumstances.

 9        Q.   Well, in the interest of time, I guess I will leave that be and

10     I'm move on, as we've only got about five minutes left.  Let me just ask

11     you before I leave this area, how is it that we have Serbian MUP that are

12     included among these units, if you can tell, based upon this report?

13        A.   I can't say.  I read it but I can't say how and in what way it

14     took place.  These are specific facts that I would need.  I can't say

15     where that came from.

16        Q.   Well, I'm not asking about that specifically.  You know, and

17     you've commented in your expertise upon the role and the duties of the

18     deputy commander of the special police brigade, in this case it was

19     Mr. Borovcanin, and you know the mechanisms by which he may exercise

20     supervision over MUP units that are in his charge, in his chain of

21     command.  So I'm asking you in a general, in a more general sense, how is

22     it that, and when I say Serbian MUP, I mean MUP from the former -- from

23     the FRY, how is it that they are assigned or they appear in this document

24     in relation to the activities carried out by other members of the MUP in

25     Bosnia?

Page 26863

 1        A.   I answered already that I don't know.  You should ask the person

 2     who made the decision for such units to be in the field.  I have no

 3     ability to answer in any other way.

 4        Q.   All right.  So you are not familiar with at least mechanistically

 5     as a method of organisation how it is that this could occur, at least in

 6     a theoretical sense?

 7        A.   If you have in mind the mechanisms that existed between the

 8     Republika Srpska and the Serbian MUP, then I truly don't know what sort

 9     of mechanisms there were.  I was just a simply operative at the time.

10     These things had to be decided on by the top echelon, by the highest

11     ranks.

12        Q.   All right.  Could I look at 65 ter 57, please.

13             Sorry, in relation to my last question, you indicated that

14     these -- the mechanism by which these Serbian MUP might find themselves

15     in the circumstances indicated if Mr. Borovcanin's report, you said that

16     that had to be -- that's a matter that had to be decided by the top

17     echelon by the highest ranks, is that right, of government, I take it?

18        A.   Probably, yes.

19        Q.   And by government, that could mean the civilian government, it

20     could mean the army; right?

21        A.   I mean the top level at which such a decision can be made or such

22     ways of cooperation instituted.

23        Q.   That could be done through the Main Staff of the army; right?  I

24     should say the VRS so the record is clear.

25        A.   I truly don't know.

Page 26864

 1        Q.   [Previous translation continues] ... presidency?

 2        A.   I truly don't know what organ that would be.  The top of the

 3     state, we know what that is.

 4        Q.   All right.

 5             MR. VANDERPUYE:  Mr. President, we are going until 2.00, right?

 6             JUDGE AGIUS:  No.

 7             MR. VANDERPUYE:  We're not.  Is it possible that I could continue

 8     for a -- or should we --

 9             JUDGE AGIUS:  There is a sitting.

10             MR. VANDERPUYE:  All right.

11             JUDGE AGIUS:  How much longer do you have?

12             MR. VANDERPUYE:  I have about 15 minutes or so.  I don't think I

13     can make it shorter.

14             JUDGE AGIUS:  I am afraid, Professor, we haven't finished.  Don't

15     blame anyone in particular.  We have to continue tomorrow morning.  Now,

16     I wouldn't like to stay another 15 minutes because that would compromise

17     things for the next Trial Chamber, will make things difficult.  So let's

18     adjourn now until tomorrow morning at 9.00.  Thank you.

19                           --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at

20                           1.46 p.m., to be reconvened on Thursday, the 9th

21                           day of October 2008, at 9.00 a.m.