1 Monday, 16 March 2009
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The accused Prlic not present]
5 [The accused Pusic not present]
6 --- Upon commencing at 2.15 p.m.
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Registrar, can you kindly call
8 the case, please.
9 THE REGISTRAR: Good afternoon, Your Honours. Good afternoon
10 everyone in and around the courtroom. This is case number IT-04-74-T,
11 the Prosecutor versus Prlic et al. Thank you, Your Honours.
12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you, Registrar. Today is
13 Monday the 16th of March, 2009. I would like first of all to greet the
14 accused. I would like to greet Mr. Coric, specifically. We are happy to
15 see that he is back in the courtroom today. I can see that Mr. Pusic has
16 taken ill. We hope therefore that he will get better as soon as
17 possible. I would also like to greet the counsel, Mr. Stringer and his
18 associates, as well as all the people assisting us in this courtroom.
19 Registrar, I believe you have four IC numbers to give us.
20 THE REGISTRAR: That's correct, Your Honour. OTP has submitted
21 its objection to documents tendered by 2D via witness Tihomir Majic.
22 This list shall be given Exhibit IC947. Two parties have submitted their
23 list of documents to be tendered through witness Bato Hamid. The list
24 submitted by 2D shall be given Exhibit IC00948. The list submitted by
25 the Prosecution shall be given Exhibit IC 00949. 2D has submitted its
1 list of documents to be tendered through witness Cengic Nedzad. The list
2 submitted by 2D shall be given Exhibit IC00950.
3 Thank you, Your Honours.
4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Registrar. The
5 Trial Chamber will hand out an oral decision, an oral decision relating
6 to a leave to reconsider the oral decision concerning a request filed by
7 the Prlic Defence with a view to exceeding the word count in its
8 motion, motion relating to the provisional release of the accused Prlic.
9 On the 2nd of March, 2009, Prlic Defence filed leave for
10 provisional release as well as the permission to exceed the word count in
11 this same motion. On the 9th of March, 2009, the Trial Chamber handed
12 down an oral decision dismissing the Prlic Defence's motion to exceed the
13 threshold of 3.000 words which is the authorised threshold. In this
14 decision, the Trial Chamber stipulated that it was therefore for the
15 Prlic Defence to file a new submission that would abide by the authorised
16 number of words.
17 On the 13th of March, 2009, the Prlic Defence filed a request to
18 review the decision handed down by the Chamber on the 9th of March, 2009
19 submitting that these were exceptional circumstances. The Trial Chamber
20 does not see that there is any exceptional circumstance that would
21 entitle the Prlic Defence not to file a 3.000-word long motion to ask for
22 the provisional release of the accused Prlic.
23 The Trial Chamber therefore decides not to reconsider its
24 decision of the 9th of March, 2009, and asks the Prlic Defence, as it has
25 already asked it to do, to file if it so wishes a submission containing
1 no more than 3.000 words.
2 So in short, the Trial Chamber is awaiting another motion
3 relating to the provisional release of the accused in question that does
4 not exceed the 3.000 word count.
5 Mr. Karnavas.
6 MR. KARNAVAS: I'm not about to re-argue anything, however I do
7 wish to state that the factual predicate that you've just outlined is
8 incorrect. At least not the one that you gave us last week and not the
9 one that I saw on the transcript. As I understood it, last time you
10 indicated that we did not give sufficient reasoning, and -- which is why
11 we filed for reconsideration. Had you said that categorically and under
12 no circumstances you were going to allow anything over 3.000, I would not
13 have wasted my time in filing for reconsideration. So I'd like the
14 record to reflect that based on your suggestions, that's what we did. So
15 if we are going to be summarising the facts, Mr. President, I do hope
16 that the facts are accurately reflected each and every occasion. Thank
18 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Karnavas.
19 Unfortunately, I don't have before me the oral decision that was handed
20 down last time, but if I remember correct finally, I believe we were very
21 clear, I think it was unambiguous. You may be right, we will look at it
22 again, and we will check what was said at the time. And we shall take
23 into account what you have just mentioned, but this will be based on the
24 transcript because I don't have the oral decision before me. Whatever
25 the case may be, Mr. Karnavas, you may file your request for provisional
1 release and the Trial Chamber will hand out its decision very quickly.
2 Let's bring the witness in now, please.
3 [The witness entered court]
4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Good afternoon, sir.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good afternoon.
6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Can you give me your first
7 name, last name, and date of birth, please.
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Ivan Bandic.
9 THE INTERPRETER: There is a lot of interference in the
10 courtroom, and the interpreters did not hear the date of birth.
11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] What is your job or your
12 current occupation?
13 Witness, can you give me your job and current occupation, and
14 could you give us your date of birth again, please.
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, my name is Ivan
16 Bandic. By profession I'm a lawyer, and I am a the ambassador of the
17 Republic of Croatia
18 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] What is your date of birth?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] 17th of November, 1959.
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Ambassador, have you already
21 testified before a court of law on the facts that unfolded in the former
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, today I'm testifying
24 for the first time.
25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you. You may read the
1 text of the solemn declaration.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will
3 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you. You may sit down.
5 Ambassador, just some brief information I'd like to give you, Your
6 Excellency. I believe that in your capacity you know how this Tribunal
7 operates I'm sure, and I'm sure your lawyer has briefed you. You will
8 answer questions put to you by Ms. Nozica. She will undoubtedly show you
9 a number of questions in support of the questions -- show you a number of
10 documents in support of the questions she's going to put to you. This
11 will last approximately 3 hours.
12 The other Defence counsel will also put questions to you if at
13 the deem it necessary adds part of their cross-examination, and they have
14 one hour and a half all in all. After that, the Prosecutor who is
15 sitting on your right-hand side, Mr. Stringer I believe today, will
16 proceed with his cross-examination which will last 3 hours which is the
17 same time as Ms. Nozica will have had. The four judges that form the
18 Bench may intervene and put questions, particularly when documents are
19 shown to you, and may put questions to you which they deem appropriate.
20 Which means that your testimony should last four days this week. You are
21 now a witness of the court since you have taken the oath, and this means
22 that you must not contact anyone before next Thursday. But I'm sure you
23 understand this perfectly well. Try and be as accurate as you possibly
24 can when you answer the questions, but in your current capacity I have no
25 concerns about this.
1 We have a break every hour and a half to enable everyone to have
2 a rest and we need to turn the tapes around also. If at any point in
3 time you feel uneasy or have a problem, don't hesitate to raise your hand
4 so that we suspend the hearing if need be.
5 I would also like to say to Mr. Coric that if any point in time
6 he wishes to get up during the hearing, I know that he has back problems,
7 if he wishes to stand at any point in time, he may. And if he wishes to
8 have a rest, this will be granted to him. This is what I had to say, and
9 I shall now give the floor to Ms. Nozica.
10 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. And good
11 afternoon to everybody in the courtroom.
12 WITNESS: IVAN BANDIC
13 [Witness answered through interpreter]
14 Examination by Ms. Nozica:
15 Q. [Interpretation] And good afternoon to you, too, Mr. Bandic.
16 A. Good afternoon.
17 Q. I'm going to go through your CV briefly. You needn't answer
18 after each of my observations, but just tell me if I say something that
19 is not correct. So you can wait until I go through your CV and then tell
20 me afterwards.
21 You graduated from the faculty of law in 1985?
22 A. Yes, that's right.
23 Q. And your first employment was in Grude municipality from 1985 to
25 A. That's right.
1 Q. Then you were the secretary of a firm called Herzegovina Putoli
2 [phoen], Herzegovina
3 A. Correct.
4 Q. From 1988 to 1991 you were in the service of the state security
5 of Bosnia-Herzegovina?
6 A. That's right.
7 Q. From April 1992 until the autumn of 1994, you were an employee in
8 the SIS administration in the Security Sector of the Defence Department?
9 A. Yes, roughly during that time, yes. That's right.
10 Q. From the -- around the autumn of 1984 [as interpreted] until the
11 1st of March, 1995, you worked in the HIS, which is the Croatian
12 intelligence service attached to the Defence ministry of Croatia?
13 A. Yes, right.
14 Q. From the 1st of March, 1995, until the 1st of March, 1997
15 were an advisor to the ambassador in Sarajevo attached to the Ministry of
16 Foreign Affairs?
17 A. That's right.
18 Q. You were employed in the same area from the 1st of March 1997,
19 until the 1st of February, 1999, in the embassy in The Hague
20 A. That's right, yes.
21 Q. You worked on these same affairs from the 1st of June of 1999
22 until the 15th of December 2000 at the embassy in Tehrana?
23 A. Yes, that is correct as well.
24 Q. You continued working in the area from the 1st of February, 2001
25 until the 15th of November, 2002, in the Croatian embassy in Belgrade
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. From the 15th of November, 2002, until the 31st of December,
3 2006, you were the consul general or performed the duties of consul
4 general in Pecs
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. And from the 1st of January 2007 to the present day, you have
7 been the Croatian ambassador in Hungary
8 A. That's correct.
9 Q. Mr. Bandic, now, although we just said that during my reading out
10 of your CV, could you tell the Trial Chamber when you worked first for
11 the HZ-HB?
12 A. My first job or my first assignment and involvement in the
13 Croatian Defence Council was at the beginning of April 1992.
14 Q. And what was your job at the time? What work were you involved
16 A. I was part of the military police of the HVO.
17 Q. Tell me, please, who was your superior?
18 A. My superior was Mr. Coric.
19 Q. You said that that was in April 1992; right? How long did you
20 stay in that post, and where did you move to after that?
21 A. Well, roughly between April and July of that same year, that was
22 it, and afterwards I became employed in the security service within the
24 Q. And who was your superior there within the security service?
25 A. That was Mr. Ivica Lucic.
1 Q. Mr. Bandic, do you know who appointed Mr. Lucic to his positions?
2 A. To the best of my knowledge it was Mr. Boban who appointed him.
3 Q. Can you remember when that was?
4 A. I remember that it was towards the end of July 1992. Yes, the
5 end of July, 1992 would be it. And I remember that for the simple reason
6 that this was an important thing for me too because at that time together
7 with Mr. Lucic I started building up the service as such, and those were
8 the fledgling structures of the service.
9 Q. Can you remember, and I'm saying this because we haven't found
10 the document on your appointment, but can you remember which specific
11 tasks Mr. Boban appointed Mr. Lucic, or, rather, we couldn't find
12 Mr. Lucic's papers of appointment?
13 A. As far as I know, Mr. Lucic was the chief of the Security and
14 Information Service, the SIS, or rather, the SIS administration.
15 Q. Can you tell the Trial Chamber what you were engaged in first,
16 you and Mr. Lucic? What kind of work did you do within SIS? What were
17 your first tasks and how many employees were there, where were your
18 premises, and so on?
19 A. Your Honours, these are the pioneer days of the service. We
20 started -- well, the two of us started working, and we tried to find some
21 more people to do the work involved. We needed to find the premises, and
22 physically that was in Mostar, and briefly speaking we did what we could
23 with the resources that we had and tried to set up the organisation from
24 finding a table and chairs and a computer, the car, so we had to start
25 from scratch. There were five or six of us to begin with or, rather, we
1 managed to recruit five or six people over the next few months and start
2 the whole ball rolling.
3 Q. Can you tell the Trial Chamber which building your premises were
5 A. The SIS administration from the first to the last day was at the
6 entrance to Mostar on the left, as far as I remember, and before the war
7 it was called the Tobacco Institute. That was the building. And nearby
8 there was a petrol station and opposite there was the cathedral, and I'm
9 saying that so that anybody who knows their way around will be able to
10 understand where we were located in Mostar.
11 And we were in the attic, up in the loft. That is to say the top
12 of the building. Well, it wasn't really a big building. It was a house
13 with a ground floor and two upper storeys and we were right up at the
15 Q. Tell me, please, was there anybody else there? Any other service
16 located in that same building when you took up residence?
17 A. As far as I remember, nobody had installed themselves yet.
18 Q. Mr. Bandic, we see that this was your first involvement, and all
19 my questions will be linked to the work you did in the SIS
20 administration. Tell me, please, how long did you stay working in that
22 A. Well, I remained there until 1994. I remained within the SIS
23 administration, and my immediate involvement was until the Washington
24 agreement roughly, and I finished the work that I was doing there in the
25 SIS administration or, rather, the HVO or the Croatian Community of
1 Herceg-Bosna as I've already said at the end of 1994.
2 Q. Can you tell the Trial Chamber what your specific tasks were?
3 I'm not talking about the SIS administration, but what did you personally
4 do? What were you personally involved with?
5 A. Well, already in the autumn of 1992, as I remember, I went out
6 into the field and one of the first times I went was, well, memorable
7 because it was an area in central Bosnia
8 negotiations there with UNPROFOR and other parties in Sarajevo, and I
9 mention that occasion because it has embedded itself in my memory. I
10 went together with Mr. Petkovic and another person, that first time.
11 Q. And subsequently did you go again, and if so, could you tell the
12 Trial Chamber roughly how much time you spent in the area until, let's
13 say, the Washington Agreement in 1994?
14 A. Yes, I went several times. I would say a total of five to seven
15 months is how long I spent there. I can't be quite sure, but anyway, I
16 went on a case-to-case basis. I would go for two or three days, but
17 sometimes those days would stretch to two to three weeks.
18 Q. Who did you go with, Mr. Bandic, and in what capacity?
19 A. Now, when I say that I went into the field, I mean central Bosnia
20 mostly, and almost always that was with Mr. Petkovic. At the beginning,
21 I think he was a colonel, but very soon after that he became a general,
22 so I went with General Petkovic. And so in a way I was his, if I might
23 be allowed to say so, his driver and his body-guard and his secretary and
24 in a way his assistant. I helped him as much as I could, and whenever I
25 went there, I was almost always with General Petkovic.
1 Q. Mr. Bandic, what assignments did you have within the SIS
2 administration? What jobs did you have, what tasks from the beginning of
3 your employment there, and did things change later on? What did you do
5 A. Well, it's like this: At the beginning when I spoke about how
6 SIS came into being, my work was technical, evolving my professional
7 knowledge, and now what I knew about the security system was perhaps a
8 little more than my colleagues knew because as I've already said, I spent
9 two or three years working in the former state in the former service, so
10 that was the sort of groundwork of my knowledge in the security sphere.
11 Now, as far as going into the field is concerned, my job was, as
12 I've already said, to help General Petkovic as much as I could, and at
13 the same time to collect information and intelligence of importance to
14 security, of course.
15 Q. Tell me, please, were you in any way an employee, and if so when,
16 tell the Trial Chamber when, were you attached to the Main Staff in any
17 way and at any time?
18 A. Yes, I was in the Main Staff. I cannot confirm, or, rather, I
19 don't remember when I was served the official papers appointing me to
20 that post, but sometime from the summer of 1993, I was in the Main Staff
21 and physically I would be up there. First of all in Citluk, and then in
23 Q. Mr. Bandic, could you please explain to the Trial Chamber what
24 the tasks of the SIS were? Could you please tell us how they were
25 regulated. Was there a legal basis for that? However, basically I'm
1 asking you as an operative what the tasks of the SIS were to the best of
2 your understanding?
3 A. The basic job of the service was counter-intelligence protection
4 of the forces of the HVO and everything that pertains to this military
5 field. So basically it was counter-intelligence protection first and
7 Of course, it involved other work as prescribed by the rules and
8 regulations of the security service. As far as I can remember, these
9 rules were passed in 1993.
10 Q. To the best of your recollection, were there some written rules
11 before these rules came into force?
12 A. I think so. Part of them were regulated through the Decree on
13 the Armed Forces, and I believe that a part was regulated through the
14 disciplinary rules. At any rate, an effort was made throughout to create
15 a legal framework so that the security service would have its proper
17 Q. Mr. Bandic, can you tell me how the Security Sector was organised
18 in the Defence Department?
19 A. My knowledge in this regard was as follows: Formally, it was
20 envisaged but it never actually started to operate, for objective and
21 subjective reasons. However, it was my understanding that one in the
22 same person was supposed to be, and indeed was, at the head of the
23 security service and one of the divisions and that was the SIS
24 administration. So it was supposed to be the military police
25 administration and the SIS administration. It was my understanding that
1 basically the sector never started functioning in the true essential of
2 the word as it had been envisaged and as it was supposed to function.
3 Q. Could you please tell me first and foremost who this one person
4 was who was suppose today head the Security Sector Administration and the
6 A. To the best of my knowledge, Mr. Ivica Lucic headed this Security
7 Sector, and at the same time he headed the SIS administration. As for
8 the military police, it was Mr. Valentin Coric.
9 Q. Second question stemming from this, you said that practically the
10 Security Sector never started to function, are you talking about the
11 entire period while you were an official in the SIS until April 1994?
12 A. Yes, that's the period I'm referring to. However, I would like
13 to add something. Towards the end of 1993, as Mr. Biskic came, he became
14 formally, the assistant for security. He came to that position.
15 Q. Now, I would like to ask you to explain to Their Honours how the
16 SIS administration was organised?
17 A. Your Honours, I've already said how many people were supposed to
18 be there and what the resources were supposed to be. However, it was
19 supposed to have it's offices, different ones, one was the operative one,
20 the other one was the analytical one, and there was even a personnel
21 administrative section, and that is how the SIS started functioning.
22 As time went by, what was envisaged was to establish centres
23 based on the territorial principle, centres of the SIS. When I say "on
24 the territorial principle," that means they were supposed to include
25 operative zones.
1 Q. Mr. Bandic, could you please explain what the link was between
2 the SIS administration and the centres? How was it envisaged, although
3 as you said they were supposed to start functioning as time went by, and
4 we'll see whether they actually did, but what is your understanding?
5 What was the link supposed to be?
6 A. In a way, SIS centres were supposed to be a link between the SIS
7 in the military districts, in the units, that is, and towards the
8 administration. At any rate, it was supposed to provide for professional
9 assistance for members of the service who were in the centres and further
10 down in the units, from battalion and brigade level, lower than that, I
12 Q. Mr. Bandic, can you explain to the Trial Chamber how -- or
13 rather, when you started working on this job, what was your relationship
14 like with these members of units who were in charge of SIS, did they
15 start working on this before your appointment, and, generally speaking,
16 what kind of link existed between you?
17 A. Centres did try to establish this link. Unfortunately it was
18 very difficult. The military police, as I already mentioned, was
19 established in the beginning of April. At the same time, units were
20 established as well, and in these units, of course, there were people who
21 represented the SIS. Practically, that means that a few months after the
22 administration started functioning, we had a situation involving people
23 who were already in the units and already did represent the SIS.
24 Q. What was your communication like with them? On what basis could
25 you give them assignments and what was this communication between the
1 administration or, rather, centres and the members of the SIS in the
2 respective units, the assistant commanders and other officers in the
4 A. Communication was very difficult. Virtually impossible. This
5 was another one of the reasons why we made an effort to establish the
6 centres, and may I repeat once again, they practically never started
7 operating in the full sense of the word. There were people who, from an
8 educational and professional point of view, and even security related and
9 moral point of view who -- these were people who were simply not supposed
10 to be there. But this was dictated by the actual situation as it was in
11 the field, where battalion and brigade commanders quite simply decided on
12 their own who they would appoint to these positions. That is to say,
13 well, quite simply this was left to individuals and their arbitrary
14 decisions, who would hold these positions.
15 While we are on the subject, I have to tell you that brigades in
16 certain municipalities were established in the following way: The
17 municipality, or rather, every municipality was a state per se and the
18 brigade was the armed force of this state, conditionally speaking. So it
19 was very troublesome to have any kind of communication.
20 Q. Could you please look at the first binder in front of you, and
21 now, in relation to this establishment, I should like to point out that
22 I'm going to put a few questions to you and --
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, Excellency, you just
24 mentioned something that I feel is particularly important but you said it
25 very quickly, and if I may, I'd like to come back to that particular
1 issue. It's on page 16, line 8 and following. You say, and I quote:
2 "The municipalities worked as a state, and the brigades that had
3 been set up by the municipalities seemed to see themselves as an armed
4 force of that particular municipality."
5 Could you perhaps give us more accurate details on this?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, to the best of my
7 knowledge and to the best of my ability, I can say that the times were
8 very chaotic then, and I apologise for using that term. Most of this was
9 rather spontaneous. When I say that, I'm saying that the municipalities
10 behaved in this way. Quite simply, I see that this was inherited from
11 the times of the previous state where indeed municipalities were
12 independent units where they had, in peacetime, I mean, their own
13 Territorial Defence. And unfortunately, a lot of this behaviour
14 continued during the war. Many heads of municipalities behaved as if
15 this were, conditionally speaking of course, their brigade, their army.
16 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Could you perhaps give us an
17 example of one municipality or several municipalities that match the
18 scheme you indicated?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, Grude, the
20 municipality that I was born in, was based on that principle. I don't
21 know after how many months, but after the administration was established,
22 I came across a man in Grude who represented -- introduced himself,
23 rather, as a SIS officer of the brigade and as the commander of the
24 brigade, and the establishment of the brigade itself depended on the
25 local authorities to a very large extent.
1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.
2 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation]
3 Q. Mr. Bandic, may I continue in respect to this question. For
4 example, as far as Neum and Capljina are concerned, did you have any
5 information from your own line of work or generally speaking that that's
6 how things functioned in an identical way, Ljubuski, other places?
7 A. Yes, but I had just wanted to tell the Honourable Trial Chamber
8 about the example that I saw with my own eyes in my own municipality.
9 Q. In line 22, I mentioned Ljubuski -- sorry, I actually said
10 "Capljina" and it doesn't seem to be recorded. However, you said that
11 you wanted to proceed from your own municipality. So if you found the
12 binder, I started telling you, it seems that there's no way of having
13 Capljina on the record. Oh yes, it is there now, thank you. Sorry about
15 You said -- or, rather, I said that I would ask you about this
16 particular section now. I'm going to point that out each and every time.
17 Now I'm going to ask you about the establishment of the SIS, and that's
18 going to be the next few documents. The first document I would like you
19 to look at is 2D1333. It should be the first one in your binder.
20 A. I see it.
21 Q. "Mr. Boban hearby appoints Mr. Valentin Coric on the 13th of
22 April, 1992, as assistant commander for the security information
24 And it says that:
25 "All Croatian Defence Council military police units should also
1 come under his command."
2 Were you engaged in the military at that time when Mr. Coric was
3 your superior?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. P00615. Can we please have a look at that now?
6 A. Sorry, what was the document?
7 Q. P00615. I'll take things in the right order, and if I skip
8 something, I'll point it out.
9 This is a decision and the appointment of Mr. Lucic. It is
10 stated here that he is appointed assistant head of the Defence Department
11 for security, the date is the 21st of October, 1992. I pointed out, and
12 I would like to point out once again, that we do not have his appointment
13 to the SIS administration as he was appointed by Mr. Boban. Can you
14 confirm that at the time Mr. Ivica Lucic was appointed assistant head of
15 the security administration.
16 A. Yes, it's one in the same person. I would like to point out once
17 again that it was the end of October -- or, rather, July 1992.
18 Q. Mr. Bandic, since we spoke of the tasks of the SIS --
19 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: We cannot hear Ms. Nozica
20 because of all the background noise apparently coming from the witness.
21 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] The interpreters are asking us to
22 speak a bit slower.
23 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: No, we cannot hear due to
24 background noise. Sorry.
25 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation]
1 Q. Your response to the previous question, when I asked you whether
2 you knew that Mr. Lucic had been appointed the assistant head of
3 security, what was that answer?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Now, I would like to ask to you look at document P00588.
6 This is a Decree on the Armed Forces which was passed on the 17th
7 of October, 1992. I would like us to look at page 137, or, rather,
8 Article 137, which is the only one referring to the tasks of the SIS.
9 137. The page is 22. Have you found it?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Article 137 says:
12 "Professional work in the armed forces and in the Defence
13 Department will be carried out by the SIS."
14 Mr. Bandic, would that be the right definition in your mind of
15 the basic work that you were supposed to carry out within the SIS
17 A. Yes, I think that would be it roughly.
18 Q. In this article it says that there is a commission that carries
19 out this work which is appointed by the president of the Croatian
20 Community of Herceg-Bosna. Do you remember whether this commission for
21 checking the work of the SIS was ever established?
22 A. I'm not aware of it.
23 Q. Document P858, please.
24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, we were talking about
25 Article 137, we just saw it. This article, I must admit, leaves me
1 perplexed, perhaps because it is fairly imprecise and since you were a
2 member of that service, you may be able to shed some light on it. When I
3 read this article, I feel that members of the SIS, and you were one of
4 them, had two missions in fact, classical missions, those of a secret
5 services and security missions.
6 When I look at this article, I see that the work, that is
7 intelligence work, is apparently supervised by a committee that is
8 appointed by the president of the Croatian Community of Herceg-Bosna
9 following a proposal by the chief of the Defence Department. This is a
10 traditional structure in democratic states where intelligence services
11 are controlled by an authority which could be a committee, as is the case
12 in this particular instance. However, when we look at the end of the
13 article, we see that reference, clear reference is made to the military
14 police which is in charge of security.
15 Now, apparently this seems to be general security, so military
16 traffic, military order, military discipline, and also procedures
17 relating to infringements committed within the arms forces. And
18 therefore, we feel that two entities are juxtaposed relating to security,
19 the military police playing a part with the SIS, and then regarding what
20 we call intelligence, the SIS in that case is competent, but we also see
21 that within the brigades there is also -- there are also members who are
22 members of the SIS.
23 So is that what this article is telling us, and is that what you
24 personally saw happening on the ground, the way this Article 137 was
25 being implemented? It's either a general article or it isn't. Is it a
1 general article and then on the ground it didn't quite happen like that?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I'll try and explain
3 that to the best of my ability. When these documents were passed, they
4 were necessary because there was an attempt, probably for the best
5 intentions, to establish these organs, and so many of these regulations
6 were copied from the former services of the former state as you said, as
7 they would be in peacetime, and I think to this day the same thing
8 happens in similar fashion.
9 But the situation at that time and in that area was completely
10 different, of course. And as you yourself mentioned, in the units
11 themselves there were people from SIS just as there were people from the
12 military police. The endeavours made were geared towards having this
13 system built up and linked up as much as possible. And let me emphasise
14 once again that this was a very difficult thing to do.
15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] So you confirm that within the
16 units there was the military police but also elements from the SIS, but
17 those two entities, were they controlled by the commander of the brigade?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's right, Your Honour. That's
19 quite right, Your Honour. They were subordinated to the commanders of
20 battalions through the brigade up until the military district level.
21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.
22 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
23 Q. Now, Your Honour asked you about the control exercised and he
24 mentioned one of the mechanisms that were applied in every democratic
25 country, and as far as I know every democratic country does have a
1 service of this kind, and you said a moment ago that as far as you know
2 the control commission or the organ that was in control and supervised
3 was not established.
4 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] So let's now look at P858, please.
5 That's the next document. And tell me when you've found it. It's the
6 next document in your binder.
7 This is a proposal by Mr. Bruno Stojic in conformity with Article
8 137 of the decree to appoint the commission for controlling the work of
9 the Security and Information Service. Can you confirm that you never
10 heard that this commission actually ever took effect or was appointed by
11 Mr. Boban?
12 A. Your Honours, I've never seen this document before, or, rather,
13 I've never heard about this commission, although the individuals listed
14 from 1 to 5, I know some of them personally, but I am not aware of any
15 commission having ever been formed.
16 Q. All right. Now, let's go and discuss the interior organisation
17 of the Security Sector. And you've already told the Judge that the
18 provisions were written in the way they were written, but let's just have
19 a look.
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] All this is going very fast,
21 but the Trial Chamber has been working on these issues 24 hours a day for
22 three years, so every time there is a document we try and establish a
23 link between the document and fundamental questions. And I see that this
24 document which you say you don't know was -- dates the 3rd of December,
25 1992, by Mr. Bruno Stojic who is head of the department. And apparently,
1 commission is being set up for the control of the SIS. And what I notice
2 here is that amongst the members of the commission there are presidents
3 of the municipalities. There are at least five of them. Well, three
4 presidents and two deputy presidents or vice-presidents. But we see when
5 we read these documents that municipalities seem to play a part in the
6 political and administrative life and, possibly, also in the field of
7 intelligence, in the field of the army.
8 How do you explain, sir, the fact that you take the president of
9 Livno, Siroki Brijeg, and of that municipality of Derventa
10 are called upon in order to control the activity carried out by the
11 intelligence service. Do you have any explanation, sir?
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, my position and the
13 post I occupied quite simply did not give me scope for that kind of
14 information. All I can do is comment. I can only say what I saw on the
15 ground, in the field when I went around the area. And that is to say
16 that the presidents of the municipalities or, rather, the municipal HVOs
17 endeavoured to have and did have a firm position, and that was
18 particularly true in 1992 because I didn't know that the commission ever
19 existed. So that's one thing.
20 And the second point is that this document at that time, or after
21 all that time, well, I never knew of the existence of this particular
22 document. And let me repeat again, I never knew that such a commission
23 was ever established.
24 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Your Honour, let's try and explain
25 that. This is a proposal to form a commission and that's what it says.
1 It says "Subject: Proposal to appoint a commission," sent to Mr. Boban,
2 and the witness said that he never heard of any such commission being set
3 up, so that's what I want to clarify. This was a proposal, and we have
4 no witnesses, this one or any of the others, who can confirm that the
5 commission ever came into being.
6 Q. Now let's try and pin-point where the Security Sector was within
7 the Defence Department. Look at P00586, the next document, please. Have
8 you found it? Yes, it's the decision on the basic premises for the
9 establishment of the Defence Department signed by a Mr. Boban on the 15th
10 of September, 1992, and I'd like to ask you to look at point 5 of that
11 decision on the basic principles of organisation of the Defence
13 You said how the Security Sector was envisaged. It says
14 assistant for the Security Sector is responsible for the work of the
15 Security Sector, and under that we have the SIS administration and the
16 military police administration. And it says, the deputy head for
17 security shall also perform the duties of chief of the security
19 Now, Mr. Bandic, is that how things were established as it says?
20 A. I've already said that that's how things were supposed to be, but
21 in actual fact they never ever came into being that way.
22 Q. All right. Now, let's look at the following decision, the number
23 of which is 2D567. It's the decision on internal organisation, and the
24 date we have there, it is signed by Mr. Bruno Stojic, the agreement is
25 given by Mr. Boban, and I'd like to ask you to look at point 4. And it
1 says the Security Sector, relations within this sector are separately
2 defined, and it says assistant head for analytical affairs and assistant
3 head for operative affairs in the security information service is
4 appointed by the head of the Defence Department on proposals made by the
5 assistant head for security.
6 Now, you confirm that within the frameworks of SIS, analytical
7 affairs existed and operative affairs as separate segments, separate
8 sections; right? Within SIS, within the SIS administration.
9 A. Yes, that's right.
10 Q. Now, then we have all the heads of centres listed, and it says
11 that they are appointed by the head of the Defence Department based on
12 proposals from the assistant head of security. Now, do we have an
13 assistant head of security in the commands of the operative zones? Yes,
14 we do. Then we can read the brigades lower down. The heads of the
15 Defence Department had proposals by -- made by the security man, and then
16 it says all the other operative and workers in the Security Sector shall
17 be deployed by the assistant head along with previous agreement from the
18 head of the Defence Department or the individual that he authorises.
19 Now, I have two questions for you. Were you one of those
20 operatives who were supposed to be appointed by Mr. Lucic in agreement
21 with the head of the Defence Department?
22 A. Yes, that's right.
23 Q. And secondly, the heads of the commands of security in the
24 operative zones and the brigades in your opinion, and you've already
25 spoken about this, were they appointed in the way that is set out here
1 and provided for by this document, that is to say, by the head at the
2 proposal of the assistant head?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Do you know whether this procedure was respected and put into
6 A. No, because I've explained to you that we came across a situation
7 as it was and that is because the HVO started to be formed in April 1992.
8 Q. All right. Now, Mr. Bandic, we have the next document which is
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Bandic, when you answered
11 Ms. Nozica's question, you have just confirmed the following: You were
12 in charge of operational activities, is that what you said?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I was in the operative
14 sector or operations sector of the SIS administration, and that was one
15 of the three departments.
16 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Let me put to you a question
17 now regarding the operational sector. Perhaps this is not relevant, but
18 let me ask you this: Did you conduct any secret operations, undercover
19 operations like tapping your opponent's telephone lines and tapping
20 friend's lines perhaps even, and you prepared very confidential reports
21 which you then gave Mr. Boban? Is that how things happen, like things
22 happen in the intelligence services in other countries, democratic
23 countries also?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, at that time and
25 throughout the time that I was in SIS we simply did not have the
1 technical facilities when you are talking about tapping and interception.
2 We didn't have trained people. Nor did we have the technical devices to
3 tap into phone lines. And I personally was not able to provide any
4 information to Mr. Boban.
5 When I say the operations department, that was me, and then later
6 on two or three other people joined. So we tried, as best as we could,
7 to train and educate people to provide them with basic knowledge about
8 security and security related issues. And let me stress once again, the
9 SIS as the military counter-intelligence service. Counter-intelligence
10 service is what I would like to emphasise here.
11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Had you had the appropriate
12 equipment and the right staff, would you have conducted such an
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, in our work, that part
15 was not envisaged at all. We quite simply didn't have the authority for
16 anything like that.
17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] If I understand properly,
18 inside the HVO no one did any in-depth intelligence work like this is
19 usually conducted? In other words, nobody was doing this kind of job?
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, within the frameworks
21 of the intelligence system, there was the military intelligence service
22 and that was its task. Pure intelligence work.
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] In other words, it was a
24 military intelligence department that was involved in this, this is what
25 you've just said, isn't it?
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] What I want to say is this, along
2 with SIS as the counter-intelligence service, there was the military
3 intelligence service as well alongside it, and if I might be allowed to
4 describe our work, it was this: Our work went up to the frontlines where
5 the HVO forces were, whereas the intelligence part was across the
7 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone please counsel.
8 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] I apologise, and I apologise to
9 the witness. I would just like to draw your attention to the
10 interpretation of the military intelligence service, which seems to be
11 incorrect, so then this might lead to misunderstanding and the
12 understanding of the security service and SIS on the one hand, and the
13 military intelligence service of -- was on the other which was under the
14 Main Staff, VRS. Now, this military intelligence service on the previous
15 page in lines 9 to 16 was translated as the military intelligence
16 service. It's not intelligence, as opposed to the informative and
17 security system which is intelligence. So just to differentiate between
18 the two services, I think that the witness said it correctly, but I don't
19 think it was interpreted correctly.
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Witness, do you
21 agree with what Ms. Alaburic has just said?
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I do agree. That was the
23 correct way it should read.
24 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
25 Q. Now, when we are talking about the tappings in service and when
1 we come to the provisions of the work of the information service - and
2 we'll come to that quite soon - and ask questions with respect to
3 intercepts and tapping, we'll do that in due course, but please look at
4 P2477 first now, please.
5 And for the record, let's just say, Mr. Bandic, that it is the
6 decision on the internal establishment of the 20th of May, 1993,
7 regulating this area when it comes to the Security Sector, or, rather,
8 the SIS administration so that we have no need to deal with that.
9 Now, I'd like to ask you to look at document 2D924. Have you
10 found it?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. This is basically a diagram of the Security Sector. Since you
13 said what you said about the Security Sector, I would now just like to
14 deal with the SIS administration. Does this schematic, this diagram, at
15 least basically show what did exist along the first line, analysis, the
16 chief and the operations and work methodology desk?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Where did you work?
19 A. In operations.
20 Q. Operations?
21 A. That's right.
22 Q. Roughly, how many people worked in operations, say from the
23 beginning of its work until mid-April 1994?
24 A. Madam, are you referring to the entire administration or only
1 Q. Only operations this time. You've already said it but --
2 A. As far as I can remember, well, it was a maximum of five people.
3 Up to five people.
4 Q. Very well. Down here we see SIS centres for southeastern
6 Tomislavgrad, Travnik, Derventa. To the best of your recollection, were
7 these centres actually established, and if so, when?
8 A. Your Honours, the setup that we see was the one that was
9 envisaged. However, as far as the centres are concerned, I can testify
10 that up to the very end they never started fully functioning. Apart from
11 these centres we had also intended, due to the situation that we had --
12 rather, there were many enclaves in the territory. We even wanted to
13 have sub-centres as lower ranking establishments. However, this was
14 carried out on paper only. Not in real life.
15 Q. Very well. Now we are going to deal with the number of engaged
16 persons in the SIS, so I'd like to ask you to look at 2D931.
17 This is sort of halfway down the period while you were working
18 there, and this is the payroll for May 1993, and we see that the total
19 number of employees is as it is here, and we see the Mostar centre of the
20 SIS, there's only 13 people. Then the Mostar SIS centre and the Travnik
21 SIS centre. We will deal with this centre a bit later, and we will use
22 it as an example of the work that was being done, and I would just like
23 to draw your attention to what it says here. That it was from the HVO
24 Grude that you got your salaries in May 1993. Can you comment on this?
25 Does that mean that there were municipalities that had resources for
1 salaries and that the department did not have enough money to pay
2 salaries to its employees.
3 MR. STRINGER: Mr. President, I object to the leading question.
4 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Very well, I do apologise. I
5 agree, yes. I agree. I do apologise.
6 Q. Could you please explain -- let me rephrase my question now -- to
7 the best of your knowledge, if you do know, why is there this note here,
8 why does it say from the HVO of Grude we got 13.125.000 Croatian Dinars
9 for salaries?
10 A. Your Honours, my explanation of this is as follows: This is the
11 place where I was born. And in Grude there was this logistics centre.
12 Grude, in a way, conditionally speaking was a centre. It was the centre
13 of the Croatian Community. Obviously, the municipality of Grude
14 enough money on its bank account and had the ability to help financially
15 at that point in time. However, yet again I would like to draw your
16 attention to what I've already said, that the local communities, in this
17 case the municipalities, had great power in certain situations of course.
18 Madam, as far as personnel are concerned, this was the number
19 that changed a bit, perhaps it went up by 10 at a maximum, so that is the
20 number of SIS members in the administration and at the centres. Of
21 course, I know practically all of these people personally, this includes
22 drivers, secretaries, typists, and so on and so forth.
23 Q. Can you tell me in the SIS administration, now that we are
24 looking at this document, that is the first column. Objectively
25 speaking, how many operatives were there and when do the technical
1 personnel start or end?
2 A. I can say that these are three persons including myself, yours
3 truly, we were in charge of operations, operative work in a way.
4 Q. Thank you. Can we look at the next document. We are just going
5 to look at the number of employees briefly. 2D939. This is the payroll
6 for October 1993. The previous one was for July. Can we state that
7 there are 34 on this list as well; right? We can see the names and they
8 are the same people, aren't they, Mr. Bandic?
9 A. Well, practically it's an identical list. Maybe only a few names
11 Q. Let us look at November, 2D947
12 called the method of financing the work of the service. But could you
13 please look at the last page, and on the last page we have the number of
14 employed persons, the number of officials, and it says here 35, 34, 40,
15 and 60. Does this roughly correspond to your own knowledge?
16 A. Indeed. I don't know this number, I mean, 60, well, to the best
17 of my knowledge, and I did have direct knowledge, I don't know how it
18 grew to this figure. I think that around 40 would have been a realistic
19 number, or, rather, the number of people I came across there. Of course,
20 I do allow for the possibility that there were 60 there, but I don't know
21 who was quite simply attached.
22 Q. Mr. Bandic, we'll get to these questions when we get to the rules
23 and to the re-organisation of the service and the establishment of
24 centres. However, except for this number that seems excessive to you,
25 otherwise this does correspond to your knowledge?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Could you please look at document -- I would like to thank the
3 interpreters. So far I had the feeling that I haven't been hurrying too
4 much and that we were working well. It's my fault for rushing.
5 2D944 is the next document I would like you to look at. This is
6 a list of officials signed by Mr. Ivica Lucic. 19th of November, 1993,
7 is the date. This is a list of HVO units and SIS officials within them.
8 And it says here Main Staff, number 1 command Ivan Bandic, chief SIS
9 officer; and Predrag Covic, SIS officer. Was that the time when you were
10 working there and tell me who was there attached to the Main Staff?
11 A. Yes, Your Honours, yes, that is the time when physically and
12 formally -- I see that right now. Although, allow me to note something,
13 I don't know what this word "Glavni" pertains to. I think it should have
14 said SIS officer at the Main Staff, because if it says chief SIS officer,
15 Glavni, I don't know who the one that was not the chief one would be. So
16 I really don't know what this word would mean.
17 Q. Let us just look at page 7, that's a list of all officers. In
18 English it would be page number 8. So could we please have that, and I
19 would like us to look at a particular note here. It's towards the end of
20 your page. It says Mostar, and then 1, 2, and then there is something
21 underneath number 2, Zarko Pavlovic was replaced, however he is a strong
22 negative personality in the brigade and is obstructing its dismissal, so
23 practically the dismissal is still underway. It say that is Raguz was
24 proposed by the brigade commander, Obradovic, who would be a suitable
25 person, and Raguz was supposed to propose a SIS officer in the brigade.
1 Now, we are just giving this as an example of appointments and
2 coordination on the basis of what we have seen. Mr. Zarko Pavlovic, as
3 stated here, it says the dismissal is underway, the replacement is
4 underway, was he ever actually replaced to the best of your knowledge?
5 A. To the best of my knowledge this was never carried through. May
6 I add something, there were a few such cases.
7 Q. Now, I'm going to ask you to look at the last page, it's the last
8 page in the Croatian and in the English and that is the note in relation
9 to this list. Most of the SIS officers in units, zones, brigades,
10 battalions, and MTD
11 decision made by the Defence Department, so there are no legal
12 possibilities. The procedure is such -- is that the chief should propose
13 SIS officers for a particular place -- for particular positions, however
14 this procedure was violated in the following way. Commanders of the
15 brigades were appointing SIS officers without asking the assistant
16 minister of security for his approval.
17 Mr. Bandic, do you remember this? This is already in November,
18 and you said that your administration started working in July, 1992, this
19 is November 1993. Do you remember that all this time there was this
20 resistance to having this established as envisaged by the rules in.
21 A. Yes, I can confirm that. That was the situation in the field.
22 Q. We have two proposals here. And it says that there should be an
23 assessment of all SIS personnel to date, and then there should be new
24 appointments. So let's look at the next document that has to do with
25 this, 2D949.
1 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I think that we will
2 manage to finish with this document, and then we can take the break.
4 Q. Mr. Bandic, this is a document dated the 22nd of November, 1993
5 According to the very logic of things, it is a continuation of the
6 previous document. Again it's signed by Ivica Lucic, and as we can see
7 he is sending it to Mr. Biskic, who was then already appointed assistant
8 minister in the Security Sector; is that right?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. It says, Here on the basis of your order we submit to you the
11 following: Names of employees of the SIS who have been appointed to
12 establishment post who are satisfactory workers and should be retained in
13 the service; names of SIS employees who have not been appointed to
14 establishment post but who are satisfactory workers and should be
15 retained in the service; names of SIS centre employees who can no longer
16 work in the service; and lists of all other employees who are not
17 included in the above lists and who do not have the approval of this
18 Security Sector, who do not possess a decision on appointment. It says
19 here, A decision on their future status in this service should be made.
20 On the next page is a list of SIS officers who do not have an
21 appointment decision, and you're the first one there. But it says here
22 that your work is satisfactory, all six of you, and that you should stay
23 on the job, and it says here that you are attached to the Main Staff, and
24 yet again, number 6, Predrag Covic. Can you confirm that at the time you
25 did not have appointment decisions in terms of this particular post as
1 stated here?
2 A. Yes, and Your Honours, if I may just briefly. A year and a half
3 after the administration was established, an attempt was made to bring
4 things in order, to deal with the situation as it was. A list of was
5 made here of persons who were within the SIS. Once again, I would like
6 to point out that there were these slip, if I can put it this way. In
7 one document it says that I was chief SIS officer, and this one it says
8 specifically that I was the SIS officer at the Main Staff.
9 Q. One more question in relation to this document and then the
10 break. Please look at the last page. It is very indicative. Let us
11 comment on this. List of employees according to units with appointments
12 made by the SIS. Mr. Bandic, there are 15 names here, so they were
13 appointed by the administration, and this was legal as envisaged. Can
14 you confirm, and we've been counting this 15 people, only 9 assistants,
15 only 9 assistants who were supposed to be established in terms of this
16 internal setup. So they were elected or appointed according to procedure
17 envisaged by law?
18 A. Yes, in the brigades.
19 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Your Honours, thank you. I assume
20 that we should take the break now so I could pause.
21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Break now for 20 minutes.
22 --- Recess taken at 3.46 p.m.
23 --- On resuming at 4.09 p.m.
24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Well, there are a few things
25 that I need to mention. The Registrar had a number to mention because a
1 mistake was made.
2 THE REGISTRAR: Thank you, Your Honour. 2D has submitted their
3 response to Prosecution's objection to the documents tendered through
4 witness Dragan Pinjuh. This response shall be given Exhibit IC00951.
5 Thank you, Your Honours.
6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you, Registrar. Thank
7 you for this correction.
8 Now, regarding the time, Ms. Nozica, you used up an hour, 55
9 minutes to be precise, so you still have about 2 hours and 2 minutes.
10 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, Your Honour, please.
11 JUDGE TRECHSEL: [Interpretation] To Mr. Karnavas, I would like
12 to remind you of the oral decision regarding the presentation of the
13 request for provisional release, and I would like to mention a line on
14 the transcript, it is page 37803, at the end of the -- they are the first
15 two lines, and I quote:
16 "It is up to Prlic's Defence team to present a new submission
17 respecting the limit of the word count."
18 So the Trial Chamber does not deem this criticism by Mr. Karnavas
19 to be justified where he said that he was surprised by this new decision.
20 Thank you.
21 MR. KARNAVAS: Well, if we look at the entire exchange, Your
22 Honour, and I don't wish to get into debate. I understand that on
23 occasion you seem to take a dim view of what I do in court, and make no
24 bones about it, but if we look at the overall tenner as I indicated --
25 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Mr. Karnavas, it seems to me that you are
1 starting to argue again.
2 MR. KARNAVAS: Well, I --
3 JUDGE TRECHSEL: This sentence is to be found, and I think that's
4 quite enough to --
5 MR. KARNAVAS: No, you --
6 JUDGE TRECHSEL: -- make the point.
7 MR. KARNAVAS: You have to look at, Your Honour, the entire oral
8 decision, and when you look at the entire oral decision, we were left
9 with the impression, rightly or wrongly, that what motivated the Trial
10 Chamber were two things. One was that we did not follow the proper
11 procedure, at which point I had to point out to the Trial Chamber that
12 the procedure that I thought -- that I used was one that was universally
13 applied throughout this Tribunal. Well before you, Judge Trechsel,
14 arrived here. So that was one point.
15 The other point, when looking at the language, it appeared that
16 the Trial Chamber was not sufficiently satisfied with explanations that
17 we provided, so when you look at the leave that we filed again, we go out
18 of our way to provide additional explanations why the leave was
19 necessary. Had we -- had we known that the Trial Chamber categorically,
20 in this instance as opposed to others where people stand up and ask
21 orally for extension of leave and within a matter of second its granted,
22 had we known that you had already made up your minds, I would not have
23 wasted my time. It does take a little bit of time to put a motion
24 together. So while you read out that one sentence, and I saw the
25 sentence, if you look at the entire oral decision in its entirety and the
1 way it was presented, we were left with the impression: That one, the
2 Trial Chamber was once again not amused with Karnavas's approach, being a
3 recidivist, at which point I have to point out that I was not doing
4 nothing wrong; and number two, that I had not provided sufficient
5 reasoning which is why we provided the reasoning. That's what we were
6 left to understand, and that's why I am a bit combative at this point.
7 Because on one hand, you question why isn't Mr. Prlic here, and on the
8 other hand we see this going on.
9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Karnavas, the Trial Chamber
10 reminded you of its decision of the 2nd of March. Maybe you interpreted
11 this decision the way you did, but as far as we're concerned, there was
12 no -- it wasn't necessary to object to it. As far as we are concerned,
13 the Trial Chamber decided that pursuant to the oral decision, we had
14 invited you to present a new request, word count 3.000 words, as I had
15 indicated earlier.
16 So we will carry on with the examination-in-chief and I'll give
17 you the floor, Mrs. Nozica.
18 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation]
19 Q. Mr. Bandic, staying with the same topic, that is to say
20 establishment and organisation, and for that would you look at the next
21 document which is P4756. These are minutes from the Chiefs of Staff
22 meeting held on 2nd of September, 1993, or from the board meeting of
23 heads of the Defence Department. Let me first ask you, did you attend
24 any of those meetings, those board meetings?
25 A. No, never.
1 Q. Now, let's see whether you know about what it says in the minutes
2 on page 2.2 of the Croatian and it's page 3 of the English, where it
3 states that the book of rules and regulations governing the work and
4 organisation of the security of information service. It says in his
5 introduction, Mr. Lucic outlined the contents of the book of rules and
6 regulations, the organisation of the service itself. He gives special
7 emphasis to the work methods and the competencies of the service as
8 specified in the book of rules and regulations. We'll deal with those
9 rules and regulations in awhile, but here we can see that at the board
10 meeting this was a subject that was discussed.
11 And now I'm interested in the second observation that follows.
12 It says, He also pointed out that he has encountered problems concerning
13 appointments of SIS officials at brigade level. That had not been -- and
14 that he had not been consulted about that. This, he said, would not
15 happen again because the decision on the establishment of the Defence
16 Department regulates how officials are to be appointed.
17 Now, Mr. Bandic, this meeting was held, or rather, the board
18 meeting was held on the 2nd of September, 1993, and we have seen
19 documents dating to the end of November 1993. Can you confirm that this
20 practice, at least up until then, was not changed?
21 A. Yes, that is correct. Throughout efforts were made to have this
22 system take effect, but as we can see one year on there were still a lot
23 of problems.
24 Q. Now, take a look at the next document, please, which 2D930. And
25 it is an order from Minister Perica Jukic on the 23rd of November, 1993
1 and he refers to the decision on the internal establishment of the
2 Defence Department, as stipulated in paragraph 1, and in the second
3 paragraph it says, With the analysis of the situation in SIS it was
4 determined that a great number of officers of SIS and was not appointed
5 based on the procedure, but the commanders of the HVO formations
6 appointed the assistant for security on their own initiative. And in
7 that regard, he is issuing the following order: That the situation
8 should be dealt with by the 26th of November, 1993, and afterwards that
9 appointments should be made in keeping with the regulations.
10 Now, does this exhibit show, Mr. Bandic, that in actual fact the
11 problem continued to exist?
12 MR. STRINGER: Objection, Mr. President, to the leading question.
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Ms. Nozica, can you
15 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Yes, I'll do that. Yes, and I
17 Q. Mr. Bandic, does this mean, or does it follow from this document
18 that the problem continued to exist?
19 A. Yes, that does confirm that, and let me emphasise that once again
20 we faced that problem until the end of the war.
21 Q. We are now going to go through three more documents, Mr. Bandic,
22 and you said that the units had assistant commanders for SIS. And look
23 at 2D927 first, please in that regard. It is a schematic for the
24 operative zone command. Well, it's identical in the English and
25 Croatian, and if you look at positions 16 and 17 now, please, which is to
1 be found -- well, there are no page numbers but anyway, 16 and 17, it
2 says, Assistant commander for SIS and the clerk for SIS. Now, are those
3 the individuals that held those posts in the operative zone?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Now look at document 2D1370. Page 2 of the Croatian, and page 4
6 of the English. And this is a schematic for the brigade formation. We
7 have that diagram. And on page 2 of the Croatian and page 4 of the
8 English, we have the security and information department in the brigade
9 where we have the head of SIS and the SIS desk officer. Does that
10 correspond to the situation as you know it?
11 A. Yes, that's right.
12 Q. And now let's look at document P566. It's on page 2, and it's
13 the diagram of the war formation of a battalion. It's page 2 in both the
14 English and the Croatian. And it speaks of the battalion commander,
15 under number 5, the officer for information security. So is that the
16 person who was in charge of SIS in the battalion, to the best of your
18 A. Yes, I think so.
19 Q. Now, Mr. Bandic, we are going to move on and look at a number of
20 other documents and deal with questions related to the legal frameworks
21 of the method of work for the Security and Information Service. And in
22 order to do that, would you please look at document P4211.
23 These are rules of procedure on the work of the information and
24 security service. It says Mostar, August, 1993, at the bottom there.
25 And from the document that we looked at a moment ago, which was the board
1 meeting of the Defence Department, dated the 2nd of September, 1993
2 is document P4756. You don't have to look for it again, I'm just saying
3 that for the record. Anyway, we see that these rules were discussed and
4 that they were enacted at this board meeting. So can you confirm that
5 this is the first set of rules of procedure dealing with the information
6 and security service.
7 A. Yes, that's right, those are the rules of procedure.
8 Q. Now, I have already asked you this, but let's repeat it because
9 it's important. Were there rules and regulations governing SIS before
10 these rules of procedure were passed?
11 A. Yes, that's right, there were.
12 Q. Fine. Now, let's start with Article 7 of these rules of
13 procedure, which states that the professional business of the country's
14 defence concerning the armed forces is done by the Security and
15 Information - SIS - Service. So is that almost identical to Article or
16 para 1 of Article 137 governing the armed forces which we saw earlier on
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Now, take a look at Article 9, and may we have your comments.
20 Does that -- does Article 9 describe the tasks that the Information and
21 Security Service dealt with. Article 9?
22 A. Yes, that's precisely it. And the emphasis is laid on
24 Q. And security protection of the Defence Department in the broader
25 sense, that's what it says, isn't it; right?
1 A. Yes. This article, in actual fact, gives the broadest definition
2 of what the Security and Information Service should do, it's remit.
3 Q. Now, Judge Antonetti asked you about interception and tapping,
4 and as far as I understood it you said you didn't have the technical
5 resources to do that and that you didn't have the authority, either.
6 Now, let's look at Article 42 of these rules of procedure for us to see
7 whether that might have perhaps been regulated by these rules.
8 Mr. Bandic, you can answer that in two ways. Here we see that it
9 was regulated, and I was -- I'm going to ask you whether that was in fact
10 what was done in practice. Was that translated into practice ever?
11 A. In my introduction, I said that many documents dating back to
12 this period were copied from earlier documents. Now, the situation on
13 the ground was completely different.
14 Q. Do you mean to say that the SIS didn't deal in these matters, is
15 that how I'm to understand what you've just said?
16 A. Yes. While I was there, in my time, the SIS didn't deal in these
17 matters. And I said because of a lack of resources and a lack of
18 manpower, we didn't have the facilities.
19 Q. Mr. Bandic, I'm now going to put a hypothetical to you. You are
20 a man of great experience in this field. A service of this kind, even if
21 it did have the resources and manpower, could they in fact tap into
22 conversations conducted by civilians, even if it did have the facilities
23 to do? So I'm asking you a hypothetical question, could it intercept
25 A. No, no, it had no legal grounds for that. There were civilian
1 intelligence services for that kind of thing.
2 Q. All right. Now, I'd like to ask you to look at the provisions
3 starting out with Article 57 and ending with Article 67 which regulate
4 mutual relations of the persons working in the administration, the SIS
5 centres, and the assistant commanders in the units. I'm not going to
6 spend too much time on that. I'm going to ask you more about how things
7 stood in practice, although each article would merit explanations. But
8 for the moment we are going to see what this looked like in practice.
9 And in order to do that, would you please take a look at the next
10 document, which is P592.
11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, before we move on to
12 the next document in the line of questioning by Ms. Nozica about the
13 tapping, I would invite you to look at Article 15 of the documents.
14 Article 15 mentions the scope of your activities, what your service is
15 meant to be doing. And I notice two main elements. First of all, you
16 have to identify the KOS
17 are still in liaison with the Serbian security services, and underneath,
18 you also have -- give information on people who are in contact with the
19 foreign secret services. So these are traditional tasks. And then if
20 you move on to the next page, you see that you are meant to give
21 information on war crime. So there are many tasks. Some of them
22 requiring intelligence operations in the traditional sense of the word,
23 tapping and intercepts as provided for by Article 42. And you say, No,
24 we didn't do any of this. If that is true, you confirm that you haven't
25 done it, but then you wouldn't have been in a position to implement what
1 Article 15 requires of you?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, Your Honours, what is
3 listed here, as you noticed full well, is the area of responsibility of
4 the military security information service. And this is quite literally
5 copied from many other regulations. I believe, and I interpret, this
6 through the circumstances under which all of this was happening, because,
7 if you allow me, for instance, over here when speaking of former members
8 of the former services like the KOS
9 services, why would it not relate to any other foreign service too? I'm
10 saying that as a man who is familiar at least with the basics of
11 intelligence and counter-intelligence work.
12 In the many listed activities that had been envisaged, it is
13 simply impossible to deal with all of that because that would require
14 topnotch training of personnel, excellent material resources. Even if I
15 were to look at the present day, a peacetime situation, it would be ideal
16 if a service could meet all of these requirements.
17 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Mr. Bandic, what you have told us right now
18 seems to me quite plausible. What puzzles me a bit is your answer to
19 Ms. Nozica's hypothetical, whether any measures of surveillance could be
20 also aimed at civilians or exclusively at the military. And you said
21 exclusively at the military. Now, if I look at these many categories
22 mentioned in Article 15 of persons that could be, if the technical means
23 were given, under surveillance, I on the one hand do not find any
24 reference to a limitation to military persons. On the other hand, there
25 are categories like foreign nationals with regard to which it is not very
1 likely that they belong to the military. Now, do you maintain the answer
2 you have given or would you perhaps like it to modify it somewhat?
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, to the best of my
4 understanding, things were the way they were. For instance, there were
5 cases when in HVO units there were foreigners. As for civilians, at the
6 time there was this civilian secret service, and within their description
7 of work was this segment too. So I remain by what I said. I stand by my
8 position, the SIS was only related to the armed forces.
9 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Thank you.
10 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Could we please move on to the next
11 document, P592. I would like to point out that we will be dealing with
12 this briefly. This decree on military -- District Military Courts and
13 Territory of the Croatian Community of Herceg-Bosna in a State of War and
14 Imminent Threat of War, there was already a discussion about this in this
15 courtroom concerning Article 25 that talks about authorised officials of
16 the security service, so I have a few questions for you. What I'm going
17 to read out to you is what the decree says, and what I expect you to say
18 is what things were like in practice. Here it says in --
19 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: Could we please have a
21 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation]
22 Q. It reads exactly like the republican law that was taken over,
23 however, instead of organs of the interior, that is the third
24 paragraph --
25 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: Now we can no longer even
1 hear the speaker due to background noise.
2 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation]
3 Q. So the document is 2D592, and I am reading Article 25 to you. I
4 have just read out the introduction, and I wish to put a question to you
5 in relation to the part where it says that in criminal proceedings,
6 instead of organs of the interior, this work shall be carried out by
7 authorised officers of the security organs of the armed forces.
8 I beg your pardon, there may be a mistake. 592. Sorry, 2D592.
9 I think that I did say that. Yes. Here, that's what I said. Line 14.
10 P592. That is when it was recorded properly. Later on, there may have
11 been a mistake, but it's the right document in e-court. Mr. Bandic,
12 could you please explain to the Honourable Trial Chamber what was the
13 work carried out by the organ of the interior. Earlier on, according to
14 the Law on Criminal Procedure, what was all the work carried out by the
15 organs of the interior?
16 A. As far as I can interpret this decree, or rather, this provision,
17 inter alia, I was a member of the organs of the interior in the former
18 system in the former state. I was a member of the state security
19 service, but it was part of the organs of the interior. In this specific
20 case what is meant is, or rather that is how I see it, this is work that
21 is police work. And within the scope of its work, there is a rather
22 broad area of activity, to my mind. Namely, from uncovering the
23 perpetrators of crimes, carrying out onsite investigations, and filing
24 criminal reports.
25 Q. Mr. Bandic, were these the tasks of authorised officials in the
1 security organs? Were all of these in fact the tasks that you as an
2 authorised official of the security organs had?
3 A. For the most part, yes. Specifically, I don't know which part,
4 but I'm talking about organs of the interior.
5 Q. I asked you the following, you mentioned all the tasks of the
6 organs of the interior, that is to say, uncovering perpetrators of
7 crimes, collecting statements, evidence, documents, carrying out onsite
8 investigations and filing criminal reports. I'm asking you whether
9 according to the rules and regulations, this was the duty of the SIS to
10 carry out all that work? Let me be more specific then.
11 A. That was not the duty of the SIS. In this specific case, we did
12 not have the ability to do that. I beg your pardon, whenever I'm saying
13 "SIS," I mean the administration that I belonged to. However, the SIS,
14 of course, did have that obligation and did carry out this work.
15 Q. Who was duty-bound to take all measures to punish the perpetrator
16 of a crime? Whose duty was it to collect evidence, not to have
17 perpetrators run away, hide, when things like that happened in the field,
18 whose duty was it to take steps?
19 A. In this specific case, the commander of the unit was the
20 authorised official.
21 Q. Mr. Bandic, the commander of the unit to the best of your
22 knowledge, or rather on the basis of your experience, did he have members
23 of the military police or members of the SIS through whom he could carry
24 out this part of his task?
25 A. Yes, I've already said that, through the Battalion Brigade all
1 the way up to the military district there were organs of the SIS and of
2 the military police.
3 Q. Mr. Bandic, now I would like to move on very briefly to two more
4 document that speak of the setup --
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, would like to put a
6 question on this document which is a crucial document. I would like you
7 to look at Article 27 of this same document. This is an article which
8 applies to any country, any civil law country, which has to do with the
9 implementation of procedures when the military carry out -- carries out
10 offences. It is a military commander who needs to take all the necessary
11 steps to prevent crimes and to prosecute crimes. This is something which
12 is valid for any country in the world. This document also shows that
13 there is a military prosecutor who is based in Mostar, and he is
14 competent in a number of municipalities.
15 This is my question, the text is extremely accurate. When
16 someone is a suspect, this person should be brought before the
17 investigating judge 12 hours after his arrest. The proceedings then
18 follow their course.
19 Let me give you and submit it to you a hypothetical case. Let's
20 assume that there is a Muslim from the HVO who has deserted and people
21 believe that he may adversely affect the HVO. In that case, the
22 proceedings are initiated, this Muslim HVO soldier should -- should he be
23 brought before an investigating judge at the request of the military
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, Your Honours, the
1 hypothetical position that you presented was possible, in my view. I
2 think that what you said was the course that would have been taken. That
3 is to say, the entire procedure would start from the unit that he
4 belonged to. And it would end with the military prosecutor, or rather,
5 with the military court.
6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. And if in any event
7 we were faced with Muslims who had been members of the HVO units who had
8 been detained at Gabela, Dretelj, at the Heliodrom, without these people
9 ever having been brought before a judge, what would the situation be like
10 then? Who would be responsible for this?
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, my understanding of
12 the matter is that one should proceed from two different situations or,
13 rather, two different positions or localities where the persons were
14 detained in military investigative prisons or detention centres. I'm
15 saying once again that my understanding of the matter is that there
16 should be a distinction between two different cases, whether there are
17 proceedings against a particular person, or whether they were detained
18 for some other reasons.
19 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.
20 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
21 Q. Witness, could you please look at document P2596 now. Very
22 briefly, if possible, can we please have a look at it. This is a letter,
23 a request, signed by Zdenko Lucic, the legal service of the brigade,
24 Stijepo Radic, I'm showing it to you because this request he is referring
25 to the rules on military discipline and what is supposed to be done in
1 accordance with it if there is a disciplinary infraction.
2 My question to you is whether you took certain measures in terms
3 of training people, not to use the word education, that is to say,
4 members of the unit or assistants for this line of work? Did you
5 indicate to them what their work would be? If there are misdemeanours,
6 crimes, and other offences committed, are they duty-bound to report
7 whatever they come across in their work?
8 A. Madam, in my view this is yet another set of regulations
9 regulating the conduct and behaviour of members of the armed forces, and
10 if I can interpret it, what it means, what disciplinary measures mean, we
11 move from the mildest form of behaviour to be sanctioned, to be punished
12 in simple terms. For example, if somebody didn't have the right attire,
13 that was an infraction, and that would come under disciplinary action.
14 Right up to the most serious crimes. And, of course, the commander of a
15 unit was the person who would be the immediate responsible person for
16 conduct or misconduct.
17 Q. Let's look at P293 now, please, which also deals with discipline
18 and regulates responsibility. And let's look at Article 29 now, please,
19 regulating the duties of officers when a crime has been committed. And
20 Article 59, so 29 and 59 which speaks of the duty to take measures in
21 order to gather evidence and other material. And it refers to superior
22 officers at company level and higher.
23 Mr. Bandic, after these regulations, can we say that as far as
24 regulations are concerned, there was a continuous obligation of how --
25 what should be done if crimes or offences are committed?
1 MR. STRINGER: Excuse me, Mr. Mr. President. I have two
2 objections. One is, I object to the leading question that's just been
3 posed to the witness. Secondly, I've been following along largely the
4 witness's testimony with the witness summary that was previously provided
5 by the Stojic team. I'm not seeing this topic on the witness summary,
6 that is, the topic in general of military discipline within the
7 structures of the HVO. And I'm suggesting to the Trial Chamber that this
8 issue is really not fairly one that can be attributed to the witness
9 summary that's been presented by the Stojic Defence. Thank you.
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Ms. Nozica, as far as these two
11 points are concerned, what do you have to say?
12 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] As far as the leading question is
13 concerned, I can reformulate that. Now, with respect to the second part
14 of the objection, I have this to say. If we heard that the witness dealt
15 in the affairs he dealt with, and if this implies the relationship
16 between the SIS administration and the units and assistants in units,
17 then I asked the question and that's how I started my questioning of
18 whether the assistants in the units were informed of the steps to be
19 taken when offences had been committed and crimes. So that does come
20 within the line of work of the SIS administration, and I think that the
21 witness -- that that is how the witness answered my question. Now, as
22 far as the leading question is concerned, I can reformulate that.
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Ms. Nozica, as far as the
24 essential issue is concerned, which has been raised by Mr. Stringer, in
25 the summary you did not address the issue of disciplinary matters, which
1 is an important issue, because under Article 7(3) this could be
2 scrutinized on a case-by-case basis, why were there no military
3 sanctions. Why was the Prosecutor not advised of this beforehand? Of
4 course, the witness is extremely competent, and he can address this
5 issue, but it may have been better to mention it in the summary. I shall
6 turn to my colleagues and see whether you will be --
7 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Can I just say something. I have
8 concluded my questions on that topic. I have no more. All I want to say
9 is that P293, these provisions were on the list of exhibits from the very
10 start for this witness. And I corresponded with the Prosecutor several
11 times, the Prosecutor asked what the witness would be saying about those
12 documents, and had the Prosecution thought that anything was contentious
13 they would have asked me that. So it was logical, as far as I was
14 concerned, that if the witness was going to talk about SIS that this
15 document should be mentioned, but I don't intend to go any further with
16 this document. I've finished my questions in that respect.
17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] In other words, you don't want
18 to address it any further, then I won't dwell on the matter. Move on to
19 another topic then, please.
20 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation]
21 Q. Witness, will you -- you tend to speak slowly and that makes the
22 interpreters happy, and I think I'm speaking slowly, too, but we do have
23 a lot of topics to get through, but we are now going to deal with another
24 topic, which is the functioning of the SIS centres, and you've already
25 spoken about that, but the documents are to be found in the other binder.
1 You need the other binder, have you got it? You can put that one down on
2 the floor, and the usher will pick it up later. I'd like now to deal
3 with the problems of establishing and forming the SIS centres, and I'd
4 like to do that through the documents, and the first document is 2D935.
5 Witness, we saw that the centres had been envisaged within the
6 structure on this diagram when it comes to SIS. Tell us briefly now,
7 please, and we have a number of documents which relate to the Vitez SIS
8 centre, what problems you faced? And then we'll go on to discuss the
9 individual documents to highlight that.
10 A. Your Honours, I've already addressed that briefly. The SIS
11 objective was to establish the best possible links between the
12 administration and the units on the ground. And one of the ways in which
13 this could be done was to form the SIS centres. And I've already
14 mentioned this. And that would be according to the territorial principle
15 so that the centres would roughly cover the area of the operative zones,
16 or military districts. Either name is used, and I must admit that I tend
17 to confuse the two. But in this specific case, we are dealing with the
18 central Bosnia
19 lack of understanding there, and if I might even say a clash between the
20 security part in that area, that is to say, the assistant commander for
21 SIS of that military district and -- of course, headed by the commander,
22 and the administration, the SIS administration. And Mr. Lucic along
23 those lines did try to find a solution to the problem so that the SIS
24 centre should nonetheless be set up in Travnik or, rather, Vitez because
25 Travnik, as far as I remember, was no longer under HVO control at the
2 Q. Now, Mr. Bandic, can we take a look at some other documents now
3 which address that problem. And the first of which is 2D935. And this
4 is a letter from Mr. Lucic addressed to the SIS centre Vitez, Mijic,
5 Miso, who is the head. It is the 26th of June, 1993, and Mr. Lucic says,
6 your duties are counter-intelligence protection of the area covered by
7 the operative zone of central Bosnia
8 individuals and events that weaken the HVO forces or their combat
9 readiness. Your methods of work are secret.
10 Now, do you agree that this is a description of the work that the
11 centres were supposed to do and that that's how it was conceived in the
12 first place?
13 A. Yes, precisely.
14 Q. Then it goes on to say, "Gather knowledge using operative
15 connections and cooperatives, and for apprehension consult the head of
16 the operative zone, Colonel Blaskic, and his assistant for security for
17 SIS, Anto Sliskovic."
18 Is that what -- how the whole line should have functioned?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. I don't have time to read it all, it says you should be wise,
21 united, determined, and we will succeed, and do not allow someone's
22 bloody mindedness or lack of weariness make us disappear from central
24 that's the answer in this correspondence. 2D948 is the number. Tell me
25 when you found it.
1 A. Yes, I've found it.
2 Q. Now, this is a letter signed by Mr. Lucic. He is writing to
3 Colonel Blaskic, and he defines and expounds the goals for the
4 establishment of SIS centres in the area; is that right?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Now, in point 1, the rules of service of SIS are mentioned,
7 Mr. Bandic, so was this a document used by the Security Sector in its
8 work before the rules of procedure were enforced?
9 A. Yes, I think that was the first written text that was used.
10 Q. Can you comment what Mr. Lucic alluded to and what he wished to
11 achieve by writing this letter to Colonel Blaskic?
12 A. Well, my interpretation of this is as follows, and I do remember
13 it, I remember the event, and it was precisely that effort should be
14 taken to implement as far as possible better cooperation between the
15 members of the Security and Information Service in the units, that is to
16 say, throughout the military district, with the SIS centre, that they
17 should coordinate their work, and then that the results thereof would
18 contribute to a better security situation. And that through the SIS
19 centre, the administration would receive information about what was going
21 Q. All right. Fine. Now, let's look at the next document which is
22 P5249. It's already an exhibit. We've already seen it in this
23 courtroom. These are instructions given for the work of SIS centre of
24 Travnik and Vitez, and it is dated the 21st of September, 1993. I don't
25 want to go into all the details of this document, but can we see from
1 this document that attempts were being made to resolve the problem and to
2 establish the centre?
3 A. Yes, I can confirm that personally because I myself was in
4 central Bosnia
5 always did our best to see that this segment should start working as had
6 been planned and envisaged.
7 Q. Would you now look at document 2D1498, please, which is a letter
8 dated the 9th of October, 1993. Sent to Mr. Mate Boban and Mr. Praljak,
9 signed by Mr. Tihomir Blaskic. We see that we have Mr. Kostroman's
10 signature there, and Mr. Dario Kordic, too. Is that a continuation of
11 the discussion pertaining this problem related to the establishment of
12 the SIS centre?
13 A. Yes, that's right. That is confirmation of that, but at the same
14 time it deals with a very serious conflict and clash, and you mention the
15 names here, so we are dealing with the commander, but we are dealing with
16 the political structures here as well, because quite simply there was
17 resistance put up to the establishment of the SIS centre, and generally
18 speaking there was resistance towards that -- to that segment and people
19 working within SIS. Unfortunately, that was a general sort of
20 opposition, which I can understand to a certain extent because nobody, if
21 I might be allowed to say so, likes the secret services, and that is
22 something we inherited from the former state and the former system
24 Q. Mr. Bandic, you said there was resistance to political and
25 military -- from -- and to military structures but to establish this the
1 SIS centre, but it did it ever function - and I'm talking about Vitez and
2 Travnik - did it ever come into being in this area?
3 A. I can say with certainty that it never came into being.
4 Q. All right. Fine. Now, finally, let's take a look at the next
5 document which is P07258. And this is a document signed by Mr. Biskic
6 dated the 9th of December, 1993. And it is -- it deals with the
7 authority to command and the information service of the HVO. We've all
8 seen this exhibit already in the courtroom, you have read through it.
9 Can you tell us why Mr. Biskic needed on the 19th of December, that is to
10 say almost a year and a half after the SIS came into being and assistance
11 in the units existed, to explain the relationships --
12 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I object to that
13 question, and the reason is that in my opinion the witness is being
14 misleading. I think that the Defence of Bruno Stojic is trying to depict
15 events now linked to the organisation of SIS in mid-1993, and the efforts
16 to establish SIS centres on the four locations as stipulated by my
17 learned friend, Ms. Nozica, with the re-organisation of SIS which took
18 place in December or, rather, at the end of 1993, and which was carried
19 out by the new leadership of the Ministry of Defence Mr. Marijan Biskic
20 and Mr. Lucic.
21 Now, this document that we are showing the witness now is linked
22 to that second re-organisation because the SIS centres were positioned in
23 a different way than they were in mid-1993. So my objection lies there.
24 And the witness will be best placed to answer.
25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I'll ask you to ask the witness
1 to shed some light on this re-organisation. Did it change many things or
2 did it not change anything at all?
3 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. I'll leave it to
4 the witness to answer and tell us what it was that changed in this
5 re-organisation. But I would like to say that what Ms. Alaburic just --
6 the issue she just raised, she can deal with during the
7 cross-examination. If there was a lack of understanding, the witness can
8 answer when her time comes.
9 Q. But anyway, Witness, answer Judge Antonetti's question about the
10 methods of re-organisation and whether it led to great changes or not?
11 A. Madam lawyer, Your Honours, this has to do with re-organisation,
12 but re-organisation of something that never actually started functioning
13 in the first place. This is a constant endeavour to establish this
14 hierarchy, and if I may say this freely, thank God this was practically
15 two months before the end of the war, in that area. So the new
16 organisation and the new setup now with a -- ministers and assistant
17 Biskic, they tried yet again to get it running somehow.
18 When we are talking about SIS centres here, they were not
19 actually found there. They were in the making all the time, and there
20 was an attempt made to establish this line. If we are talking about
21 re-organisation, we can re-organise something that does exist. However,
22 in this case nothing did exist.
23 Q. Thank you. Thank you, Witness. Just two documents now. You
24 said that sometime in August or September 1992 up until the beginning of
25 1994, you went from time to time out into the field with Mr. Petkovic.
1 That is an important topic that we'll deal with later, but now I'm going
2 to ask you to look at two documents only because we don't have you
3 mentioned in relation to this activity of yours in many other documents,
4 so P2032 is what we would like to look at. It's an exhibit, this
5 document, 2032. This is something that you must have found by now.
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. This is a meeting that did you attend on the 22nd of April. Can
8 you tell us very briefly in what capacity were you there and do you
9 remember the content of the meeting?
10 A. Yes, Your Honour, in relation to this event, this meeting, it --
11 well, it happened after other things that happened that indicated that
12 the situation in central Bosnia
13 with the representatives of the Bosniak side, the political and military
14 both. If my memory serves me correctly, on their side it was Mr. Ganic,
15 a member of the presidency. We had a meeting in Zenica, and then after
16 that we had a meeting near Vitez. I think that it was at the UNPROFOR
17 base near Vitez. I was there as always, like on all other occasions when
18 I went with General Petkovic, however, this time my superior was there
19 too, Mr. Lucic, the SIS chief.
20 Q. Mr. Bandic, this meeting was also attending by representatives of
21 the international community, right? We see Philippe Morillon in
22 attendance and Jean Pierre Thebault?
23 A. That's right. I think that I mentioned that the representatives
24 of UNPROFOR were there as well as of the Bosniak military and political.
25 Q. Could we look at the next document, P 2019, the meeting held on
1 the 21st of April --
2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Just a question, this won't
3 take long at all. I was looking at this report dated 22nd of April,
4 1993, which mentions a number of issues and problems, particularly the
5 kidnapping of Mr. Totic, and Mr. Alilovic talks about this event saying
6 that some people are not -- can't be controlled. So this is precisely
7 the sort of affair where the SIS or the sort of situation where the SIS
8 would have investigated or has investigated, I don't know. In order
9 precisely to know when it comes to intelligence and counter-intelligence,
10 in order to know who this Mujahedins are, was that sort of work done in
11 your service, in your department, or was it not done at all?
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, in this particular
13 case, I've already mentioned that it had to do with a few events that
14 made the situation in central Bosnia
15 complicated. You mentioned the abduction of the HVO members in Zenica,
16 then also the second one was Ahmici, and the situation in the area was
17 very difficult, and that was the reason why the representatives of the
18 two peoples met and had these discussions.
19 As for the second part of what you mentioned, the Mujahedin, as
20 far as I can remember, at that time, the question was not that topical.
21 I mean, it wasn't treated that way yet, it was only later that more
22 importance was attached to it.
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well, we could spend hours
24 on this document, but I'm going to focus on the essential part. Djimo
25 Mardan [phoen] is mentioned in the document, who, according to
1 information stemming from the intelligence services, is the man who gives
2 orders to the MOS. In the document, the MOS includes Mujahedin. So
3 where do these pieces of information stem from coming from the
4 intelligence service? Is that coming from SIS or from another service?
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, such information was
6 coming from different sources, secret and public, and the media, and
7 unfortunately there were a lot of rumours, too, but this kind of
8 information was coming from several sources. If you allow me, I would
9 like to say that this meeting was necessary in order to introduce some
10 calm because many things were happening that showed that there could be
11 an escalation of conflicts.
12 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation]
13 Q. Mr. Bandic, can I please ask you to look at the next document
14 then. Again, it was a meeting that was organised rather soon. So it is
15 P2019. Again, you are mentioned here as the deputy chief of SIS, Ivan
16 Bandic. Is that the position that you held? This record was signed by
17 Mr. Tihomir Blaskic?
18 A. Yes, as I've already said, this meeting followed the one that was
19 held in Zenica, and it had to do with the events that I spoke of. This
20 lack of precision in terms of my title, well, it was there as a rule,
21 wasn't it, because in the preceding document I was an HVO officer, and
22 here I am deputy chief of SIS, as far as I know this position never
23 existed; however, people simply took the liberty of writing things this
24 ambiguously and that really did happen quite often.
25 Q. Mr. Bandic, can you tell -- or, rather, explain to the Honourable
1 Trial Chamber how you introduced yourself at these meetings, especially
2 to representatives of the international organisations that were there
3 when you accompanied Mr. Petkovic? How did you introduce yourself, and
4 did you introduce yourself officially at all?
5 A. At these meetings that I attended, for the most part I introduced
6 myself practically the same way all the time; security officer of General
7 Petkovic. No matter how people would understand that or interpret that
8 or translate that.
9 Q. Tell me, is that how you introduced yourself as a rule, or did
10 you sometimes give broader explanations to people as to what it was that
11 you were doing, although this may seem very strange to you what I'm
12 asking you now? Did you give any broad explanations as to what you
13 actually did and what your work entailed in?
14 A. You see, I was a member of a secret counter-intelligence service.
15 I was not in a position to introduce myself that way and to wear a badge
16 stating that, I simply introduced myself as a security man. As I've
17 already said, I was supposed to be there at hand as far as General
18 Petkovic was concerned. His driver was there, secretary, body-guard,
19 et cetera.
20 Q. Mr. Bandic, now I would like to move on to another topic which
21 would show how reports were compiled, security reports, and how they were
22 submitted and to who, and let us see whether there were some kind of
23 order involved in all of this?
24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] There's something that puzzles
25 me. The documents we are looking at, which is an exhaustive summary of
1 this meeting by Colonel Blaskic and to which Ambassador Thebault took
2 part, where BiH and HVO are present, and this is what puzzles me: I see
3 this report is destined to Mr. Dario Kordic and to Mr. Kostroman. Why?
4 Why is this report sent to those two political personalities when in fact
5 it deals with military issues, is there any explanation to this fact?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, my interpretation of
7 this was that Mr. Kordic, Mr. Kostroman, were political authorities,
8 people of political authority in that area at the time. However, as far
9 as I know, Mr. Kordic was a military person too. I think that he had the
10 rank of colonel. However, please take that with a grain of salt. At any
11 rate, Mr. Kordic was, I can say this freely, the top political authority
12 in that area and at that time.
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] In central Bosnia?
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
15 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation]
16 Q. Now we are going to move on to some reports. You compiled the
17 first one, so I'm just going to ask you for your comments briefly because
18 time seems to be running. The document is D515. It's a report, can you
19 please tell the Honourable Trial Chamber whether you compiled it?
20 A. Yes, I know this report and I can confirm that it is mine
21 largely, or rather, that it was compiled by myself to a large degree.
22 However, I may say that there was other information related to what had
23 happened; however, for the most part I did this.
24 Q. Mr. Bandic, can you tell us briefly what was the problem? Why
25 was this report compiled, what was the problem? Why was this report
1 written up?
2 A. The problem cropped up, to put it simply, in political relations
3 in political conflicts. In this case, between presidents and
4 municipalities. And also there was this lack of functioning on the part
5 of the system itself. On the one hand presidents and municipalities were
6 arbitrarily making decisions on some matters, in this specific case about
7 bringing people into custody. This was carried out through the brigade,
8 and regrettably through security organs in that brigade.
9 Q. Does this have to do with the president of the municipality of
11 A. Yes, yes, yes, precisely. The president of the municipality of
12 Neum. However, also the president of the municipality of Capljina
13 was involved in this case, too.
14 Q. Very well. Can we move on to 2D86 now. I will take you through
15 this very briefly. Quite a few of these documents have already been
16 displayed in court, but this is information about foreigners in the ranks
17 of the Army of Bosnia-Herzegovina. Tell me, please, did your service,
18 the SIS, deal with such information, too; collecting information about
19 foreign mercenaries in the Army of Bosnia-Herzegovina?
20 A. Primarily, this was the job of the military intelligence service,
21 but, of course, if we were in a position to gather such information, we
22 did so.
23 Q. I'm just going to ask you something in relation to page 3 of the
24 translation of this document. It has to do with some payments for the
25 needs of those saboteurs, Mr. Jozelic, Rudolf. He is a member of the
1 Army of Bosnia-Herzegovina, and he is collecting some money in HRD. Did
2 you know that at that time the HRD, the Croatian dinar, was used on the
3 east and west side as a means of payment? In all fairness, this document
4 is dated the 15th of November, 1993. Did you know that the Croatian
5 dinar was used as tender?
6 A. I think that in that area it was only the Croatian dinar and
7 perhaps the German mark that was tender. Used equally on both sides,
8 conditionally speaking.
9 Q. Now I would like to ask you to look at document 2D941. That is a
10 letter that Mr. Lucic, 941, yes, yes, that's it. Mr. Lucic is writing
11 this on the 28th of November, 1992: The Republic of Croatia
12 Defence, Security and Information Service, to Mr. Rebic. In this
13 document he speaks of the activities of the Kuwaiti IGASA which presents
14 itself as a humanitarian organisation that is involved in the procurement
15 of weapons and ammunition through their mission in Split.
16 In the next document on the next page we have a document where we
17 see that the head imam, Hidajet Effendi, is addressing the Kuwaiti IGASA
18 in Split
19 this organisation to send in. Could you please explain to the Honourable
20 Trial Chamber, first of all whether your service collected such
21 information, and why is Mr. Lucic addressing the Ministry of Defence,
22 Defence of the Republic of Croatia
23 A. What I know about this and how I can interpret this document is
24 the following, that in the territory of the Republic of Croatia
25 must have existed many organisations that were active and that depicted
1 themselves as humanitarian organisations but unfortunately dealt in
2 matter that were not of a humanitarian nature. And there were
3 organisations like that throughout the country, mostly in Zagreb
5 informing the service in Croatia
6 of this kind to be recorded, supervised, and surveillance put in place
7 and prevented. So these were organisations. In this instance, an
8 international organisation, that abused its powers and things like that
10 Q. All right. Fine. Now, look at the next document, and it is
11 information compiled within the SIS sector and SIS administration. 2D934
12 is the document number.
13 This is a request dated the 16th of August, as it says, to the
14 military police administration, signed by Mr. Lucic, and he says that he
15 considers that measures should be taken with respect to the killing of
16 nine Muslim civilians in the village of Mokronoge
17 in the report attached and in other documents attached. Now, Mr. Bandic,
18 we do have this piece of information that was attached but not the other
19 documents. Now, what I'm asking you is this: Was this one of the things
20 you did, the kind of work you did, and do you know whether any
21 proceedings, criminal proceedings were taken against individuals
22 mentioned here for the acts they had committed?
23 A. Yes, this was one of the forms that we had of acting where the
24 head of SIS sent to the military police administration requests for
25 measures to be taken, specific measures, and in this case this was war
1 crime, I believe, and as far as I remember proceedings were initiated,
2 and I think that the perpetrator or perpetrators were convicted of the
4 Q. All right. Fine. Now, we are going to skip over the following
6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Could you please look at page 2
7 of the document. The report dated 16th of August, 1993, about this
8 murder of nine Muslims. I see that the conclusion here is that a member
9 of the 2nd Brigade of the Croatian army would have committed this murder.
10 According to you, what does the soldier of the 2nd Brigade of the
11 Croatian army do here? Was he on leave from his unit or was his unit
12 present here on the ground? If you don't know the answer, please let us
13 know. Tell us I don't know and we'll move on.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I don't know that that
15 was a member of the Croatian army. I think it was a member of the HVO.
16 That's what I would say. I'm not quite sure. But I think this is a
17 mistake and it should read the HVO. A member of the HVO.
18 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Well, maybe it's
19 time to break, time flies. So I suggest we break for 20 minutes.
20 --- Recess taken at 5.35 p.m.
21 --- On resuming at 5.57 p.m.
22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Khan, fine, but we
23 will bring the witness in and we need to tell him that he will come back
24 tomorrow. Usher, could you please go and fetch the witness. Mr. Khan.
25 Just a moment, please, wait for the witness to be here.
1 MR. KHAN: I'm grateful.
2 [The witness takes the stand]
3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Khan, you have the.
4 MR. KHAN: Mr. President, Your Honours, good afternoon. Your
5 Honours, firstly I'm grateful for your foresight in bringing the witness
6 in. As raised with the members of the court staff and the parties in the
7 courtroom, it is my application that the -- today's hearing be adjourned
8 an hour early. Lead counsel, Senka Nozica, has unfortunately been taken
9 rather ill, and she is a feeling under the weather, and I think in those
10 circumstances, given the importance of this witness to the Defence case,
11 and it's only right and proper that the hearing be adjourned early.
12 Hopefully, we can resume as scheduled tomorrow. So, Your Honour, that is
13 my application, that we adjourn now today's proceedings for the reason
14 I've just given.
15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, you have understood
16 that Ms. Nozica cannot resume her examination-in-chief because she
17 doesn't feel well. That does happen sometimes here, people are taken
18 ill. Maybe it's the way this courtroom is designed, and the germs
19 circulate rather freely inside this courtroom. Tomorrow morning, the
20 hearing is scheduled for 9.00, so we shall ask you to be here at 9.00
21 tomorrow morning, and Mr. Khan, could you please let Ms. Nozica know that
22 we hope that she will recover very quickly.
23 MR. KHAN: Your Honour, I will certainly pass on your sentiments,
24 and I am grateful for them.
25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation]
1 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, Your Honour, please.
2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, I believe you had a
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour, yes. First
5 of all, I'd like to express my surprise. I don't know what has happened,
6 but I'd like to ask you that my time testifying here is until Friday, and
7 I have permission from the ministry to be here until Friday, so I don't
8 mind this delay, but if my testimony could be over by Friday so that I
9 can return.
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Your Excellency, rest assured,
11 Ms. Nozica had three hours, she has already had approximately 2 hours,
12 and I believe she has an hour and 30 minutes left, so the other Defence
13 counsel will have one hour and a half. Maybe they won't need all that
14 time. The Prosecution will have three hours. I'm sure that that will be
15 fine, and I'm not worried about this. We have a number of days still
16 ahead of us, unless Ms. Nozica would be unable to resume her
17 cross-examination --
18 THE INTERPRETER: Resume her examination-in-chief, interpreter's
20 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I would like to
21 inform you that the Defence of General Petkovic will certainly ask for
22 additional time to examine this witness at this point. Since the
23 examination-in-chief has not been completed, I can't tell you exactly how
24 much more time we'll be asking for, but we will certainly expound our
25 reasons. You will know the subjects and the reasons and what we wish to
1 show, and you will have documents placed before you, and we consider that
2 those documents are important for each of the individual topics. So
3 we -- our request will be well documented, but we will certainly be
4 asking for more time. And I do believe that we shall be asking for as
5 much time as was used in the examination-in-chief, which means a maximum
6 of three hours, thank you.
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The Trial Chamber will look
8 into this matter. If during cross-examination somebody would like the
9 same time as was granted for examination-in-chief, then you, since you
10 are the Defence counsel of a co-accused, this is rather surprising, but
11 we will look at submissions.
12 Mr. Khan.
13 MR. KHAN: Your Honours, just as a precursor, we will of course
14 respond to any submissions put forward by any parties at the appropriate
15 time, but we wish to go on record to express our gratitude to the
16 government of Croatia
17 And as far as Bruno Stojic is concerned, I don't want him to be overly
18 concerned. We will do whatever is in our capacity, consistent with the
19 fair trial rights of all the accused, to ensure that his schedule is
20 respected as far as possible and that he is released as far as it's in
21 our power to advocate on that issue, by Friday as was hoped. But Your
22 Honours, of course we will respond to any submissions at the appropriate
24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Ms. Alaburic, you are going to
25 file this in writing, aren't you?
1 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] I don't think we have time for
2 any written communication. And as we did last time, we will put the
3 documents to you on the basis of which we intend to conduct our
4 examination, and we will point out what we wish to deal with that has
5 been said in testimony, what we consider was incorrect, and what we wish
6 to put right.
7 Now, as far as the time we needed, the extra time we needed to
8 cross-examine this witness, I'd like to draw your attention to the fact
9 that last week we were given an additional summary to this witness's
10 statement and that the latest information I received yesterday during the
11 afternoon hours. Now, based on that information, my team was ready today
12 after the examination-in-chief to spend all night preparing the documents
13 that we would need for the cross-examination. So we would be ready to go
14 ahead at 9.00 tomorrow morning, and then on the basis of the documents we
15 select, we'll be able to tell you what the topics are, what the thesis
16 put forward are, and which documents we wish to present to the witness
17 and you during the cross-examination in the belief that they are of
18 interest to establishing the facts and the truth, and that this will help
19 Your Honours in their understanding of the case.
20 Had we had a complete summary beforehand or earlier on, and all
21 the information about the facts that this witness will address, then we
22 would have tabled a request for additional time earlier on. Thank you.
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Ms. Alaburic.
24 MR. KHAN: Mr. President, I must just raise one issue. As I
25 indicated, it is our intention to respond to any motion at the
1 appropriate time. Given that the witness has very candidly stated that
2 he has obligations, high obligations in my respectful submission, on
3 behalf of his government that require him to be released on Friday, I
4 would ask that any submissions on this issue by my learned friend for
5 General Petkovic be filed in writing, and we will respond. It will save
6 time. That's the first point.
7 The second point, Mr. President, Your Honours, is it would be a
8 sorry state of affairs, in my respectful submission, if a genuine attempt
9 by the Defence to provide further information, largely in response to
10 Prosecution requests, is used as stick to beat it as an argument or a
11 crutch by a party to say they need more time. Now, I don't see how from
12 the additional information which has been given in good faith, that
13 additional time will be needed.
14 The third point, and again I just raise it now and it can be
15 briefed in any written filings, is there has been an open invitation to
16 my learned friend, who sits behind me, to proof any Defence witness
17 called by the Stojic team. That invitation has not been taken up. And
18 in those circumstances, these last minute requests should be given the
19 closest scrutiny. Now, Your Honours, it is my respectful submission that
20 a witness that has come here with the leave of a government should, as
21 far as possible, consistent, of course, with the fair trial rights of the
22 accused, and your overriding obligation to ensure a fair trial, those
23 time limits should be respected as far as possible. And if additional
24 time is needed, of course the moving party should show what is the new
25 fact this was not anticipated, and I'd ask that that argument be detailed
1 in writing so that time is not wasted in the hearing tomorrow or in the
2 days that lie ahead before the end of this week.
3 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, with your permission.
4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] You will have the floor very
5 soon, Ms. Alaburic. The difficulty is follows: As far as I can see,
6 Ms. Alaburic, you will be here tomorrow I believe, and I sincerely hope
7 that Ms. Nozica will be here tomorrow. She will have an hour and 30
8 minutes to finish. After that, if we then have debate on what you have
9 said today, and you will raise this issue again tomorrow, and you will
10 address it one item after the other, and then Mr. Khan will reply, and
11 then the other Defence counsel will also reply, and the Prosecutor will
12 also get to his feet and reply. This could last all in all an hour and a
13 half at the very least.
14 It would be much better, therefore, for you to e-mail this to us
15 overnight so that we can take a decision on this. Otherwise, we will
16 waste a lot of time discussing all of this. And this is time that is
17 then wasted. This topic should have been raised a long time ago. You've
18 known for a long time now that Mr. Bandic was going to come and testify.
19 You knew what issues would be raised during his testimony, so you had
20 ample time to seize us of this matter, not at the last minute like you
21 have just done now because Ms. Nozica is not here, otherwise Ms. Nozica
22 would have resumed her examination-in-chief, and you would have told us
23 at the last minute that you need three hours. I would have probably had
24 a heart attack hearing you and hearing this request coming in. I'm
25 absolutely dumb struck by this. This is my personal opinion on the
1 matter. Maybe I shall also have a -- be taken ill.
2 This is something which you should have raised a long time ago,
3 and you should not have raised it at the last minute since you are fully
4 aware of the obligations of His Excellency who has come here today to
5 testify, and you shouldn't do this at the last minute. So I have the
6 feeling that we are now faced with the facts.
7 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, with your permission
8 let me explain. My learned friend, Ms. Nozica, had to leave because of
9 her illness. We would have completed the examination-in-chief of this
10 witness, which means that over the next days, we have three days, 12
11 hours with this witness. Even on the assumption that I am really going
12 to ask for three hours and that you give permission for this three hour
13 time, that would mean that the examination of this witness would take
14 five hours or five hours less than would be placed at our disposal,
15 generally speaking. So I don't consider my request to be a detriment or
16 an obstacle to Mr. Bandic leaving The Hague on Friday, nor would I need
17 to extend his stay here at all. Now, as to whether the request was made
18 on time or not, I'd like to remind you that last time when I tabled a
19 request for additional time, I did so immediately before the start of my
20 cross-examination by putting all the documents before you and telling you
21 all the subjects which were explicitly stated and all the be exhibits
22 that I was going to raise, grouped by the topics. You commended me on
23 this manner of work and the way in which I requested additional time.
24 You expressed great satisfaction that I had shown you the documents that
25 I was going to discuss, and I considered this commendation on your part
1 as a guide-line for future reference.
2 So it was following that guide-line that I prepared myself in the
3 same way, to have you decide. Now, if Your Honours would like me to send
4 a list of topics during the night and a list of the documents pertaining
5 to those topics, and to send a copy to the Prosecution and Mr. Khan so
6 that then they can prepare overnight, I have nothing against this, but I
7 consider it to be the right of my client to be given the necessary time
8 for cross-examination of all witnesses in this courtroom, regardless if
9 they are saying something for him or against his interest. That is the
10 basic right of my client.
11 Were my client to be tried in a single trial, his rights would
12 not be jeopardized, so I don't think that in a joint trial, the rights of
13 the accused can be diminished compared to his rights under a single
14 trial. Therefore, I consider that my request will be based on the basic
15 premises and rules of the work of this Tribunal, and I don't wish to
16 expound my right to request additional time anymore now, and we must not
17 treat these cases as six Defence cases or working together or five
18 Defence cases. The Defence of General Petkovic requests that it be
19 treated as an independent or autonomous subject with all the attending
21 Now, as regards the basis for my request for additional time, I
22 think you'll be able to assess the merits when you see what was
23 mistakenly stated during the examination-in-chief, what was passed over
24 during testimony, what the -- we consider to be the truth, that is to
25 say, the Petkovic Defence, and what documents and materials we are going
1 to use to prove that. We consider these are subjects of exceptional
2 importance for this trial. We consider that Mr. Bandic is a -- fully
3 qualified to respond to those issues and that we should take advantage of
4 this occasion to establish the facts in this courtroom, facts important
5 for a final decision by the Trial Chamber.
6 I completely understand that the Defence of Mr. Bruno Stojic will
7 object to my request just as they objected to all our requests for
8 additional time, and what Mr. Khan said to the effect that I had time to
9 prepare for this witness and for his cross-examination could do something
10 in a shorter space of time, I consider to be completely immaterial, not
11 to the point, because it is every Defence counsel's right to prepare as
12 they see fit. And we consider this to be incommensurate and that we have
13 every right to cross-examine the witness, Mr. Bandic, in this case. I
14 personally know Mr. Bandic, and I had the pleasure and privilege of
15 meeting him two or three years ago, and we wish to talk to him as a
16 witness called by another Defence team, somebody who has put forward his
17 thesis which go against Mr. Petkovic's case. I think that we have enough
18 time to prove that that is indeed the case. And I am sure we'll be able
19 to prove it.
20 Let me repeat, if you wish me to sends in the request in writing
21 in the course of the night, I am ready to comply so that in the morning
22 you'll be able to see what it's all about. Thank you.
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Ms. Alaburic, in order for the
24 information to be complete, are you in contact with other counsels in
25 order to see whether they will give you some of their time within the
1 hour and a half that was granted to everybody? Maybe you're the only one
2 who will cross-examine. Have you discussed it with them or do you have
3 no idea at all?
4 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I fully respect the
5 positions of the other Defence teams that have already been expressed in
6 this courtroom; namely, that if they do not intend to use the time that
7 was allotted to them for cross-examination, that they return this time to
8 the Honourable Trial Chamber and that the Trial Chamber can use it as
9 they deem fit.
10 So I don't think that the other Defence teams should be brought
11 into this position, that they give or do not give their own time to
12 another Defence team that may have a conflict of interest. Therefore, I
13 have not asked at all my learn friends from the other Defence teams as to
14 whether they intend to cross-examine or not. I happen to know that
15 General Praljak's Defence does wish to use their time. In order to make
16 this decision, if necessary, perhaps you can ask my learned friends now
17 whether they are going to cross-examine or not, so then we will know
18 within which boundaries we are moving.
19 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. The Trial Chamber
20 heard you. Mr. Khan.
21 MR. KHAN: Your Honour, hopefully the last word on the topic, I
22 think perhaps rhetoric at this stage is hardly helpful, but I will say
23 for the record at page 77, lines 21, I think it perhaps is a tad unfair
24 to say that the Defence of Mr. Bruno Stojic objects to requests for
25 additional time simply because they've been made. We try and we
1 endeavour as far as possible to take a principled position, and Your
2 Honours, of course, will judge whether or not on a case by case basis we
3 have on occasion supported the Prosecution, support other parties, and on
4 occasion we've been -- taken a position which may not have found favour
5 with our colleagues, respected colleagues, for the Defence or for the
7 Your Honours, I would ask for the reasons that Mr. President you,
8 yourself, intimated, that the most time-effective manner of proceeding
9 would be to ask my learned friend to very kindly file an application for
10 additional time, detailing not only the new -- not only the areas she
11 wishes to cover, but what are the new facts that have emerged that could
12 not have been anticipated that would render an amendment to the
13 time-lines -- guide-lines that Your Honours have previously issued in
14 relation to this witness, and we will then endeavour to respond to it. I
15 think that's the most effective way of doing it. Otherwise, even one and
16 a half-hours, perhaps, would be a rather conservative estimate to the
17 amount of time that could be lost to this issue that, in my respectful
18 submission, could have been raised a very long time ago rather than when
19 the witness has arrived in The Hague
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Well, the Trial Chamber will
21 ask for a written submission so that we can rule.
22 Mr. Stringer, I have a question to ask you regardless of all
23 this. Should the Trial Chamber grant Mrs. Alaburic three hours or two
24 hours, I don't know, would that lead to a new request by you in order to
25 be granted additional time?
1 MR. STRINGER: Well, good afternoon, Mr. President and Your
2 Honours. The Prosecution position I think, on that, would be to simply
3 wait and see how it all -- how it all goes. We at the very least have to
4 protect the three hours that we have been accorded. And there are some
5 concern about that based on the last few minutes of debate. We have to
6 have the three hours, and if that happens this week then obviously that's
7 the best and it's best for the witness. If it turns out that for
8 whatever reason it's necessary for the witness to come back another time
9 or to stay, I think that is something that needs to be considered;
10 although, it's not -- certainly not something the Prosecution would
11 favour. I'm sure it's not going that the witness would favour either.
12 So point number one is at the very least the Prosecution will
13 insist on its three hours, its full three hours, depending on how the
14 cross-examination of any of the Defence teams goes, it might be that the
15 Prosecution asks for additional time. I think it's unlikely based upon
16 the tenor of the debate. However, you know, I think with every witness
17 there's a possibility that any party might, at the end, feel the need to
18 ask for some additional time. And certainly the Prosecution would wish
19 to reserve the possibility for that should it arise. However, at the
20 moment, I think that I'm more comfortable just sort of insisting on the
21 three hours that we are granted. Thank you.
22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Ms. Pinter.
23 MS. PINTER: [Interpretation] Good evening, Your Honours, I just
24 wanted to suggest that the witness be excused and allowed to leave the
25 courtroom as we are dealing with these procedural matters.
1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Well, all has been
2 said so there's no need to dwell on this. We'll wait for the written
3 motion. I'll be here as early as 5.00 in the morning, and I shall be
4 waiting in my office for this request. I wish you a very pleasant
6 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 6.23 p.m.
7 to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 17th day of March,
8 2009, at 9.00 a.m.