Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 1987

1 Tuesday, 2 October 2001

2 [The accused entered court]

3 [The witness entered court]

4 [Open session]

5 --- Upon commencing at 9.30 a.m.

6 JUDGE MUMBA: Good morning. Will the Registrar please call the

7 case.

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

9 IT-95-9-T, the Prosecutor versus Blagoje Simic, Milan Simic, Miroslav

10 Tadic and Simo Zaric.

11 JUDGE MUMBA: We are continuing with cross-examination and

12 Mr. Lukic did end his cross-examination yesterday. But before counsel,

13 the next counsel, starts, I would like to ask Mr. Lukic to give us English

14 translations of all the documents, the lists and other documents, because

15 that's the requirement for purposes of the record, and also we were

16 getting some other writings on these documents interpreted, so we would

17 like to have an official translation to attach to the documents, and the

18 registry assistant will give them numbers according to their numbers here

19 since they are all in Serbo-Croat. Apart from that, you may be seated.

20 MR. ZECEVIC: Good morning, Your Honours.


22 [Witness answered through interpreter]

23 Cross-examined by Mr. Zecevic:

24 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Lukac. Since we met yesterday,

25 today we can talk a bit. Tell us, Mr. Lukac, in 1992, you had had about

Page 1988

1 ten years experience in the police; is that right?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. During that period of time, you applied the provisions of the

4 Criminal Code of Bosnia-Herzegovina, I assume.

5 A. You mean in my police work?

6 Q. Yes.

7 A. That's right.

8 Q. You also applied the provisions of the law on criminal procedure;

9 is that right?

10 A. Yes, that's right.

11 Q. I mean in your police work.

12 A. Yes, yes.

13 Q. Can you tell us, is police detention one of the institutions

14 envisaged by the law on criminal procedure?

15 A. At that time, it was. Up to three days.

16 Q. I am referring to that period. What about detention based on a

17 ruling by the investigation judge? Wasn't that also envisaged by the law

18 on criminal procedure?

19 A. That's right.

20 Q. Tell us, Mr. Lukac, as for police detention, powers with regard to

21 that were in the hands of the police; is that right?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. Exclusively?

24 A. Well, there were always consultations with the prosecutor but it

25 was within the domain of the police.

Page 1989

1 Q. I'm asking you with regard to the rights of the accused and the

2 system of police detention. Wasn't police detention under your

3 jurisdiction only? Of course, provided that there were consultations with

4 the prosecutor. That's only natural.

5 A. Not of the accused but of the suspect.

6 Q. Thank you. Tell me, houses of correction, prisons, detention

7 facilities, all of that was under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of

8 Justice; isn't that right?

9 A. That's right.

10 Q. Exclusively under the Ministry of Justice?

11 A. That's right.

12 Q. Tell me, in Bosanski Samac before 1992, was there a prison or was

13 there a detention facility?

14 A. There was not a prison but there was a detention facility.

15 Q. Are you referring to police detention?

16 A. No. I am talking about detention facilities in the sense of the

17 premises, and they were in the police station.

18 However, when the police would give a person three days of

19 detention, then that person would be sent to the court detention facility

20 in Doboj.

21 Q. In Doboj?

22 A. Yes, in Doboj.

23 Q. Tell me, Mr. Lukac: You attended reserve officer's school, didn't

24 you?

25 A. Yes.

Page 1990

1 Q. Are you familiar with the institution of military detention as a

2 disciplinary measure?

3 A. I know that it exists, but I don't really know much about that

4 subject.

5 Q. Are you familiar with the institution of military prison?

6 A. As soon as there were military courts, there had to be military

7 prisons so that people could serve time there.

8 Q. Thank you. Tell me: Military detention and military prison were

9 stipulated in the law on the armed forces; is that right?

10 A. Possibly, but I'm not aware of that.

11 Q. Military detention and military imprisonment were under the

12 jurisdiction of the military in a broader sense; is that right?

13 A. That's right.

14 Q. Within their exclusive authority?

15 A. Probably.

16 Q. Tell me, Mr. Lukac: You now hold a position of responsibility in

17 Bosnia-Herzegovina. According to present law and regulations in

18 Bosnia-Herzegovina, are police detention and court detention regulated in

19 a similar way as they were in the former Yugoslavia in terms of the

20 authority involved, not in terms of the duration and things like that?

21 A. Not in the Federation, but it is so in Republika Srpska, as far as

22 I know.

23 Q. Tell me: In the Federation, under whose authority does police

24 detention fall?

25 A. In the Federation, the police, according to the existing Criminal

Page 1991

1 Code, cannot order detention under any circumstances. This can only be

2 done by an investigating judge.

3 Q. What about court detention? That is under the jurisdiction of the

4 Ministry of Justice through the court; is that right?

5 A. Yes, that's right.

6 Q. What about penitentiaries, houses of correction, detention

7 facilities? Is that also only under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of

8 Justice?

9 A. That's right.

10 Q. What about military prisons and military detention? Is that

11 within the authority of the Ministry of Defence of the B & H or the armed

12 forces, or who?

13 A. The armed forces of the BH do not exist yet. There is the army of

14 the Federation and there is the army of Republika Srpska.

15 THE INTERPRETER: Could Defence counsel please pause before he

16 puts his next question.

17 A. In the Federation there are no military courts and there are no

18 military prisons.


20 Q. [Interpretation] Thank you. Mr. Lukac, during your stay in Samac

21 from the 17th until the 26th of April, and from June - I don't know the

22 exact date - until the 4th of September, Samac was shelled, wasn't it?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. Often?

25 A. From time to time.

Page 1992

1 Q. How often was "from time to time"? Every other day?

2 A. I cannot say with accuracy, but it was there.

3 Q. Thank you. Let us move on to another matter. I assume that the

4 Trial Chamber and all of us here would deem it important to clarify

5 certain facts related to your testimony of the past few days. I would

6 like to put a question to you related to a document. It is document P19,

7 or rather, P19 ter in the B/C/S language. You may recall that this is a

8 military document. That is the report of the 17th Tactical Group,

9 addressed to the command of the 2nd Military District, and it is dated the

10 17th of April. The transcript of the 24th of September, on page 1666,

11 line 17, contains your statement that the information contained in this

12 document is inaccurate and that what happened was actually the opposite,

13 and that the information in this document is actually an alibi for what

14 truly occurred. Did I correctly paraphrase your own words?

15 A. I cannot remember exactly, because there were several documents of

16 this kind. Could you read it, please?

17 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Can the witness be shown the document, please,

18 Mr. Usher, the one already in the registry?

19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I've read it.


21 Q. [Interpretation] May I just read out to you what you said, page

22 1666, line 17, "No, I do not think that this piece of information is

23 correct at all. Actually, what happened is the exact opposite." Do you

24 agree with that?

25 A. I do, fully.

Page 1993

1 MR. ZECEVIC: [In English] I would request the registry to show the

2 witness P20 ter, please.

3 Q. [Interpretation] Have you read the document?

4 A. Well, it's not very clear but I managed to understand more or less

5 what it is.

6 Q. It is a request to engage the air force, isn't it?

7 A. This copy is quite illegible.

8 Q. Mr. Lukac, on the 25th of September, during your testimony, you

9 read that same document.

10 A. Go ahead with your questions.

11 Q. On page 1669, point 11, or rather line 11, in response to the

12 question whether you remember any aircraft flying in that area, you said

13 that you did not remember that. Is that correct?

14 A. Correct.

15 Q. Thank you.

16 MR. ZECEVIC: [In English] May the registrar show the witness P21

17 ter, please?

18 Q. [Interpretation] This is a report to general headquarters, isn't

19 it, related to numerous attacks, and attacks coming from the side of Prud;

20 is that correct?

21 A. That's what it says here, inter alia.

22 Q. On page 1671, line 4, you stated that as far as you know, there

23 weren't any inter-ethnic incidents and conflicts on the territory of

24 Bosanski Samac. That's what you said in relation to that document.

25 A. Yes, before the war broke out, incidents on an ethnic basis.

Page 1994

1 Q. Tell me, Mr. Lukac, because this document is dated the 17th or

2 18th of April --

3 A. The 17th.

4 Q. Were there numerous conflicts on the 17th and were there attacks

5 coming from Prud?

6 A. At that time, I was detained, but I know that in town, in Bosanski

7 Samac, there weren't any such conflicts.

8 Q. You were detained in Crkvina; is that right?

9 A. Yes, that's right.

10 Q. How far away is Crkvina away from Bosanski Samac?

11 A. Three, three and a half kilometres.

12 Q. Thank you.

13 MR. ZECEVIC: [In English] May the usher show the witness P23 ter,

14 please?

15 Q. [Interpretation] This is a document dated the 18th of April 1992,

16 isn't that right, the report of the 17th Tactical Group to the command in

17 Doboj, right?

18 A. No. This is --

19 Q. I'm talking about 23 ter.

20 A. This is a report of the 17th Corps to the 2nd Military District.

21 Q. Well, yes, but in Doboj?

22 A. As far as I know, this kind of command was supposed to be in

23 Sarajevo, not in Doboj.

24 Q. What does it say on the document, sir?

25 A. On the document, it says the command of the 2nd Military District.

Page 1995












12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French

13 and the English transcripts.













Page 1996

1 Q. It has to do with taking over control over Samac, is that right,

2 on the 18th of April, 1992? The document relates to information that

3 during the day of the 18th of April, control was taken over, over Bosanski

4 Samac?

5 A. Can you tell me where it says so? In which line?

6 Q. Paragraph 3.

7 A. I've read it.

8 Q. Is that what it says?

9 A. That's what it says.

10 Q. In response to the Prosecutor's question in this regard, you said

11 that you remember that on the 18th of April, it was a Saturday, and that

12 you were detained in Crkvina, and that from that room, through the window,

13 you could see the road to Gradacac, and that you noticed a column of JNA

14 tanks and of other combat vehicles that were going in the direction of

15 Bosanski Samac. Is that correct?

16 A. That's correct.

17 Q. Tell me, Mr. Lukac, you have just looked at these documents - you

18 can look at them again - these are documents that are strictly

19 confidential; right?

20 A. That's right.

21 Q. They are all marked "strictly confidential," aren't they?

22 A. I've read it.

23 Q. Are they all marked "strictly confidential"?

24 A. The one that's in front of me is marked "strictly confidential."

25 Q. I hope that I have understood you correctly that you have

Page 1997

1 questioned the authenticity of every one of these documents, or at least

2 in part.

3 A. That's right.

4 Q. Mr. Lukac, you are trying to establish that JNA units, in

5 communication with their higher command, dispatched, invented information

6 in strictly confidential form; right?

7 A. I did not claim that. I have been claiming that certain

8 assessments contained in these documents are not correct.

9 Q. I asked you about facts, not assessments.

10 A. If some things that are contained in these pieces of information

11 are to be treated as facts, then they are not correct. If it says in this

12 information that --

13 Q. Thank you. Thank you. While giving your statement, you invoked

14 logic several times. Can you give me a brief answer now as to whether

15 what you have been claiming is logical or not?

16 A. What are you referring to?

17 Q. Well, when you say that this document -- these documents contain

18 facts that are not correct.

19 A. Correct.

20 Q. Does that mean that in your opinion this is logical?

21 A. I don't know whether it's logical for someone, but that's what it

22 says. That's the way it is.

23 Q. Thank you. Tell me, Mr. Lukac: On page 1560, line 4, of the

24 transcript dated the 24th of September, you claimed that in the

25 communication centre of the police there were five employees; is that

Page 1998

1 correct?

2 A. Before the war, that's correct.

3 Q. Yes, I am referring to the pre-war period. You said that four of

4 them were Serbs and their chief was a Bosniak who was married to a Serb

5 woman.

6 A. Correct.

7 Q. Did you mean to say that their chief, a Bosniak married to a Serb

8 woman, was in some way different or worse than the members of his own

9 people?

10 A. I did not say that.

11 Q. But why did you point out that he was married to a Serb woman?

12 A. I pointed that out from the point of view of the possibility of

13 information leaking out of that centre in the pre-war period. That fact

14 was mentioned in that context.

15 Q. Are you trying to say that the chief of the communication centre

16 was a potential danger and that information could leak through him?

17 A. Primarily through the rest who worked there too, and he is not too

18 far away from that either, because his brother was a member of the 4th

19 Detachment.

20 Q. However, in your statement, you did not say that his brother was a

21 member of the 4th Detachment. You said that he was married to a Serb

22 woman.

23 A. That is correct. I talked about the ethnic composition of the

24 people who were employed in this communication centre.

25 Q. Why is that so important?

Page 1999

1 A. I believe it is important from the point of view of the

2 possibility of information leaking from that centre. It is in that

3 context that this subject was referred to in this statement.

4 Q. Do I understand you correctly that the fact that he was married to

5 a Serb woman indicated the possibility of information leakages? Is that

6 correct?

7 A. In a way, yes, in a broader sense.

8 Q. Thank you. On page 1610 -- I apologise. On the transcript of the

9 28th of September, you said, on page 1896, line 20 -- the question

10 concerned Mr. Petar Karlovac, a Croat, and the question was: "Was he a

11 member of the 4th Detachment and did he have a criminal record?" Do you

12 remember that?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. Your response was that, according to your information, he really

15 was a member of the 4th Detachment and that he was in the reserve, or

16 rather, in the reserve of the State Security.

17 A. Yes, the State Security.

18 Q. And that he was married to a Serb woman. Is that correct?

19 A. Yes, that's correct.

20 Q. Thank you. Tell me, please: The same transcript, page 1898, line

21 20, of the 28th of September, 2001, it refers to Darko Dujmusic.

22 A. Dujmusic.

23 Q. Thank you. Dujmusic who was also said to be a member of the 4th

24 Detachment.

25 And to the question of whether he had a criminal record, you

Page 2000

1 replied, "No, he didn't have a record, but he was born in a mixed

2 marriage."

3 A. That's correct.

4 Q. Thank you. When testifying yesterday, Mr. Lukac, on page 1953,

5 line 6, talking about Mr. Ivan Lonac, who is also a Croat, is he not, you

6 said, "Yes, a Croat, married to a Serb woman."

7 A. That's correct.

8 Q. You are a Croatian nationalist, are you not, Mr. Lukac?

9 A. That's what you say.

10 Q. I'm asking you.

11 A. I am a Croat by nationality but I am not a nationalist.

12 Q. I have read out to you five examples of statements where you say

13 the same thing about certain members of your own nation, and as I

14 understand this, it was in a negative sense, was it not? In a

15 non-affirmative sense?

16 A. I said those things exclusively to explain why people did what

17 they did.

18 Q. Do you wish to say that their wives had such a big influence over

19 them?

20 A. I don't know how much influence they had, but those were reasons

21 for their actions.

22 Q. Does your wife have such an influence on you?

23 A. I don't wish to answer that question.

24 Q. Thank you.

25 MR. ZECEVIC: [In English] Will the registrar show the witness

Page 2001

1 F18/A ter -- well, it should be P18/A ter, I'm sorry. P18 and P18/A ter,

2 the two documents in Serbian language.

3 Q. [Interpretation] Do you remember this document, Mr. Lukac?

4 A. Yes, yes.

5 Q. A list of donations from Donji Hasici and a report on how these

6 funds were spent; is that right?

7 A. That's correct.

8 Q. Thank you. On page 1600, on the transcript of the 24th of

9 September, in lines 17 and 18, to the Prosecutor's question, you said that

10 your personal standpoint was that this document is quite -- quite

11 transparent, it's quite easily understood.

12 A. That's correct.

13 Q. Thank you. I agree with you. Tell me, Mr. Lukac, what is the

14 date on this document?

15 A. March 1992. I can't see exactly what the day is.

16 Q. At that time, you were in the police in Bosanski Samac, were you

17 not?

18 A. That's correct.

19 Q. Mr. Lukac, was it not your duty to take certain measures

20 prescribed by law, in accordance with the rules of your service and

21 Article 213 of the Criminal Code of Bosnia and Herzegovina, that is to

22 submit criminal reports against those persons, because this was, after all

23 -- this had to do with 24 pieces of automatic weaponry?

24 A. Under normal circumstances, that's what should have been done, but

25 the first time I saw this document was here in this courtroom.

Page 2002

1 Q. So at that time, you did not have any knowledge of this, of the

2 existence of this document and these facts?

3 A. No, no. I saw this for the first time here in the courtroom.

4 Q. Thank you. Tell me, in the same transcript of the 24th of

5 September, on page 1588, line 15, you said - and this refers to armed SDA

6 patrols - you said, "In a certain sense, the police tolerated their coming

7 to town in this manner." You meant to say that perhaps their weapons were

8 in their cars, they weren't carried openly, they were not in uniform but

9 in civilian clothes. Do you remember that?

10 A. Yes, that's correct, but I wish to correct you. I did not say

11 they were armed SDA patrols but armed patrols of the Bosniak people in the

12 town of Bosanski Samac.

13 Q. Well, it's the same thing.

14 A. No, it's not.

15 Q. These patrols of members of the Bosniak people, were they

16 authorised to carry weapons?

17 A. No.

18 Q. Well, it doesn't matter whether it's the SDA or the Bosniak

19 people, but in any case, they did not have licences to carry weapons,

20 regardless of who they were?

21 A. No, they didn't.

22 Q. As you said, under normal circumstances, your duty was to take

23 certain legal measures; is that correct?

24 A. That's correct, but I have no right to take away anybody's right

25 to defend themselves.

Page 2003












12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French

13 and the English transcripts.













Page 2004

1 Q. I understand you, but I would like to ask you to answer my

2 questions. My question was: Did they have the right to carry weapons,

3 under the law which was then in force?

4 A. No.

5 Q. Thank you. Tell me, Mr. Lukac, you say the police tolerated

6 them. Isn't it correct that you were not authorised under the law to

7 tolerate something, but on the contrary, to implement the law, to enforce

8 it?

9 A. That's correct.

10 Q. Thank you. Mr. Lukac, during this examination, there was only one

11 event you were able to recall, or rather only one case where you submitted

12 a criminal report for unauthorized carrying of weapons, and this was in

13 October 1991.

14 A. There were more cases like that. I remembered only this one.

15 There were two --

16 Q. Mr. Lukac --

17 JUDGE MUMBA: Counsel, please remember to pause after the witness

18 has completed the question.

19 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes, Your Honours, but the point was I had not

20 finished the question, and Mr. Lukac tried to answer before I finished the

21 question.

22 JUDGE MUMBA: Before, all right.


24 Q. [Interpretation] I'm talking about the transcript of the 28th of

25 September, page 1865, line 23. If you recall, this refers to the village

Page 2005

1 of Donji Hasici, there were two Serbs with a Vukovar licence plate

2 carrying weapons; correct?

3 A. Correct.

4 Q. Yesterday, while testifying, you remembered another such case

5 against a member of the HVO, a Croat in any case, who was going to visit

6 his relatives in Bosnia somewhere, and he was stopped at the bridge, I

7 think, carrying weapons without a licence. Is that right?

8 A. That's right.

9 Q. Thank you. Tell me, Mr. Lukac, during the on-site investigation

10 of the sabotage incidents you mentioned, you said that in some places,

11 these incidents involved military explosives; is that correct?

12 A. It was exclusively explosives used by the army.

13 Q. Thank you. In relation to these incidents, you did not

14 investigate certain individuals from Bosanski Samac; is that correct?

15 A. No, I didn't.

16 Q. You assumed it was the JNA that was responsible for these attacks?

17 A. Well, no, but on the basis of information we had.

18 Q. On the basis of information that the explosives were of army

19 provenance?

20 A. That was not the only facts we had.

21 Q. You also mean the boot prints left on the scene?

22 A. Among other things.

23 Q. Didn't a policeman wear the same set of boots as the JNA in Bosnia

24 and Herzegovina? I'm referring to the Socialist Republic of Bosnia and

25 Herzegovina.

Page 2006

1 A. I can't remember. I'm not absolutely sure.

2 Q. What sort of boots did you have as part of your equipment?

3 A. Police boots made of leather.

4 Q. Were they different from military leather boots?

5 A. I really can't remember. I can't say.

6 Q. You were a reserve officer, Mr. Lukac.

7 A. Yes, I was a reserve officer, but I cannot remember what the

8 police boots and the military boots looked like when compared to each

9 other.

10 Q. Thank you. I hope you are aware of the fact, Mr. Lukac, that in

11 Mr. Fitozovic's flat - and he was the commander of the Territorial

12 Defence - a large amount of explosives was found: a hundred kilogrammes of

13 dynamite and 25 kilogrammes of military explosive. Are you aware of that?

14 A. No, I'm not aware of it.

15 Q. You didn't have this information that he was in possession of

16 this?

17 A. No.

18 Q. Tell me, Mr. Lukac: During your testimony, you mentioned

19 barricades and roadblocks that happened one day in Bosanski Samac. Could

20 you explain to us, Mr. Lukac, how it was possible for armed individuals to

21 gather, acquire weapons, set up roadblocks, block the town, and the

22 police, as you yourself said, did not intervene. Is that correct?

23 A. That's correct, but they were not individuals; they were armed

24 citizens.

25 Q. Please answer my questions. Does this mean that the police did

Page 2007

1 not consider this event to be even a misdemeanour, such as, for example,

2 disturbing law and order? Is that correct?

3 A. No.

4 Q. I beg your pardon?

5 A. No, it doesn't mean that.

6 Q. Did you consider this to be a misdemeanour?

7 A. It's a misdemeanour in any case, but it was a response to

8 something that happened on the evening before.

9 Q. Did you take any measures in connection with this misdemeanour?

10 A. It was not within my competence, and I don't know whether anything

11 was done about their disturbing law and order. I was the head of the

12 Crime Investigation Unit, and public law and order is within the

13 competence of the uniformed police.

14 Q. Are you aware of the police having taken any measures in this

15 connection?

16 A. I'm not aware of it, but I do know that the police commander was a

17 man of Serbian nationality who was appointed by the Serbian Democratic

18 Party.

19 Q. I did not ask you that. According to your knowledge of the rules

20 of service in the police, was it not the duty of the police to arrest the

21 perpetrators? Was it not?

22 A. Under normal circumstances, yes.

23 Q. To confiscate the weapons; isn't that right?

24 A. Under normal circumstances, yes.

25 Q. And to submit criminal reports; isn't that right?

Page 2008

1 A. Under normal circumstances, yes.

2 Q. All this regardless of the ethnic affiliation of the perpetrators;

3 isn't that right?

4 A. That's correct.

5 Q. But this was not done, any of this?

6 A. Well, whether some of it was done or none of it, I don't know.

7 Q. Can we agree, Mr. Lukac, that the police was not doing its job in

8 accordance with the law and that in this way it betrayed the confidence of

9 the people of Bosanski Samac and contributed to the build-up of ethnic

10 tension in the town; isn't that so?

11 A. I don't agree with you at all.

12 Q. What part do you disagree with?

13 A. I don't agree with anything you have just said.

14 Q. Do you wish to say that the fact that nothing was done was in

15 accordance with the law?

16 A. It was not in accordance with the law, but this was not happening

17 on Mars; it was happening in reality, the reality at the time.

18 Q. Do I understand you that this was not in accordance with the law?

19 Isn't that the first part of your answer?

20 A. That's right.

21 Q. So you do agree with that.

22 A. We can't see this in such an abstract way.

23 Q. Mr. Lukac, I beg of you, please answer my questions.

24 A. I agree. The measures that were prescribed by law were not

25 taken.

Page 2009

1 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you.

2 Thank you, Your Honours. I don't have any further questions.

3 [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Lukac.

4 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Pantelic.

5 MR. PANTELIC: Your Honours, could I have just a second to prepare

6 my documents here?

7 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Please go ahead.

8 MR. PANTELIC: Because my learned colleague was just finishing

9 here his cross-examination.

10 Thank you. Thank you, Your Honours. Good morning.

11 First of all, ladies and gentlemen from the Prosecutor unit, do

12 you hear me loud and clear? Everything is okay? Good.

13 MR. DI FAZIO: Loud and clear.

14 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you. If some problems occur, please give me

15 a sign. Thank you.

16 Cross-examined by Mr. Pantelic:

17 Q. Good morning, Mr. Lukac. I'm Defence counsel Pantelic on behalf

18 of my client, Mr. Blagoje Simic.

19 MR. PANTELIC: First of all, Your Honours, I would like to bring

20 to your attention a fact that after checking my documents regarding the

21 material provided by the OTP to Defence - namely, I'm speaking about the

22 witness statements - I came to a conclusion, a fact, actually, that the

23 Defence for Blagoje Simic was not provided with the witness statement

24 dated March 29, 1995.

25 JUDGE MUMBA: You mean this witness's statement?

Page 2010

1 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, that's correct, Your Honour. Actually, thanks

2 to the assistance of my colleagues, literally yesterday, I got the Serbian

3 B/C/S transcript. I don't have English transcript. I have ERN numbers.

4 The numbers are 00642708 up to 00642726. The fact is that I don't have

5 these documents in my official received list which I signed in order to

6 confirm that certain material with regard to this case were provided to

7 the Defence by the Prosecution.

8 So I respectfully ask this Trial Chamber to instruct my learned

9 friends from the Prosecution to avoid this kind of -- sort of professional

10 negligence, because it is not the first time in these proceedings that my

11 learned friends from Prosecution were directed by this Honourable Trial

12 Chamber to avoid this incorrect approach. The Defence for Blagoje Simic

13 was prevented, in a period of preparation for this cross-examination, to,

14 to some extent, have a general overview of the relevant materials

15 pertinent to this particular witness.

16 So let the record shows that the Defence is firmly and strongly

17 objecting to this behaviour of the Prosecution, and I would be very happy

18 to see just a short explanation, if it's possible now or we can defer that

19 issue after the break and before the second witness.

20 JUDGE MUMBA: When did you discover that you didn't have the

21 statement in question?

22 MR. PANTELIC: I discovered that virtually yesterday. I checked

23 my official receipts, which the Defence is signing and then delivered to

24 the OTP.


Page 2011












12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French

13 and the English transcripts.













Page 2012

1 MR. PANTELIC: And, no, I didn't receive this particular

2 transcript which was made based on the interview with this witness in the

3 premises of this Tribunal in the Office of the Prosecutor on the 29th of

4 March, 1995.

5 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Maybe we can have an explanation from the

6 Prosecution.

7 MR. PANTELIC: Or maybe later, I'm sorry.

8 JUDGE MUMBA: No, before the cross-examination starts, because

9 then we will see how much it impacts.

10 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you. It impacts very much, I can tell you.

11 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, the Prosecution, please.

12 MR. PANTELIC: And I will show you, in addition.

13 JUDGE MUMBA: Do we have an explanation from the Prosecution?

14 MR. DI FAZIO: Does the Chamber wish to hear how it impacts very

15 much first or --

16 JUDGE MUMBA: No, no, no, no. That's a problem of the Chamber.

17 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you. I don't know off the top of my head,

18 sorry, as I stand here, when precisely it was served to Mr. Pantelic.

19 It's being investigated at the moment. I'll be able to provide an answer

20 to the Chamber shortly, once we've had an opportunity to check our

21 records.

22 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, this is only one statement dated 29th March,

23 1995.

24 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes.

25 JUDGE MUMBA: It's in Serbo-Croat.

Page 2013

1 MR. DI FAZIO: We've got it in English as well.

2 JUDGE MUMBA: No, no. I'm asking Mr. Pantelic.

3 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour.

4 JUDGE MUMBA: The Serbo-Croat version.

5 MR. PANTELIC: Unfortunately, it is in B/C/S language. I didn't

6 have time, the possibility, to have English transcript to make a

7 comparison.

8 JUDGE MUMBA: What I want to be clear about is did you get it in

9 the English version only?

10 MR. PANTELIC: No, in B/C/S version, I don't have in English. My

11 colleagues provide me with a B/C/S version.

12 JUDGE MUMBA: What I'm asking you is the Prosecution did not give

13 you the document either in B/C/S or in English?

14 MR. PANTELIC: Absolutely correct, Your Honour.

15 JUDGE MUMBA: So that is the position, and we will be expecting an

16 explanation after the break, Mr. di Fazio, please.

17 MR. DI FAZIO: I would think that would be quite enough time for

18 us to check our records. It's of course a matter of -- it's peculiar that

19 other Defence counsel have it and that Mr. Pantelic doesn't, but

20 nonetheless, I'll investigate the matter and I'll be able to tell the

21 Chamber what precisely has happened with respect to service of this

22 document.


24 MR. DI FAZIO: Don't forget that Mr. Pantelic has also acted for

25 different defendants at different times in this case as well. So I'll be

Page 2014

1 checking that pretty carefully to see --

2 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. You have to see whether at any time in his

3 capacity as Defence counsel in this case he was served with that

4 particular document.

5 MR. DI FAZIO: That is correct, and I'll be making absolutely sure

6 our records are scoured so that we can give you a clear answer shortly.

7 Thank you.

8 JUDGE MUMBA: So Mr. Pantelic, you can start your

9 cross-examination.

10 MR. PANTELIC: If you will permit me, Your Honour, please, just

11 very briefly, yes, it is one document, but in criminal proceedings, maybe

12 one page, maybe one word, can be very important, and this is --

13 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, we are through with that. The Prosecution have

14 yet to respond, and then you can make your submission.

15 MR. PANTELIC: Of course.

16 JUDGE MUMBA: So can you start your cross-examination.

17 MR. PANTELIC: In order to clarify just several words, whether I

18 was Defence counsel in this particular case for the other defendant or

19 not, nothing matters, because it is the -- our obligation as a Defence

20 counsel to deliver to the new counsel all documents. So officially acting

21 on behalf of Mr. Blagoje Simic from the 15th of March of this year, I am

22 just limiting or referring to that issue. Otherwise, my dear friend, I

23 was acting in many cases from 1996.

24 JUDGE MUMBA: Mr. Pantelic, we are over. Can you start your

25 cross-examination? If you don't have questions, please say so.

Page 2015


2 Q. Good morning, good morning, Mr. Lukac. Again, sorry for these

3 housekeeping matters that we have to clear up.

4 Mr. Lukac, you are 45 old; is that correct? You were born in

5 1956, so more or less 45. I'm younger one year than you. The people of

6 our age, and average people, must have -- well, not brilliant but to some

7 extent above-average memory, personal memory; is that correct?

8 A. I didn't understand you completely.

9 Q. In terms of personal memory, memory of the history of the events,

10 whatever happened, you know? I mean personal memory. I'm speaking about

11 the capacity of memory. Yeah? Do you understand me? So to say, I mean,

12 we are not old people, we are not young people, so we can say we have

13 certain memory.

14 A. Well, I would not like to generalise. It is a matter which

15 relates to individual cases, I would say.

16 Q. That's the right point. Having a scale from one to ten, where

17 would you put your personal memory? I mean your ability to -- your

18 recollection --

19 JUDGE MUMBA: Mr. Pantelic?

20 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour?

21 JUDGE MUMBA: You have not informed this Court that you are an

22 expert on memory, and we are not dealing with that. We are not testing

23 the memory of the witness. We are searching for the truth. Please

24 proceed with cross-examination on matters related to the indictment.

25 MR. PANTELIC: Madam President, this is absolutely crucial moment,

Page 2016

1 why I'm starting with this issue. And just be patient with several

2 questions, because I will make some reference to the transcript, to the

3 proceedings. I am entitled to establish, or to try to establish, the

4 level of personal memory of the witness, especially because we are dealing

5 with the criminal law issues, with criminal proceedings, and it might be

6 you can agree with me that the personal memory of witness for some events

7 might be of crucial importance. So I kindly ask you to allow me to finish

8 my line of examination, which will not take more than 34 seconds. Thank

9 you.

10 Q. Mr. Lukac, on the scale from one to ten, where would you put your

11 personal ability of recollection, your personal memory?

12 JUDGE MUMBA: Mr. Lukac, don't answer that question.

13 Mr. Pantelic, continue with cross-examination.

14 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you.

15 Q. Mr. Lukac, when was the first day when you start to give your

16 testimony before this Court? I mean the date.

17 A. Last Thursday, the -- not this week but before, the week before.

18 Q. [Previous translation continues]... September 20?

19 A. Yes, more or less.

20 Q. Tell me, Mr. Lukac, what was the colour of your shirt on that day,

21 at the beginning of your testimony?

22 A. Dark grey.

23 Q. Dark grey or maybe black?

24 A. Dark grey.

25 Q. Thank you, Mr. Lukac.

Page 2017

1 A. My suit was black.

2 Q. I didn't ask you for your suit, not yet.

3 In your testimony, Mr. Lukac, for example, on page 1644, line 12

4 to 15, hearings on 25th of September --

5 MR. PANTELIC: My mistake, Your Honour. I made a mess with my

6 documents. Sorry. You can disregard this fact. I apologise.

7 So page 1644, line 12 to 15, 25th of September, you said, the

8 gist: I already said that the meeting ended at 2110 and it might have

9 been around 2120. And then you were mentioning another hour, which is,

10 for example, shifts take place at 2200 hours.

11 Then transcript page 1638, line 24, 25th of September, you said:

12 "As far as I can remember, that meeting was supposed to start at 5.30

13 p.m. However, it was postponed until 6.30 p.m."

14 Then page 1647, line 56 and line 14 [sic], also 25th of September:

15 "I came to this restaurant perhaps at 20 to 10.00 or 15 to

16 10.00."

17 Then another reference: "I arrived at the police station at

18 2205."

19 Then page 1648, line 18, 25th of September: "The call could have

20 been made about 2210."

21 And finally, I mean in my examples, because obviously Mr. Lukac

22 made so many references in his testimony, but in order to keep -- I mean,

23 to respect the time, I just make the choice of these several references.

24 JUDGE MUMBA: No. Mr. Pantelic, it's fair, if you want to show

25 any contradictions, to remind the witness of what incident he was

Page 2018

1 describing so that he can relate that to the time he mentioned.

2 MR. PANTELIC: Absolutely.

3 JUDGE MUMBA: You remind him, because he has been giving evidence

4 for a long time, so in fairness to him is to remind him of when he

5 answered to the question discussing this and that meeting, or "Your

6 meeting at the restaurant with so-and-so, you mentioned this time." Then

7 the witness will recall the incident and then you can ask your questions.

8 But not just mentioning the times on different dates without reference to

9 what incident he was describing. It may not be possible for the witness

10 to remember the incidents he was describing on which he stated -- for

11 which he stated those times.

12 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, I think Mr. -- he will

13 correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Mr. Pantelic is referring to the

14 meeting on the night before the -- what the Prosecution says was the

15 attack.

16 MR. PANTELIC: Can I, my dear friend, give the answer to the Trial

17 Chamber?

18 JUDGE MUMBA: No, no, no. Let the Prosecution, yes, make their

19 own submission.

20 MR. DI FAZIO: I rise to my feet because I'm objecting to the

21 question as it was, A, on the basis that the episode is not clearly

22 identified to the witness; and secondly, it wasn't conclusive. It was too

23 long and it's too much detail for anyone, and this witness, to be able to

24 intelligently comment. I have no objection to the topic. I think it's a

25 perfectly proper topic for cross-examination. But the manner in which the

Page 2019












12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French

13 and the English transcripts.













Page 2020

1 question is framed has to be, A, shortened, and the episode identified

2 clearly to the witness so he can then give the information that

3 Mr. Pantelic seeks.

4 JUDGE MUMBA: I'm sure Mr. Pantelic understood that. It's the

5 same direction that the Chamber was trying to give.

6 MR. PANTELIC: I respectfully disagree with your approach, Madam

7 President, because it is not the aim of my line of cross-examination now

8 to speak about events, about details. I just want to establish a certain

9 standard. So I will not ask Mr. Lukac what was happened on what

10 particular times. No. It is just another line of questioning. So please

11 allow me to finish my line and then you can say whether it's -- so I'm not

12 asking him about what was happened at that particular time. So please,

13 Your Honour.

14 JUDGE MUMBA: But when you give so many times, as you say, stated

15 by the witness during his evidence, it's only fair that you remind him of

16 what he was referring to.

17 MR. PANTELIC: If I may finish with the second question, you will

18 see the basis of my line of cross-examination. So please, Madam

19 President, allow me to finish this line, please.

20 JUDGE MUMBA: All right. You finish and let's see.

21 MR. PANTELIC: You will see.

22 Q. Page 1650, line 17, you were referring to one event which

23 was -- which occurred on 2300 hours.

24 MR. PANTELIC: As I said, that was just a brief analysis of

25 certain references of this witness to certain events. He is a

Page 2021

1 professional policeman. He is a very well-educated man.

2 JUDGE SINGH: Mr. Pantelic, put your questions to the witness.

3 Please don't make statements to the Bench.

4 MR. PANTELIC: Yes. I agree, Your Honour.

5 In transcript of 28th of September, plus the yesterday's

6 transcript, this witness mentioned that he do not recall and do not

7 remember more than 30 times.

8 Q. So, Mr. Lukac, you have an excellent memory with regard to the

9 events which occurred more than 10 years ago -- or no, around 10 years,

10 yes. Less than 10 years, let's say. You were mentioning exact hours and

11 minutes. And then for certain general questions and issues, your answer

12 is: "I do not remember. It happened a long time ago, ten years ago" or

13 "I cannot recollect," and forms like that. So could you answer me a

14 question: How is it possible for you personally to know exactly and

15 precisely what was happened almost ten years ago and you cannot recall for

16 the, let's say, facts of almost common knowledge in general terms when you

17 were asked by Defence in the cross-examination? Just your personal

18 answer. I mean ...

19 A. Well, I will speak -- I will answer your question very frankly.

20 The reason for my good memory about certain events relating to ten years

21 back can be explained -- I will explain in two ways. The first way:

22 Those events, I have written, noted them down upon leaving the camp, and

23 then my memory was very fresh, in terms of dates, in terms of events,

24 too. You can read that in my book. And the other reason was that some

25 events, some things, in the case of a normal human being, will remain

Page 2022

1 engraved in a person's memory for his whole life, and it is quite natural

2 that people tend to forget things that are not so important or that he

3 does not consider to be so important.

4 Q. Thank you very much, Mr. Lukac, for your complete answer. So we

5 could agree that if we would speak today about the events in the region, I

6 mean neighbouring areas of Samac municipality, Bosnia, Croatia, at that

7 time in 1992, in general terms -- I'm not referring to events, persons,

8 time, no; just general terms. So you could say, because you wrote three

9 books -- is that right?

10 A. Yes, that is right.

11 Q. You could say that certain personal knowledge about the general

12 circumstances of the region you can have certain recollection?

13 A. I agree with you.

14 Q. Thank you very much. Mr. Lukac, first of all, I would like to

15 make a reference to your personal background, and professional, of

16 course - and professional, yes - and I would like to make a reference to

17 page 1525, line 1 until 11 of the first day of your testimony here. To be

18 honest, it's just a matter of clarification, nothing more. When my

19 learned colleague Mr. di Fazio asked you about your current position,

20 professional position, you said: "I teach philosophy and sociology." Is

21 that correct?

22 A. No, I did not say that. I said that I was a professor of

23 philosophy and sociology. That was my occupation.

24 Q. Exactly, Mr. Lukac, because I am of the same opinion. After

25 reading this transcript, it appears to me that it's maybe a line of

Page 2023

1 questioning or maybe trying -- let's say attempt to establish something

2 else was made on sort of - excuse me for the words - maybe a clumsy way, I

3 mean, referring to ...

4 So we could agree, both of you, that you finished your school

5 faculty of philosophy and sociology and then, contrary to the question of

6 the Prosecution related to teaching, the question was, where do you do

7 that? And it's a little bit unlogic that you teach philosophy and

8 sociology in Sarajevo at the federal Ministry of Interior of Bosnia and

9 Herzegovina, which might be quite unique. That would good that police

10 will learn about the philosophy and sociology, but I think it's too

11 early. Maybe later on.

12 And then the second question was, "How have you been doing that?"

13 And you actually give him an answer, the actual answer, that you held that

14 present job for at least five months, and you are working for police of 20

15 years. And your current position is in the federal Ministry of Interior,

16 and you said that you were acting director of the federal police under the

17 Ministry of Interior.

18 JUDGE SINGH: Mr. Pantelic, how is he going to answer this? There

19 is so many questions in this. Please just phrase one question at a time

20 so that we get one answer.

21 MR. PANTELIC: Absolutely. My idea is to go faster through these

22 proceedings, so in summary way I will just give you an answer very easily.

23 JUDGE SINGH: But the difficulty is if you put five or six

24 questions at a time and then he comes up with one answer, we do not know

25 to which question he's answering, you see, so perhaps you could assist the

Page 2024

1 Tribunal. You'll be much faster if you put one question at a time, a

2 quick question, a quick answer, and it moves on.

3 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you, Your Honour. I will follow this

4 instruction.

5 Q. So you are not teaching philosophy and sociology within the

6 federal Ministry of the Interior of Bosnia and Herzegovina?

7 A. No, I am not.

8 Q. We could both agree that the Bosnia and Herzegovina consists of

9 two entities. One is Muslim-Croat federation and the other is the

10 Republika Srpska?

11 A. That is correct.

12 Q. We could also agree - correct me if I'm wrong because maybe I'm

13 not so familiar - that the Muslim-Croat federation consisted of nine

14 cantons or something?

15 A. Ten.

16 Q. Ten, sorry. And that actually, when you are saying that you are a

17 federal Ministry of Interior, it refers to the Muslim-Croat federation and

18 actually, the unit -- I mean the state, subject of these ten cantons,

19 actually, entity of these ten cantons; is that correct?

20 A. That is correct.

21 Q. And you're acting director of Muslim-Croat federation in the

22 Ministry of Interior?

23 A. Yes, but that ministry has its jurisdiction, established by law,

24 and the cantons are -- also act on the basis of legislation too.

25 Q. Thank you. So we could agree that you are acting director of

Page 2025

1 police in one of the Bosnian entities?

2 A. That is correct.

3 Q. And as you said earlier, each entity has its own Ministry of

4 Interior, police forces, army and other government? I mean ...

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. And at the present, the -- according to the Dayton Peace Accord

7 and to the constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina, you would agree with me

8 that there is no common police forces for both entities?

9 A. No, but we are working on it.


11 Q. I believe that that's inevitable process. Good.

12 JUDGE MUMBA: We have reached our break time, Mr. Pantelic, so we

13 will break off and resume our proceedings at 11.30 hours.

14 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you, Your Honour.

15 --- Recess taken at 11.02 a.m.

16 --- On resuming at 11.33 a.m.

17 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. I see the Prosecution on their feet.

18 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you, Your Honours. If I may just very

19 briefly inform the Court of that issue raised by Mr. Pantelic at the very

20 beginning of his cross-examination of this witness, namely, the service of

21 the statement of Mr. Lukac, the one dated 1995, March 1995. That

22 statement was served on both Mr. Lukic, Mr. Novak Lukic, and Mr. Igor

23 Pantelic when they were acting for Miroslav Tadic, when they were both

24 acting for Mr. Tadic. Later, Mr. Pantelic, as I understand it, obviously

25 changed -- his client was changed and --

Page 2026

1 JUDGE MUMBA: When was that? What date was that?

2 MR. DI FAZIO: That was done on June 9, 1999.

3 In addition, when Mr. Blagoje Simic was arrested and brought to

4 the Tribunal, the Prosecution was instructed to deliver its Prosecution

5 materials to Mr. Blagoje Simic - in fact, I'm told 11 binders' worth of

6 material - with absolute haste, and that was done. My colleague Ms. Reidy

7 was charged with the responsibility of examining those binders, making

8 sure that everything was included to ensure that the issue of disclosure

9 was fully covered and completely covered. And although we don't have a

10 signed receipt, she ensures me, categorically and emphatically and firmly,

11 that all of Dragan Lukac's statements were served. So there's been

12 service of the statement back in 1999 and we have every reason to believe,

13 although we don't have documentary evidence -- I'm sure we will conduct

14 further inquiries, but I can provide the Court with my solemn assurance

15 that it was included again in the materials provided earlier this year

16 when Mr. Blagoje Simic surrendered himself to the Tribunal. So our

17 position is that it is beyond doubt that it has been provided to

18 Mr. Pantelic on one occasion, and almost certainly provided on another

19 occasion, when the binders were provided. So that's the position of the

20 Prosecution.

21 There's just one other issue, and that is this: There seems to be

22 on the -- Mr. Pantelic seems to have adopted the position that the fact

23 that he received the statement in -- the certain fact that he received the

24 statement in June of 1999, when he was acting for Mr. Miroslav Tadic, is

25 not good enough. That, with respect, is not, I submit, the purpose of the

Page 2027












12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French

13 and the English transcripts.













Page 2028

1 disclosure rules. The purpose of disclosure rules is to ensure that a

2 person who is charged has full disclosure, full access to the material

3 that will be used against him.

4 It has, of course, been known throughout the history of this case

5 that Mr. Lukac would be one of the prime witnesses in our case, and that's

6 been the case for years now, and he cannot be heard to complain, I submit,

7 that, "Well, it was given to me when I was acting for Miroslav Tadic.

8 I'll close my eyes to it, close my ears and eyes to it, and I'm therefore

9 prejudiced. It wasn't given to me after my client changed to Mr. Blagoje

10 Simic." The question is prejudice, the question is disclosure, the

11 question is: Is he armed with sufficient material? Yes, he was, back in

12 June of 1999. There can be no prejudice whatsoever to him, in the

13 Prosecution's submission, and in addition, it was almost certainly given

14 to them again this year. So that's the position of the Prosecution.

15 JUDGE MUMBA: Thank you, Mr. di Fazio.

16 You proceed, Mr. Pantelic.

17 MR. PANTELIC: Madam President, do you allow me just to give you

18 facts?

19 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, yes, one minute, perhaps, so that we proceed

20 with cross-examination. Yes, you can reply, yes.

21 MR. PANTELIC: Madam President, acting as Defence counsel in

22 various cases does not necessarily mean that each cases are the same. I

23 will give you an example.

24 JUDGE MUMBA: Can I restrict you? The Prosecution is saying when

25 you are acting for another defendant in this case --

Page 2029

1 MR. PANTELIC: Sure. That defendant, Mr. Miroslav Tadic, has

2 absolutely nothing to the position of my present client, who was a former

3 major. So the documentation, the line of evidences, does not necessarily

4 mean that it's the same. It's not the same pattern. In addition, I

5 checked my receipt, when Mr. Blagoje Simic was voluntarily surrendered in

6 March, in seven or eight binders that was provided on that day. I checked

7 them very precisely. I don't -- I didn't find this particular transcript

8 of March 1999. I find only three or four statements from 1994, and it's

9 not the question. So --

10 JUDGE MUMBA: But it's accepted by you that you were served this

11 document when you were acting for Mr. Tadic in this same case.

12 MR. PANTELIC: That is correct but, again, it was years ago, so I

13 didn't take care about that. When I gave all this material to my

14 colleague who is presently acting, I forgot everything. It's thousands of

15 pages. I cannot have that in all my mind, believe me. It's an inevitable

16 process. When I was preparing for the submissions in this case, I made a

17 strategy to analyse files by files. I cannot analyse 49 witnesses. So it

18 was the actual situation, I realised that I didn't --

19 JUDGE MUMBA: But then your colleague gave you the statement

20 yesterday.

21 MR. PANTELIC: And then my colleagues were so kind to give me

22 B/C/S version yesterday, and I don't want to make any expanded matter of

23 this issue. I can resolve that with colleagues from Prosecution, we can

24 exchange our papers and see what's going on and --


Page 2030

1 MR. PANTELIC: It's just that was -- I was absolutely surprised

2 not to have, for this very important witness, this statement. So that was

3 my concern, nothing more.

4 JUDGE MUMBA: It's okay, Mr. Pantelic. You can go on with

5 cross-examination.

6 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you, Your Honour.

7 JUDGE MUMBA: You received it yesterday so obviously you read it.

8 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you. I try to be always ready.

9 Q. Mr. Lukac, could you tell us in rough figures, how many citizens

10 of Muslim-Croat federation is the situation now? In rough measure, rough

11 figures.

12 A. What do you mean, are you talking about the actual population of

13 the federation?

14 Q. [Previous translation continues]...

15 A. I really do not have these figures.

16 Q. Could we say that it's around a million and a half, two millions?

17 A. Probably, perhaps even more.

18 Q. So now you are not a Minister of Interior, you are the assistant

19 to minister?

20 A. In a way.

21 Q. [Previous translation continues]... and territory of roughly

22 million of -- million and a half, two million citizens, you're covering

23 this territory of the Muslim-Croat federation?

24 A. That belongs to the jurisdiction of the federal ministry.

25 Q. Yes, yes. That was my understanding. When my learned colleague,

Page 2031

1 Mr. di Fazio, mentioned, with regard to the event when you were appointed

2 as acting chief of police of Samac on 11th of April 1992, he used the

3 words, "It was quite mouthful," is that correct, quite mouthful,

4 mouthful?

5 A. What was the word?

6 Q. He said that when you were appointed as the chief of police of

7 Samac on the 11th of April, 1992, that this event, in terms of

8 professional position for you, was quite mouthful?

9 MR. PANTELIC: Just -- I would like to give an explanation to the

10 interpreters, because I cannot hear the right translation to the witness

11 of the word "mouthful." My understanding is that "mouthful" is something

12 as the word is say, with full mouth of capacity, of important position,

13 something like that.

14 JUDGE MUMBA: Perhaps the Prosecution can assist.

15 MR. DI FAZIO: I think I can assist. I haven't got the transcript

16 here. My memory tells me that Mr. Lukac described a position that he held

17 in the police and was -- it was a position -- it was a phrase that

18 described his position as chief of police, except he didn't say "chief of

19 police," he said something like, "I was a representative of the Ministry

20 of the Interior," and I said, "That's quite a mouthful. Does that just

21 mean chief of police?" That's my recollection of the episode.

22 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, yes.


24 Q. So using the same terminology, it will be even more mouthful to

25 say now, for you, when you are performing your actual position in Ministry

Page 2032

1 of Interior of Muslim-Croat federation? It's an upper level, I would

2 say.

3 A. That's right.

4 Q. Do you know by chance how many citizens are now in Belgrade, city

5 of Belgrade?

6 A. Don't know.

7 Q. Well, given the fact that it's around two and a half million

8 citizens, we would say that comparing to Muslim-Croat federation, in terms

9 of citizens and not territory, of course, but that you can be considered,

10 I mean in theoretical terms, that you are assistant to city chief police,

11 speaking about the category of number of citizens.

12 A. If we are talking about the number of citizens, then that is

13 right, but I don't know about the powers that this assistant in the town

14 of Belgrade has.

15 THE INTERPRETER: Could Mr. Pantelic please wait for the

16 interpretation to finish?


18 Q. Mr. Lukac, you are actually a professor of philosophy and

19 sociology?

20 A. That's right.

21 Q. Would it be inappropriate for you if I would address you with a

22 Professor Lukac?

23 A. It doesn't bother me.

24 Q. Tell me, Mr. Lukac -- Professor Lukac, sorry, what is your

25 favourite philosopher during your study, maybe after that? Because you

Page 2033

1 probably -- you were very focused on the theory of philosophy, history of

2 philosophy. I mean just -- you can say.

3 A. There were several of them.

4 Q. Can you point to one name or ...

5 A. Aristotle, for instance.

6 Q. You probably know who said, "The starry heaven -- the starry

7 heaven above me and moral law within me."

8 A. You're probably referring to Emmanuel Kant.

9 Q. And you probably have very great admiration for his work, critic

10 of pure reason.

11 JUDGE MUMBA: Mr. Pantelic, how will this help us in this case,

12 this line of cross-examination?

13 MR. PANTELIC: Very much.

14 JUDGE MUMBA: How will it help us in this case?

15 MR. PANTELIC: Just in the next two questions you will see my

16 basis, if you allow me.

17 Q. I will quote a German philosopher, Nietzsche, particularly his

18 work "Thus Spoke Zarathustra," a part of this work: [as read]

19 "All men return eternally. The small men return eternally."

20 I said "the small men." Sorry.

21 "Naked had I once seen both of them, the greatest man and the

22 smallest man, all too like one another, all too human. Even the greatest

23 man. All too small, even the greatest man. That was my disgust at man.

24 And eternal return also of the smallest man. That was my disgust at all

25 existence."

Page 2034

1 Would you agree with this concertation [phoen].

2 MR. DI FAZIO: I object to the question.


4 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, I haven't objected to any

5 of the questions thus far because, of course, one must be careful not to

6 interrupt a line of cross-examination if it's going somewhere and one

7 can't quite see where it's going at the time and thereby deprive counsel

8 of an opportunity of making his point, and I've tried not to do that, nor

9 can I say that this material substantially affects the Prosecution; it

10 doesn't, because it's not relevant in any conceivable way to any issue, as

11 far as the Prosecution can assess. But the point must be reached at some

12 stage where one is just left unable to see what sort of point is being

13 developed by counsel, and I think that point has been reached. And

14 therefore, unless Mr. Pantelic can assure the Chamber -- or sorry, not

15 assure, because you will get that assurance, but explain to the Chamber

16 the relevance of this philosophical dissertation to the issues in the

17 indictment, then I say the point has now been reached where it should be

18 stopped.

19 JUDGE MUMBA: The objection is sustained, Mr. Pantelic.

20 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you.

21 JUDGE MUMBA: The witness will not answer the question.

22 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you, Madam President.

23 Q. Now, we can agree, can we not, that the fascist and Nazi programme

24 manipulated with Nietzche's work, philosophical work? Is that correct?

25 A. In a way, yes.

Page 2035












12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French

13 and the English transcripts.













Page 2036

1 Q. We can agree, can we not, that the principle of equality of

2 nations, all constituent nations in the former Yugoslavia, meaning

3 Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, and especially Bosnia, was

4 reality, national key, equality of nations; is that correct?

5 A. On paper, yes.

6 Q. Speaking about papers, you said, when you were at The Hague, at

7 the premises in the Office of the Prosecutor, on 29th of March, 1995, you

8 said:

9 [Interpretation] "The constitution of the B and H says that the B

10 and H is a republic of three peoples, which means that the three

11 nationalities were equal."

12 For the record, 00642723. Is that correct, that you said that in

13 the discussion with the OTP?

14 A. Yes. Yes. That's what the constitution of Bosnia-Herzegovina

15 says, or rather, the former constitution.

16 Q. Thank you. And you said that on that occasion in the Office of

17 the Prosecutor? Did I hear your answer? So you said on 29th of March in

18 the Office of the Prosecutor the sentence that I just read to you?

19 A. Yes. Yes. That is what is stipulated in the constitution.

20 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... say that to the Prosecution.

21 We know that it's in the constitution, but I'm specifically referring to

22 the conversation with Ms. Nancy Patterson and the other assistants.

23 A. If that's what it says in my statement, that means that that's

24 what I said.

25 Q. Now, Professor Lukac, we can say that in Bosnia, prior to 1992,

Page 2037

1 the national key and the principle of equality of constitutive nations

2 were in fact in force?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Also, Professor Lukac, we could agree, could we not, that based on

5 the provisions of actual constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina, namely,

6 the annex of Dayton Peace Accord, there are also many instruments in order

7 to protect the vital national interests of three constitutive nations in

8 Bosnia and Herzegovina?

9 A. Are you referring to the existing constitutional framework of

10 Bosnia-Herzegovina?

11 Q. Yes.

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. Thank you, Professor Lukac. We can agree, can we not, that each

14 of entities in Bosnia and Herzegovina, namely, the Federation -- the

15 Muslim-Croat Federation and Republika Srpska, have their own symbols of

16 entity: flags, hymn, anthems?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. Thank you. Could you describe, Professor Lukac, the official

19 symbol of Republika Srpska?

20 A. You're referring to the coat of arms, the emblem?

21 Q. That's right.

22 A. I think that it is a coat of arms with a two-headed eagle on it.

23 Q. And could you describe the flag of Republika Srpska?

24 A. Yes. It is a red, blue, and white flag.

25 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... symbol in the middle of this

Page 2038

1 flag, cross or with --

2 A. I'm not sure.

3 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... "C" in Cyrillic?

4 A. I saw them on a flag, but I don't know whether it is the official

5 flag of Republika Srpska. I think that the official flag is this

6 three-coloured flag without the four "S's," but I'm not sure about that.

7 Q. Thank you. You read, Professor Lukac, Cyrillic and Latinic

8 alphabet, I suppose?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. During your education when you were at primary school and the high

11 school, I think it was the case that on the basis of rotation, each day

12 the students should write homework and the, you know, the other works in

13 school; for example, one day in Latinic alphabet and the other in

14 Cyrillic.

15 A. Well, that wasn't the rule exactly, but it was applied in a

16 certain way.

17 Q. Yes. Thank you, Professor Lukac. That was also my case when I

18 was doing this education.

19 Now we are speaking about the period of the beginning of year

20 1992. Given the fact that you are a well-educated person, you were a

21 chief of Criminal Investigation Department -- and by the way, I heard from

22 my colleagues that at that time you were an excellent professional in that

23 work. So you can consider yourself as a, let's say, quite informed man

24 about your written papers, watching TV stations. I mean, you are a

25 policeman, you're gathering information. So you can say for yourself at

Page 2039

1 that time that you were a quite well-informed person; is that correct?

2 A. Well, I would say, on the whole, a person with average

3 information.

4 Q. Tell me: Could we agree on the fact that in the middle of

5 February and then by the end of February, at the beginning of March 1992,

6 the representatives of three constituent nations in Bosnia and Herzegovina

7 at that time - Muslims, Bosnian Muslims, Bosnian Croats, and Bosnian

8 Serbs - under the auspices of EC, met themselves and then they agreed

9 about so-called Cutilliero agreement? Do you have any recollection about

10 this event?

11 A. Was this in Lisbon?

12 Q. That's right.

13 A. I remember there was a conference, but I can't remember any

14 details about it.

15 Q. So maybe we could agree on the fact that EC at that time tried to

16 impose one of the general principles for a peaceful resolution in Bosnia,

17 and that principle is that Bosnia will be divided into three constitutive

18 units with national cantons.

19 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, it's difficult to see how

20 the witness can agree with that if he says that he can't -- if all that he

21 can recall is that there was a conference but can't remember any details

22 about it unless Mr. Pantelic can establish that -- what details he does

23 know and it turns out that in fact he knows a lot more than a few -- that

24 he can remember something, perhaps the question could be permitted, but he

25 says, "I can't remember any details," so how can he answer?

Page 2040

1 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Pantelic?

2 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour, just to be very precise, I'm

3 asking Professor Lukac whether he read in the newspaper or saw on the

4 television -- he already said that there is some recollections about the

5 Lisbon Conference, so my question is very simple. Is he familiar with the

6 principles of that agreement, yes or no, or "I cannot recollect." No

7 problem.

8 A. The question is very simple. I really do not remember what

9 decisions were made, what the negotiations were, because there were so

10 many of those talks.

11 Q. So we could both agree, you just said it was actually the

12 permanent process of international community in order to resolve a

13 problems in Bosnia, many conferences, many plans, counter-group,

14 Vance-Owen plan, et cetera, et cetera, and finally Dayton Peace Accord, so

15 we could agree on that?

16 A. Yes, I agree fully.

17 Q. Speaking about the -- one of the main principles in the actual

18 constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and you, in capacity of, I would

19 say, high official of one of the entities, probably know that there is a

20 possibility for veto if the vital national interests of one of the three

21 constitutive nations of Bosnia might be jeopardised?

22 A. You mean the adoption of decisions in the parliament of Bosnia and

23 Herzegovina? That's right, those mechanisms were in place.

24 Q. We can agree, can we not, Professor Lukac, that the universal

25 right for self-determination and self-defence is a fact actually?

Page 2041

1 A. Do you mean the self-determination of nations or republics?

2 Q. I mean of nations, of peoples.

3 A. As far as I know, the constitution of the former Yugoslavia and

4 the former republics said that it was the republics that had the right to

5 self-determination, not the peoples, as far as I can remember.

6 Q. Yes. But Professor Lukac, we could agree, could we not, that

7 constitution of Socialist Republic of Yugoslavia, under the communist

8 regime, didn't follow certain standards in well-developed legal systems,

9 so it seems to me that it's a little bit dubious to make references about

10 human rights and the general principles of international law and using

11 constitution of Socialist Federative Republic of Yugoslavia, to some

12 extent, I mean, because that was a communist regime; is that right?

13 A. I agree.

14 Q. I'm simply speaking, Professor Lukac, about the universal right of

15 United Nations, of international community, where this principle is

16 enshrined.

17 A. I agree, provided this is not to the detriment of other nations,

18 the others.

19 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Excuse me, Mr. Pantelic, I wonder on this, just a

20 little bit of clarification. It's my understanding of the rules of

21 international law on self-determination of peoples and also the

22 sovereignty of existing, independent, sovereign states, that there is some

23 quite strict parameters on whether people in an existing sovereign state,

24 let's say Bosnia and Herzegovina, have a right to seek self-determination

25 for themselves within that existing, recognised, independent, sovereign

Page 2042

1 state, maybe a member of the United Nations. So I wonder whether you

2 could maybe clarify for me where you're going on this particular line of

3 questioning. Thank you.

4 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour. I absolutely concur with you

5 about this standards.

6 Q. Professor Lukac, I'm speaking about the Republic of Croatia. That

7 was my line of questioning. Croatian people in Republic of Croatia voted

8 for independence; is that correct?

9 A. That's correct.

10 Q. And that independence was recognised by the international

11 community; is that correct?

12 A. The Republic of Croatia was recognised as a sovereign and

13 independent state.

14 Q. And then, given the fact that Bosnian Croats, being a constitutive

15 nation in Bosnia and Herzegovina, started with formation of Bosnian

16 Posavina on November 12, 1991, including eight communities in this

17 region. It was -- it was in Bosanski Brod. I mean the decision was made

18 in Bosanski Brod. And then Herceg-Bosna, covering 18 communities in

19 Herzegovina, proclaimed the same situation on November 18, 1991. And in

20 addition, central Bosnia -- I mean the Bosnian Croat community in central

21 Bosnia proclaimed certain, I would say, entity on January 27 of 1992,

22 covering four communities in central Bosnia. Could we agree that the

23 formation of these entities, subjects, whatever you like, to say of

24 Bosnian Croats in Bosnia-Herzegovina, was legitimate at that time, given

25 the fact that the Bosnian Croats, with the will of the people, after the

Page 2043












12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French

13 and the English transcripts.













Page 2044

1 plebiscite decided to do that? Is it legitimate or not? Or is it okay

2 with your personal opinion?

3 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, I object to the question.

4 I do so on this basis, if Your Honours please: There are a number of

5 assertions in the question -- in the question, factual assertions about

6 the creation of various entities by way of proclamation. We don't know

7 what the witness says about all of those factual assertions that precede

8 the question. Then there is a question on the legitimacy of these

9 decisions. The expertise of Mr. Lukac to comment on these -- what must be

10 complex questions of international law has not been established. And then

11 he's asked if it's okay with his personal opinion. And that is not a

12 relevant matter. So on the basis of all of those three matters, I object

13 to the question. It would be simpler if he could comment on --

14 individually on the various factual assertions made by Mr. Pantelic. Then

15 we would know where he stands. But at this stage, it's too many things

16 for him to comment on.

17 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. The objection is sustained as put by the

18 Prosecution. I'm sure you agree that the question is quite loaded, the

19 different parts or entities established by whoever should have been put

20 separately to the witness so that he can say yes or no, whether he knows

21 or whether he doesn't. So can you rephrase your question? Simple,

22 straightforward questions will take us -- we will make progress, rather

23 than loaded questions, especially on matters which hinge on principles of

24 international law which may not be the expertise of the witness.

25 MR. PANTELIC: Madam President, but this witness was, during his

Page 2045

1 testimony and previous statements, were very much qualified to give

2 certain international law issues and certain analyses with regard to

3 Republika Srpska, and I was simply -- because I saw that he has his

4 personal opinion. It's not necessarily means that he's an expert,

5 speaking about Republika Srpska. Now I want to establish his view on the

6 other communities in Bosnia.

7 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. You separate the questions --


9 JUDGE MUMBA: -- instead of loading them as you are doing.

10 Perhaps it will be much clearer. And also, your time is running. You

11 indicated 45 to an hour. So you have 15 minutes. I actually deducted the

12 minutes we are taking discussing other issues since before the break.

13 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you, Madam President, but that was the case

14 last week. In general terms, I said it was 40, 45 minutes or maybe a few

15 minutes more.

16 JUDGE MUMBA: No. You said 45 to an hour, so you have 15 minutes

17 remaining.

18 MR. PANTELIC: That was in the situation of last week so now we

19 are in a -- you want to cut me?

20 JUDGE MUMBA: No, no. Go ahead.


22 Q. Speaking from the position of an individual, of the ordinary

23 citizen, being a Bosnian Croat by his origin, do you support the will of

24 Bosnian Croat people in Bosnia to establish this kind of -- these

25 communities?

Page 2046

1 A. I will be very sincere in my answer to you. You mentioned here

2 the Croatian community of Bosnian Posavina, the Croatian communities of

3 Herceg-Bosna, a similar community in central Bosnia, which you claim was

4 established in late 1991. I personally have never read the document about

5 the establishing of these communities. They probably were established.

6 Q. [Previous translation continues]... as an individual, as a person,

7 do you agree with the right of Bosnian Croats to establish all these

8 whatever was, subjects of --

9 JUDGE MUMBA: The witness was trying to explain that he had never

10 read that document, so he may be saying maybe they were not established.

11 So let him complete his answer. Don't cut him short. Because he first

12 has to agree whether they were established and then say whether or not

13 they had the right. So if he doesn't know that they were established or

14 his understanding was that they were not established, then let him say

15 so.

16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I do not know what their purpose was

17 because I have not read the documents on their establishment. If the

18 purpose of establishing such communities was for the self-defence of the

19 Croatian people in Bosnia and Herzegovina against the aggression that was

20 imminent against them, then I justify the establishing of these

21 communities.


23 Q. Thank you very much, Professor Lukac. Then we can agree, can we

24 not, that on March 18, 1994, this so-called Washington Agreement was made

25 and concluded between the representatives of Bosnian Croats and Bosnian

Page 2047

1 Muslims in order to create Muslim-Croat federation?

2 A. I agree.

3 Q. Would you agree with me that within the -- within provisions of

4 this agreement, only Bosnian Muslims and Croats were identified

5 constituent people of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina?

6 A. I can't say that because I don't know if that's what the document

7 says.

8 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you.

9 Your Honours, I have a map here. I think it's no objections on

10 that. I mean it's a map.

11 JUDGE MUMBA: It's a map about what?

12 MR. PANTELIC: About Bosnia and Herzegovina and entities.

13 JUDGE MUMBA: So you want the witness to --

14 MR. PANTELIC: To give to witness to locate certain things on the

15 map.

16 Mr. Usher, please. I don't know if you can cover -- if you can

17 cover the territory of Bosnia.

18 Q. And then Mr. Lukac, in the meantime you can get your pen or

19 marker. Actually, I'm speaking about the --

20 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, I see the Prosecution.

21 MR. DI FAZIO: I'm not going to object but this has not been

22 disclosed to us, I believe. Could the credentials of the map be at least

23 identified so we know what sort of map it is. Is it going to be produced

24 in evidence, that sort of thing, just to get those issues sorted out

25 before it's simply given to the witness.

Page 2048

1 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Pantelic?

2 MR. PANTELIC: I am very -- yeah, that could be tendered as the

3 evidence because map is map. If you like, I can use your map of -- Times

4 map which already exists so I don't see any particular problem. You can

5 expect this map. Map is map.

6 JUDGE MUMBA: No, Mr. Pantelic, it's not a question of saying a

7 map is a map.

8 MR. PANTELIC: My intention is to tender it in evidence with the

9 marks of this particular witness on that --

10 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. The intention is okay, but we have to establish

11 that it's a proper map.

12 MR. PANTELIC: Proper map, yeah, this is a proper map.

13 MR. DI FAZIO: Certainly looks like a map. I've got no problem

14 with that but I --

15 MR. PANTELIC: You can check.

16 MR. DI FAZIO: I've never seen it before. That's why.

17 JUDGE MUMBA: Can the usher show it to the Prosecution?

18 MR. DI FAZIO: I'm not intending to stand in the way of my learned

19 friend trying to put the map in.

20 JUDGE MUMBA: In the meantime, do you have copies, Mr. Pantelic,

21 or we have it on the ELMO?

22 MR. PANTELIC: Map is map, Your Honour, I mean --

23 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes, a map is a map is a map.

24 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. So you have no objection?

25 MR. DI FAZIO: No.

Page 2049

1 JUDGE MUMBA: Can we have it numbered?

2 THE REGISTRAR: This map of Bosnia and Herzegovina and entities

3 shall be marked for the record as Defence Exhibit D14/1.

4 MR. PANTELIC: A map of Bosnia and Herzegovina in Cyrillic

5 alphabet.

6 JUDGE MUMBA: So will it have a "ter"? Is it in Cyrillic?

7 MR. PANTELIC: No, it's just the title of this exhibit actually,

8 "Map of Bosnia and Herzegovina with the entities in Cyrillic alphabet,"

9 like Times map.

10 JUDGE MUMBA: All right.


12 Q. Professor Lukac, can you have a pen, please, one of the markers

13 here? You already have it. Thank you so much. Could you circle -- could

14 you round a town Tomislavgrad on that map? East of Lim, I think, or --

15 left, left, left, left?

16 A. Am I supposed to circle it?

17 Q. Yes. What was the name of Tomislavgrad prior to 1992? Could you

18 read that from this map?

19 A. Underneath it says Duvno; that's correct.

20 Q. Let the record reflect that the witness identified town

21 Tomislavgrad.

22 Could you find a town Siroki Brijeg, please? Near Mostar, I

23 think?

24 A. I found it. I've circled it.

25 Q. Please on the ELMO, on the screen, please? I see only

Page 2050

1 Tomislavgrad? So please, Mr. Usher. Siroki Brijeg, yeah. Please, could

2 you tell me what was the name of this town prior to 1992?

3 A. I think before 1991.

4 Q. Could you say the name?

5 A. Listica.

6 Q. Let the record shows that witness identified a town of Siroki

7 Brijeg.

8 Now, Mr. Lukac could you find a town Gornji Vakuf on that map? It

9 should be near Donji Vakuf. Could you show on the screen, Mr. Usher,

10 please? Yeah, good. What was the name of town Gornji Vakuf prior to

11 1992? Could you read from the map? Or sorry, that's my mistake. Excuse

12 me, professor. What is the actual name of town Gornji Vakuf? What is the

13 name now of this town?

14 A. It's called Uskoplje now.

15 Q. Prior to 1992, it was Gornji Vakuf?

16 A. Correct.

17 MR. PANTELIC: Let the record shows that witness identified town

18 Gornji Vakuf on the map. And I would like to tender this map in evidence.

19 JUDGE MUMBA: It's already been marked. It's already been

20 tendered.

21 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you, Your Honour.

22 Q. Professor Lukac, being a police officer and a person who obtained

23 military education in the school of reserve officers, we can agree, can we

24 not, that the army and the police are based on the subordinate

25 principles? Is that correct?

Page 2051












12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French

13 and the English transcripts.













Page 2052

1 A. Yes, correct.

2 Q. Can we agree on the fact that during the wartime, a special

3 legislation is in force and actually was in force in Bosnia, namely

4 speaking about the martial laws, martial courts, and that all civilian

5 authorities were to some extent reorganised under this system of war laws,

6 martial laws, martial courts?

7 A. This is the first time I hear that there were martial courts.

8 Q. Martial court means a military court.

9 A. There were military courts, yes.

10 Q. Then in the event of war, certain special legislation is in force

11 and certain human rights can be suspended; would you agree with me?

12 A. I couldn't say.

13 Q. Professor Lukac, could you agree with me that the fact that during

14 the war in Bosnia, all three nations in Bosnia during the fight among

15 themselves got the volunteers unit within their army formation? Is that

16 correct?

17 A. Whether they all had, I don't know, but in a certain way, probably

18 such units existed.

19 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... focusing on Bosnian Croat

20 army, which is the name HVO; is that correct?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. And within this HVO army were a number of volunteers, and people

23 came to fight for the cause of Bosnian Croats; is that correct?

24 A. There probably were.

25 Q. Do you also agree with the fact that within the army of Muslim-led

Page 2053

1 government, there were some units of Mujahedins, actually from Afghanistan

2 and Saudi Arabia, from Pakistan, from Islam world?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. And also within Serbian army also were certain members

5 of -- volunteers came to fight for Serbian cause in Bosnia?

6 A. Very possibly.

7 Q. And we could agree about that they were a person with a not so

8 clear past and with a criminal record. Actually, my understanding

9 is -- I would like to discuss that with you, and could we agree on that

10 fact, that all of them came in war to make -- to plan their -- to make

11 crimes, to -- you know, to behaviour not in accordance with the moral laws

12 and laws in general? That's my impression about the volunteers in

13 Bosnia. Could you agree with me?

14 A. I wouldn't agree that they all came with such intentions, but a

15 certain number of them probably did.

16 Q. Tell me, Professor Lukac: Within the Muslim-Croat Federation, is

17 it possible that, for example, a municipal official will give the orders

18 to police or army or some higher levels in terms of -- is it correct? Is

19 it possible? Is that a correct assumption?

20 A. You mean during the war or in peacetime?

21 Q. [Previous translation continues] ...

22 A. In a certain way, the leader takes part in solving certain

23 questions, or at least where the police is concerned. I wouldn't know

24 about the army.

25 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... for example, president of

Page 2054

1 municipality can order to police to conduct the investigation or to detain

2 someone or something. Is it possible that the president of Municipal

3 Assembly can do that?

4 A. Not under the law.

5 Q. Thank you, Professor Lukac. And then during war, is it possible,

6 under the conditions of, as you said previously, special legislation, a

7 military legislation, martial courts, et cetera, is it possible that

8 president of municipality can give the order to the commander of military

9 unit, no matter which region? I'm not speaking about the particular

10 region; in general terms. Just give me the answer. Is it possible?

11 A. Well, under such conditions the work of the official organs is

12 suspended, such as the parliament, the government, and so on. So if the

13 president of the municipality is part of a body, such as the Crisis Staff,

14 for example, then in a certain sense he probably can.

15 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... is that during the war,

16 Crisis Staff can give the orders to military and police structure. Is

17 that correct that you said that?

18 A. No, I did not say that.

19 Q. Could you agree on the fact that it is not possible for the

20 president of Municipal Assembly - or sorry, in wartime, president of

21 Crisis Staff - to give the orders to military and police formations?

22 A. I cannot claim yes or no, because I don't know what the competency

23 of the president of the municipality are within the frameworks of the

24 Crisis Staff. I really do not know that.

25 Q. Thank you. We have military structure in one state, police

Page 2055

1 structure - that is, Ministry of Interior - we have a Ministry of Defence,

2 we have a headquarters of army, and you want to say to me and to us today

3 that president of Municipal Assembly can say to General X, "Go and make

4 this military operation"? Is that what you're saying today now?

5 A. No, I did not say that.

6 Q. Thank you, Professor Lukac. Do you have, Professor Lukac, any

7 knowledge about the atrocities against Bosnian Serbs in the neighbouring

8 area of Bosanski Samac during the war, 1992 and 1995, your personal

9 knowledge? Do you have personal knowledge?

10 A. I did not hear your question well. Can you repeat it?

11 Q. Do you have personal knowledge of atrocities against Bosnian Serbs

12 in the neighbouring territory of Bosanski Samac during war? Do you know

13 if there were Serb victims of any war crime in the region?

14 A. Well, there were individual instances probably, yes.

15 Q. Thank you. Are you familiar, Professor Lukac, with the special

16 unit of Fire Horses, special unit of Bosnian Croat army in Posavina? Did

17 you hear about that?

18 A. Yes, I did hear something about it, in the later stages of the

19 war.

20 Q. You heard that the members of this paramilitary Bosnian Croat unit

21 committed rapes, killings, beatings of Bosnian Serbs in neighbouring area

22 of Samac?

23 A. When was that? In which period?

24 Q. 1992, 1995.

25 A. Well, at the time I was detained, so I'm not aware of those facts.

Page 2056

1 Q. I mean after your release, did it come to your attention this

2 fact, simply?

3 A. Well, it was not a subject of my attention, but most probably

4 things like that may have happened in certain areas. I'm not saying that

5 crimes were not committed by the Muslims and Croats against the Serbs.

6 Q. [Previous translation continues] ...

7 JUDGE MUMBA: Can you wait for the translation, because you are,

8 you know, overlapping the translation.

9 MR. PANTELIC: I do apologise, Madam President.

10 Q. Could we agree, Professor Lukac, on the fact that the -- the fact

11 of the presence of Croatian army units in Posavina in 1992? Were there

12 some Croat units present there?

13 A. I don't know. I wasn't there at the time.

14 Q. Did you find some facts about it?

15 A. Well, when I came on April 1st, 1994 until the end of the war, the

16 army of the Republic of Croatia was not on the territory -- on the free

17 area. I'm referring to Orasje and areas controlled by the Croats.

18 MR. PANTELIC: If it's possible, Madam President, I have just

19 one -- on this document one seal, and I would like the witness to read

20 what is in this seal, simply.

21 JUDGE MUMBA: What is the document?

22 MR. PANTELIC: It's a document of -- it's a document of HVO

23 Croatian unit in Bosanska Posa [phoen] -- I'm not going to tender that

24 into evidence. It's just like for the identification of certain fact,

25 clarification certain fact.

Page 2057

1 JUDGE MUMBA: Oh, yes. It will be given an identification number.

2 MR. PANTELIC: Mr. Usher, please.

3 JUDGE MUMBA: Can it be given an identification number, please,

4 just for identification.

5 THE REGISTRAR: This document shall be marked for identification

6 purposes as D15/1 ter (ID).


8 Q. Professor Lukac, could you read to us what is in this seal? What

9 is in the seal?

10 A. In the seal itself?

11 Q. Yes.

12 A. It says: "Republic of Croatia, Operative Group eastern Posavina,

13 command of the Croatian army, Slavonski Brod."

14 Q. Could you read the date, please, on the document. This is

15 universal. It's just a figure. The date, please.

16 A. May 28th, 1992.

17 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... agree that Slavonski Brod is

18 in fact in Croatia, Republic of Croatia, it's not in Bosnia?

19 A. That is correct.

20 MR. PANTELIC: With your leave, Madam President, I have a photo

21 here provided by my learned colleagues from the Prosecution, so I think

22 there will not be objections to anything, because I get --

23 JUDGE MUMBA: Is it one of the exhibits?

24 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, and I would like to tender it an exhibit.

25 JUDGE MUMBA: No, no. If it's an exhibit, what is the number?

Page 2058

1 MR. PANTELIC: No, no, no. It wasn't an exhibit. It was in the

2 process of discovery.

3 JUDGE MUMBA: Oh, I see. So it hasn't been discussed yet.

4 MR. PANTELIC: Yes. And now, I mean, because they made this

5 photo --

6 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Yes.

7 MR. PANTELIC: -- I don't see any particular problem, Mr. di

8 Fazio. Do you agree that there is a label here?

9 MR. DI FAZIO: My learned friend may well be right. I just can't

10 see across the room.

11 JUDGE MUMBA: Can the usher show the photo to the Prosecution

12 first.

13 MR. PANTELIC: You can confirm that this is your document,

14 actually, your photo.

15 MR. DI FAZIO: We may not have to -- we don't have to use it.

16 MR. PANTELIC: It's not in --

17 MR. DI FAZIO: Exhibit P12, F15.

18 JUDGE MUMBA: Was it produced?

19 MR. DI FAZIO: F15 out of Exhibit P12.

20 JUDGE MUMBA: Oh, I see. Okay.

21 MR. DI FAZIO: It's already there. We don't have to reintroduce

22 it.

23 MR. PANTELIC: It's actually -- sorry.

24 JUDGE MUMBA: It's part of P --

25 MR. PANTELIC: It's produced already.

Page 2059












12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French

13 and the English transcripts.













Page 2060

1 MR. DI FAZIO: It's in part of the photographs.

2 MR. PANTELIC: My mistake. But could you --

3 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, you can show it to the witness. Can we put it

4 on the ELMO?

5 MR. PANTELIC: Put it on the ELMO, Mr. Usher. We have another

6 one. Sorry. Great. But is there any label on that? Because there is a

7 label. I don't want to disturb Professor Lukac. I just want for him to

8 read this label. I want to read this label, nothing to hide.

9 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. di Fazio. Any problem?

10 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes. Thank you. If Your Honours please. I've got

11 no problem with the photograph. I just wondered if the previous document

12 was -- I saw the usher take it back to the Defence table. Is that now

13 being marked for identification now with the Court, that actual document

14 itself?

15 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. That was marked for identification only --

16 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you.

17 JUDGE MUMBA: And then he -- he doesn't want the witness to refer

18 to it. He accepts the exhibit.

19 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you.

20 JUDGE MUMBA: So it will be kept with the registry.

21 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you. That's what I wanted to be -- I just

22 saw it go that way. I didn't see it go towards the table, the registry

23 table, and I just wanted to make sure that that was covered. I'm sorry to

24 interrupt.

25 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. It will be kept by the registry because it's

Page 2061

1 been identified.


3 Q. So Mr. Lukac, on the left upper side, is there any -- no, no. Is

4 there any label with a description what it is actually? Do you have that?

5 A. It's written in English.

6 Q. Can you read that? What's that? "Serb --"

7 A. Well, I don't speak English.

8 Q. I will tell you: "Serb Orthodox church." Can you read the next

9 line? Because it's --

10 A. Donja Dubica, Odzak.

11 Q. "Municipality," which means "opstina." And the date?

12 A. Date, October 1996.

13 MR. PANTELIC: Could we have that -- the photo on the screens,

14 Mr. Usher, please. Okay. Good.

15 Q. Professor Lukac -- great. You see these white words at the altar

16 here in Latinic, Latinic letters?

17 A. Yes, I can see it.

18 Q. Could you tell us what it is? Can you read it?

19 A. It says "smoke."

20 Q. This word, could we -- in which context -- it's a little bit

21 strange to have this word in an Orthodox church, so in which context this

22 word occurred, this label occurred in -- could you explain me? What does

23 it mean in church? Is that to smoke, or something else, another action?

24 A. Well, it seems strange and highly inappropriate.

25 Q. [Previous translation continues] ...

Page 2062

1 JUDGE MUMBA: Can you wait until the translation of the witness'

2 answer is completed, please.


4 Q. Could we agree, Professor Lukac, that this is a dirty word?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. Could we agree that it means --

7 MR. PANTELIC: Excuse me, Your Honours. Excuse me, ladies and

8 gentlemen.

9 Q. Could we say that it means do the blow-job, the blow-job?

10 A. Yes, it probably has that meaning. Yes.

11 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... Good. What is on the left

12 corner, left down corner? Could you read these words?

13 A. Well, it's difficult to read. It says "come."

14 Q. Would it be [Interpretation] welcome supci [phoen], assholes?

15 A. I cannot confirm that.

16 Q. Thank you. So Professor Lukac, we can agree on the fact that we

17 saw destroyed Orthodox church in the municipality of Donja Dubica, in the

18 village of Donja Dubica, municipality Odzak, which is the neighbouring

19 municipality of Samac, with these words in Latinic letters?

20 A. Well, I wouldn't agree that it was in fact the interior part of

21 the church. With the rest, I agree.

22 Q. Professor Lukac, obviously we are laypersons. We cannot see what

23 is the level of destruction, of course. I agree with you.

24 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you, Mr. Usher.

25 Q. I got the note - that's the problem - from my client, and I want

Page 2063

1 to check. When you spoke about the rapes of women, of Bosnian Serbs in

2 the neighbouring territory, it seems to me that some problems in the

3 transcript were here, so just to put the question, to clarify that issue.

4 Could you agree, Professor Lukac, that the members of paramilitary

5 units, Fire Horses, committed certain crimes in the neighbouring area of

6 Samac, including rapes, killings, atrocities in general terms, on the

7 members of Bosnian Serbs, women and men?

8 A. I cannot agree with that. I cannot confirm that. I said that

9 there was a possibility that this could have happened.

10 Q. Thank you very much, Professor Lukac. I will give you one

11 picture, and I would like if you can give me your agreement or

12 disagreement. It's based on the western wild west movies where the gunmen

13 are entering the town, they are fighting, they are shooting, they make

14 various crimes, et cetera. It seems to me that we could compare this

15 picture with the entering of the paramilitary units in Samac, Serbian

16 paramilitary units in Samac that you mentioned, something like, you know,

17 like a bunch of criminals or desperados coming into a very quiet town. Do

18 you have that impression?

19 MR. DI FAZIO: I object. My learned friend should at least

20 identify the film that it's being compared with, and as a device of

21 cross-examination, it lacks all precision. The way the takeover, what the

22 Prosecution says is the takeover - perhaps the Defence sees events

23 differently - on the night of the 16th and 17th is perfectly proper for

24 cross-examination, and if Mr. Pantelic wants to put to the witness that

25 he's painted the events in a dramatic and unrealistic fashion, so be it.

Page 2064

1 I don't mind that. But the way the question is framed is not going to get

2 to that, it's going to get to something else, and so therefore I object.

3 JUDGE MUMBA: Maybe, Mr. Pantelic, it's the way the question is

4 framed. Can you rephrase your question to make it more precise?


6 Q. Would you agree with me, Professor Lukac, that the following

7 persons were present in Bosanski Samac and they committed certain crimes,

8 especially against you, the following persons: Lugar, Laki -- Lugar,

9 Slobodan Miljkovic; Laki, Predrag Lazarevic; Cera, Nebojsa Stankovic;

10 Crni, Dragan Djordjevic; Debeli, Srecko Radovanovic; and Beli? Could you

11 agree on the fact that these persons committed against you and other

12 members certain crimes, certain violence? Yes or no?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. Do you have any knowledge that one of these mentioned persons --

15 A. My apologies. Can you perhaps increase the volume of the sound in

16 my earphones? I cannot hear very well.

17 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. The usher will assist.


19 Q. Do you have, Professor Lukac, any personal knowledge -- is it

20 better now with the voice?

21 A. It's all right. Thank you.

22 Q. So do you have any personal knowledge of certain crimes committed

23 by this group against Bosnian Serbs, residents of Samac municipality?

24 A. No, I don't.

25 Q. Could we agree, Professor Lukac, that you mentioned a man with a

Page 2065

1 red beret who on one occasion said to Lugar, "Don't beat that man, you, on

2 the street"? Is that correct?

3 A. Yes, it is.

4 Q. Could we agree on the fact that according to your impression and

5 knowledge - I don't know - that this man with red beret was a superior to

6 Lugar?

7 A. Yes, I was sure he was.

8 Q. Could we assume that probably this man with red beret was in

9 superior position to all members of these paramilitary units?

10 A. I don't know that. I don't even know whether these were

11 paramilitary units, because they were identified as special units of the

12 Security Service of Bosanski Samac.

13 Q. Could we agree on the fact that Mr. Stevan Todorovic, who recently

14 pleaded guilty in this Tribunal, was a chief of police in Bosanski Samac?

15 A. I agree with that.

16 Q. And that, as you just said, he is in fact commander of all police

17 forces in Bosanski Samac area?

18 A. It is probably like that.

19 Q. Do you agree on the fact that -- first of all, Professor Lukac, do

20 you know a person named Momcilo Mandic, Momo Mandic?

21 A. Yes, I know the person.

22 Q. [Previous translation continues]...

23 A. Well, before the war, he was Assistant Minister of the Interior of

24 Bosnia and Herzegovina and --

25 Q. And in 1992, he became, I suppose, Minister of Police of Republika

Page 2066

1 Srpska; is that correct?

2 A. Quite possible.

3 Q. Do you know the fact that Chief of Police Stevan Todorovic was

4 appointed by the decree of Ministry of Interior of Republika Srpska on

5 April 6, 1992?

6 A. Don't know that.

7 Q. Could we agree on the fact, Professor Lukac, that a Colonel

8 Nikolic was Commander-in-Chief for JNA army units in that area of Bosanski

9 Samac?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. Thank you, Professor Lukac. I would like to pose the following

12 questions: Professor Lukac, could you tell me -- you said that there were

13 no ethnic tensions within the municipality of Bosanski Samac prior to

14 April 1992, but --

15 MR. DI FAZIO: That's not what the witness said, if Your Honours

16 please. My recollection was that he said that there were no ethnic

17 conflicts. That's my recollection.

18 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, conflicts.

19 MR. DI FAZIO: It may not amount to much, and I don't know where

20 the question is going, but just to assist Mr. Pantelic, that's my

21 recollection of what the witness said, and there is a distinction that may

22 become important.

23 JUDGE MUMBA: There is a distinction between conflicts and

24 tensions, yes.


Page 2067












12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French

13 and the English transcripts.













Page 2068

1 Q. Professor Lukac, we could agree on the fact that there were

2 certain ethnic tensions, which is a lesser degree of conflict, within the

3 territory of Bosanski Samac, yes or no?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. And we could agree also that many participants in this community

6 life were committed to resolve all this problem -- tensions and problems?

7 A. Perhaps try to resolve them.

8 Q. I agree with you. And the number of meetings on the various

9 levels and on the various occasions with the various participants actually

10 took place at that time, March and April, in Bosanski Samac, many --

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. We could agree that the -- on the meeting that you mentioned on

13 April 13, where the representatives of all three ethnic groups and

14 political parties were present, and you said that you heard from

15 Mr. Franjo Barukcic about that meeting, that there are certain topics were

16 there; and is that correct?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. And you checked that fact with some other persons who were present

19 on that occasion, later on, I mean; is that correct?

20 A. Yes, it is.

21 Q. And then you said that on that occasion, there were some

22 discussions about the peaceful solution between three ethnic groups; is

23 that correct? According to the words of Franjo Barukcic?

24 A. I wouldn't say that a settlement was being discussed, but as far

25 as I know, Mr. Blagoje Simic presented some views about the territorial

Page 2069

1 organisation of the Serb Municipality of Bosanski Samac.

2 Q. So in fact it was a hearsay. You weren't there but Mr. Franjo

3 Barukcic was there and then he told you about this meeting; is that

4 correct?

5 A. That is correct.

6 Q. Do you know whereabouts of Mr. Franjo Barukcic now? Where is that

7 person?

8 A. That person died.

9 Q. Did you check with some other persons? You mentioned some other

10 persons. Could you tell to the Court and to me what are the persons --

11 who were the persons that you contacted with this particular meeting?

12 A. Well, I didn't contact anyone special, but I discussed the topic

13 later on.

14 Q. Name?

15 A. Well, later in Orasje, I spoke to Mr. Ivo Zivkovic, who attended

16 the meeting.

17 Q. With someone else maybe?

18 A. I can't remember.

19 Q. Could you agree, Mr. Lukac, that given the fact that the Lisbon

20 Conference that we earlier spoke, and the principles of the ethnic

21 divisions in Bosnia, were proposed by the EC, maybe that might be a topic

22 on that particular meeting? Because that was in March, and that was the

23 beginning of April? Just say, do you have any idea maybe? Is it maybe

24 possible?

25 A. I don't know. I don't know what had been concluded at the Lisbon

Page 2070

1 meeting, so I cannot say.

2 Q. [Previous translation continues]... concluded, it may be, may be.

3 You can say "maybe."

4 MR. DI FAZIO: The witness can't say "maybe" because he said, "I

5 don't know." "Don't know" is different from "maybe" and it's different

6 from "yes."

7 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, he has already answered the question, actually.


9 Q. So once again, Professor Lukac, are you sure that that meeting was

10 on the 13th of April, with the presence of all these people? Yes or no?

11 Are you sure 100 per cent?

12 A. Well, if the two persons confirmed to me this information, because

13 they attended the meeting, I believe it was so.

14 Q. [Previous translation continues]... Professor Lukac?

15 JUDGE MUMBA: You wait for the translation to be complete,

16 please. Yes, you can go ahead.


18 Q. Unfortunately, I can inform you, Professor Lukac, that neither

19 that was meeting on 13th of April, neither these two persons you mentioned

20 were present to that meeting. So with all due respect, you're a good

21 policeman, but your sources of information are not so reliable.

22 JUDGE MUMBA: What do you say to that, what counsel has put to

23 you?

24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I quoted the sources of

25 my -- of information. I believe that the context of the discussion was

Page 2071

1 such that they had no reason to invent what I have just told you.


3 Q. Professor Lukac --

4 JUDGE MUMBA: It's 1.00 now.

5 MR. PANTELIC: One question and I'm off.



8 Q. Professor Lukac, could you tell me: You were at the school for

9 military officers in Karlovac in Croatia at -- yes or no?

10 A. I was.

11 Q. Could you agree that during the army service and in army camps,

12 there is no service for cleaning, for cleaning of premises, of vacuuming,

13 dust, so that actually soldiers do that by themselves on the regular

14 basis? Do you agree?

15 A. I agree with you.

16 Q. Could we agree that when the person is in detention for -- in

17 [Interpretation] person when he is detained [In English] no special

18 service for cleaning premises, et cetera, and that normally the prisoners

19 do that jobs on a regular basis, of course? Do you agree with that?

20 A. In prison, yes.

21 Q. Could you agree that these gentlemen also being detained, in UN

22 view, also have this -- because it's prison, like others, they have these

23 duties, in cleaning walls and stuff like that? Could you agree on that?

24 A. I don't know about that.

25 Q. So, Professor Lukac, the fact is very simple: Why, then, you were

Page 2072

1 so insulted when, during your detention, whether it's legitimate or not,

2 in Bosanski Samac SUP premises, why you felt so insulted cleaning,

3 cleaning floors? Because they -- obviously officers do that, soldiers,

4 detainees. I mean why? Can you just briefly tell me why you were

5 insulted?

6 A. I didn't say I was insulted for having been told to clean

7 something.

8 Q. I tell you, I remind you, that you saw a person, your colleagues

9 and one woman, and you felt -- your impression was that they had had

10 certain sympathies with you in that position. And my impression,

11 listening you, were that you felt something insulted. You were a chief of

12 police, you were a very good policeman, and then you are cleaning. So I

13 mean personally, can you tell me, were you insulted with these acts or

14 not?

15 A. Well, humiliated, I was.

16 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... other soldiers and other

17 detainees, no? I mean, they are other persons. Thank you.

18 MR. PANTELIC: I am finished this part. I have only several

19 questions regarding the credibility of witness, certain issues, which will

20 not take more than 15 additional minutes.

21 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, because you've gone past -- you've actually had

22 two hours of cross-examination, even deducting the other times when we

23 were discussing. So you need 15 minutes tomorrow? We are adjourning now.

24 MR. PANTELIC: Just -- thank you.

25 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honour, I don't know whether this is

Page 2073

1 appropriate time. I have a clarification in the transcript.

2 JUDGE MUMBA: Right now?

3 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes. If you find it appropriate, I can do it right

4 now or maybe tomorrow morning.

5 JUDGE MUMBA: Can we have it now when it's still fresh?

6 MR. ZECEVIC: Actually, while I while I was conducting the

7 cross-examination of witness, Mr. Lukac, over here, it came to my

8 attention, I realised when I was reading the transcript, that "krivine

9 prijava" was translated as "criminal report." It is my understanding that

10 "criminal report" is a completely different thing, and I would like to be

11 of assistance to the -- to this Honourable Trial Chamber, if I may explain

12 what "krivine prijava" actually means, and then probably the witness can

13 confirm that, if that is okay with --

14 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, you can go ahead.

15 MR. ZECEVIC: Okay. When the police captures a certain

16 perpetrator on the -- on a certain criminal offence, the police conducts

17 the interrogation and a limited investigation, upon which the police files

18 a certain document to the DA's office. This document is called "krivine

19 prijava." This document contains the suggestion on the charges to be

20 brought against the certain offender, accompanied with rather long

21 explanation of the police investigation results, of the interrogation

22 results, and evidences, whereupon, on the basis of this document, district

23 attorney files the document with the preliminary charges against the

24 offender before the investigating judge and before the court of law.

25 I tried this as an explanation and maybe the witness can confirm

Page 2074

1 that so we have this clear, because it's a terminological, in my opinion,

2 problem because a criminal report is something completely different.

3 JUDGE MUMBA: Does the witness agree?

4 JUDGE SINGH: Mr. Zecevic, we do not have the name of the document

5 on the record. It's still not there. Perhaps you will wish to spell it

6 out.

7 MR. ZECEVIC: I'm sorry, krivine prijava, k-r-i-v-i-n-e,

8 p-r-i-j-a-v-a.

9 JUDGE SINGH: Thank you.

10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I agree.

11 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you, Your Honours, I'm sorry.

12 JUDGE MUMBA: That's okay. So we will adjourn until tomorrow

13 morning at 0930 hours.

14 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at

15 1.09 p.m., to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 3rd

16 day of October, 2001, at 9.30 a.m.