1 Tuesday, 29 June 2010
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.06 a.m.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning to everyone. Mr. Registrar, would you
6 please call the case.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. Good morning
8 everybody in and around the courtroom. This is case IT-03-69-T. The
9 Prosecutor versus Jovica Stanisic and Franko Simatovic.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
11 Let's first check whether the videolink is functioning well.
12 Mr. Bogunovic, can you hear me and can you see me?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can hear you. And, yes.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Then Mr. Jordash, are you ready to continue your
16 MR. JORDASH: Your Honour, yes, thank you.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed. And before we start, Mr. Bogunovic,
18 I would like to remind you that you are still bound by the solemn
19 declaration you've given yesterday at the beginning of your testimony,
20 that you'll speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
21 Please proceed, Mr. Jordash.
22 MR. JORDASH: Thank you.
23 WITNESS: BORISLAV BOGUNOVIC [Resumed]
24 [Witness answered through interpreter]
25 [Witness testifies via videolink]
1 Cross-examination by Mr. Jordash: [Continued]
2 Q. Good morning, Mr. Bogunovic.
3 A. Good morning.
4 MR. JORDASH: Could I ask for P553 to be on e-court, please. And
5 page 9 of the English and page 10 of the B/C/S.
6 Q. Mr. Bogunovic, would you look at paragraph 52, please, which
8 "We found out about Ovcara much later. It was rarely mentioned
9 because the people who were there were not allowed to talk about it and
10 were afraid. It was Vujovic and Vujanovic who forbid any discussion
11 about this. Since they were commanders, I'm convinced that it was them
12 who forbid any discussion, and if it wasn't for them, then Ovcara
13 wouldn't have happened."
14 Have you reminded yourself of that paragraph?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Just in two or three sentences, could you explain what happened,
17 as you understood it, at Ovcara in 1991?
18 A. As far as I understand, some of the prisoners stayed behind in
19 Vukovar, or rather, in Velepromet. At that time the commanders were
20 Vujovic and Vujanovic, and instead of taking people to Serbia, those
21 people were taken to Ovcara and were executed there. We didn't know
22 about that immediately after the event. A lot of time lapsed until the
23 story became public and until we all found out what had happened there.
24 Q. And Vujovic is Miroljub Vujovic; is that right? M-i-r-o-l-j-u-b.
25 A. Right.
1 Q. And was he tried for this crime?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Where was he tried?
4 A. In Belgrade
5 Q. And he received, is this right, a 40-year sentence?
6 A. I believe so or perhaps 20. I'm not sure.
7 Q. And am I correct that Vujovic was known at the time or became
8 known soon after as somebody who -- just give me a moment, please. Did
9 Vujovic have a particular reputation at the time of these events as
10 somebody who was not willing to respect the laws of war and respect
12 A. I personally didn't know Vujovic. I did not know him from
13 before. He was not a member of my party. He was not a party member. I
14 knew very little about him, but I did know the men who preceded him as
15 commanders and that's why I said without knowing them that maybe it
16 wasn't a good thing to have them appointed to those positions. I don't
17 know whether he had the reputation that you described, however, whatever
18 you just said turned out to be the truth after those events.
19 Q. Thank you.
20 MR. JORDASH: Could we have P407 on e-court, please. Not to be
21 broadcast. Thank you. Could we go to page 2.
22 Q. Mr. Bogunovic, I don't know if you recall this from yesterday,
23 but it is or purports to be a state security report from Novi Sad to
24 Jovica Stanisic. Are you following me?
25 A. No. I cannot ...
1 Q. Let's go to page 1 then, please. Let's just make sure we both
2 understand what we are looking at. Do you see the first page, Ministry
3 of the Interior of the Republic of Serbia
4 A. Yes, yes, I can see that.
5 Q. To Jovica Stanisic.
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Chief of the state security department?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. And the subject is a report, one copy of the report on Slavonia
10 Baranja, and Western Srem?
11 A. I can see all that.
12 Q. And we go over the page to page 2, and the first paragraph there,
13 just have a look and remind yourself of this which we looked at
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. The first paragraph describes what appears to be some kind of
17 staged or fake clash between Kojic and Vujovic, the same Vujovic we were
18 speaking about in relation to Ovcara. Yesterday when you were asked
19 about it by my learned friend for the Prosecution - Your Honours page 25
20 of the draft transcript - you described something a little different,
21 which was a genuine argument between Kojic and Vujovic. Do you recall
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. So you agree with me that this report from your experience is
25 inaccurate and that the disagreement between Kojic and Vujovic was, in
1 fact, quite genuine?
2 A. I'm sure it was genuine, yes.
3 Q. And do you know the basis of the disagreement between the two?
4 A. The basis of the disagreement aligned the fact that Vujovic did
5 what he wanted. He did things that he was not authorised to do, that he
6 was not supposed to do. When he was called to task and when he was told
7 that he should not go on doing them, he opposed and he said that he would
8 blow up the police building if need be just to prevent things from being
9 the way they wanted them to be. In other words, the argument was genuine
10 and I'm sure that it was.
11 Q. So is this accurate then: Vujovic was a threat to the work of
12 the police as Ilija Kojic saw it?
13 A. Yes, that is a fact.
14 Q. And not just a threat to the police, but a threat to the security
15 of ordinary civilians in the region?
16 A. Yes, I must say that the TO was joined by people whom we didn't
17 know. There were robberies, murders, and the security situation was
18 rather bad.
19 Q. So returning to the Exhibit P407 and the second paragraph:
20 "The source said Serbia
21 that is, the assistant minister of the Ministry of the Interior of
23 others to turn the Krajina into a 'twilight zone.'"
24 Would you agree with this that Kojic was, in fact, certainly in
25 the context of Vujovic, trying to prevent Vujovic from causing chaos in
1 the region?
2 A. I agree. Not only did Kojic want that, but also people from the
3 government, or rather, the residents of the area did not feel safe. They
4 feared Vujovic's men and what they were doing and how they behaved.
5 Q. Looking at -- thank you, Mr. Bogunovic. Looking at paragraph 3:
6 "Visic also accused Kojic of obstructing the work of the SUP
7 preventing inspection service, the police and municipal organs from
8 working, and all this was covered up by shady deals involving the export
9 of wood (oak) from the Krajina, oil, and other alleged shady deals."
10 Did you experience Kojic trying to obstruct the work of the SUP
11 as described in this paragraph?
12 A. Kojic cannot obstruct that because Kojic was not the only one
13 working in the police. There were others around him, and it is certain
14 that the police, including Kojic, tried to prevent things that were
15 happening at the time. In addition to the selling of oaks there were the
16 instances of theft from the companies that were closed down at that time
17 and also things were being stolen from private individuals, including
18 tractors and other agricultural equipment. I can't say that he was the
19 one who tried to obstruct things. It was the police that did their job,
20 that tried to uphold the law.
21 Q. Thank you.
22 MR. JORDASH: Can we turn now, please, to P554. Could we go to
23 page 5 of the English version and 5 of the B/C/S.
24 Q. And the paragraph I'm interested in, Mr. Bogunovic, is paragraph
25 24. If you just read that to yourself quickly to remind yourself of it.
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. The sentence I'm particularly interested in or the two sentences
3 are those at the end:
4 "After the fall of Vukovar, I requested reinforce for the police
5 force and in fact 300 police officers arrived from Serbia in Vukovar to
6 control the situation because the JNA had left. I tried to restore some
7 order and legality and control from the authority."
8 Could you explain or elaborate on that, please.
9 A. When the JNA left Vukovar killings started. People were being
10 killed irrespective of their ethnicity or religion. It didn't matter
11 whether they were Serbs, Croats, Hungarians. If they had property, be it
12 a good vehicle or some money, they would be killed. There were
13 robberies, murders of civilians and residents of the area. Things were
14 being transported across the border to Serbia. At one point I asked for
15 reinforcement for the police to come over from Serbia in order to help us
16 restore order and prevent further murders and robberies.
17 Q. Who did you request those reinforcements from?
18 A. We had a meeting. I don't remember when. Goran was with me. We
19 had a meeting. I believe that it was in Belgrade. I'm not sure. No,
20 I'm sure it was in Belgrade
21 those people to help us overcome the situation and restore order.
22 Q. And when the 300 police officers arrived, whose command did they
23 fall under?
24 A. They fell under the command of the men who were in charge of the
25 police in Slavonia
1 when they arrived.
2 Q. Were they of any assistance in overcoming the situation and
3 restoring order?
4 A. Yes, they were. First of all, they established order on the
5 borders. Whenever somebody wanted to transport something across the
6 border, they had to prove the origin of those goods. Also, they
7 established check-points in the villages and in Vukovar and they checked
8 passengers and vehicles and they were of a major assistance in that
10 Q. Were their duties restricted to police officer duties, I mean,
11 traditional police officer duties of detecting and preventing crime?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Thank you. Were you aware of an organisation called the Serbian
14 National Security formed under Goran Hadzic's control?
15 A. I knew of that but that organisation was under the personal
16 control of Goran Hadzic. Whatever they had to say, they said to him and
17 I was not in the loop.
18 Q. Right. This had, from what you observed, nothing to do with any
19 other member of the SBWS government, this was Goran Hadzic's
21 A. You are correct.
22 Q. Was it disbanded by Badza after Badza arrived in the region?
23 A. I don't think so. I think that it continued working, and I think
24 that those men were still under the control of Goran Hadzic.
25 Q. Okay.
1 MR. JORDASH: Could we turn to P553, please. And page 15 of the
2 English and 16 of the B/C/S. Sorry, 17 of the B/C/S.
3 Q. Paragraph 88. Do you have paragraph 88, Mr. Bogunovic?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Paragraph 88 describes Arkan and particular -- a particular crime
6 committed concerning shooting people, men dead in a brickyard. And the
7 statement describes that Arkan committed it, or you were told that he
8 committed this crime in retaliation for the killing of several of his men
9 in Ernestinovo in early October. Do you recall this?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Was it widely known that or did it become widely known that Arkan
12 had committed this crime for personal reasons?
13 A. I already said that I had heard about Arkan who had had a
14 skirmish the day before Ernestinovo with the HVO. He had lost three men.
15 On the following day he returned to Dalj, and he learned that there were
16 some 15 men in the brickyard, they had been brought over from Beli
17 Manastir. He ordered the men to be taken out of the furnaces and shot.
18 Q. Mr. Bogunovic, did you hear about Arkan removing prisoners from
19 the Dalj prison and executing them around this time?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Was this --
22 A. On one occasion.
23 Q. Sorry, go ahead, I interrupted you.
24 A. On one occasion he took a couple of people from the prison in
25 Dalj. They were taken away and they were shot dead.
1 Q. Did you speak to other members of the SBWS government about this
3 A. Not only about that crime. The government discussed the
4 situation. We knew that the situation was not that good. We didn't dare
5 talk about Arkan that much because he was in the area, and we all feared
6 him and his men. So we didn't discuss him much. Not a lot was actually
7 said about that incident as a result of that. When we talked about Arkan
8 and those incidents, we talked in private.
9 Q. And was it privately condemned by you and other members of the
10 SBWS government?
11 A. Yes. We did not like his conduct, we did not like what he did,
12 but we were powerless to oppose him.
13 MR. JORDASH: Could we turn now, please, to paragraph 26 of this
14 statement. Page 6 of the English and 6 of the B/C/S.
15 Q. "I met Jovica Stanisic several times. I had no personal contact
16 with him. He never told me anything about what his role was."
17 Is it right that you did not during these events speak to
18 Mr. Stanisic?
19 A. I don't recall speaking with him. I don't recall any
20 conversations with him. I don't think there were any.
21 Q. And he never told you anything about what his role was, and is it
22 correct that no one else told you what his role was either?
23 A. At some point in time, Goran told me that Jovica was from the
24 state security but nothing other than that. He didn't specify whether he
25 was a chief. He just said that he was from the DB and that was it.
1 Q. And from that you understood what?
2 A. Well, we met other people at the time as well. We wanted to meet
3 anyone who could assist us, provide advice or instructions about what to
4 do. We wanted to meet people who could provide us with what we needed
5 the most at the time, be it financially or in other ways. In any case,
6 that was the reason why we met with people from Serbia.
7 Q. But you knew Stanisic -- let me start that again. Hadzic told
8 you Stanisic was from the DB, but through these events, as you told us
9 yesterday, you had no idea what role the DB played, if any, in the SBWS
10 in 1991 and 1992; is that correct?
11 A. Yes, it is.
12 Q. Looking at this paragraph again, the paragraph says:
13 "If he had to talk to anyone, he spoke to Goran Hadzic. I met
14 him in Backa Palanka and in Novi Sad
15 Goran Hadzic but those were not official meetings with Stanisic, he just
16 happened to be there."
17 Now, how do you know that if Stanisic had to talk to anyone he
18 spoke to Goran Hadzic? Did that come from Hadzic?
19 A. Yes, it did.
20 Q. So Goran Hadzic mentioned to you that, for example, he had gone
21 to Belgrade
23 A. He didn't say that only to me, he shared it the other members of
24 the government as well.
25 Q. But from what you told us at no time did Hadzic inform you what
1 Stanisic had said or what Stanisic had instructed or anything like that?
2 A. He didn't specify any instructions. He only said that he had met
3 with Stanisic and that they had spoken. He would then convey specific
4 instructions about how to go about solving our problems the way that
5 would be favourable for us.
6 Q. But wasn't Hadzic saying that those instructions were coming from
8 A. Well, yes, for the most part he would say he had been to see
9 Milosevic and that he had arranged with him what needs to be done and
10 what would be the best course to take for us. It happened frequently
11 that he said he had seen Milosevic and received instructions from him.
12 MR. JORDASH: Could I just take instructions, Your Honour.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Please do so.
14 [Defence counsel and Accused Stanisic confer]
15 MR. JORDASH: Thank you.
16 Q. Sorry for the delay, Mr. Bogunovic. Just to pick up where we
17 left off, is it right -- well, let me ask you it in a more open way. Can
18 you recall any instruction whatsoever from either Stanisic or anyone from
19 the Serbian DB in relation to your work within the SBWS?
20 A. I cannot recall any instructions from Stanisic since I didn't
21 know who the man was. I was introduced to him by Badza with whom I had
22 more frequent contacts, but before meeting him in Backa Palanka and Novi
23 Sad, I had not met him before.
24 Q. Just so that you understand our position, Mr. Bogunovic,
25 Mr. Stanisic has no recollection of meeting you in Backa Palanka. Are
1 you sure that your recollection is correct?
2 A. I recall having met him at Ljubo Novakovic's place in Backa
3 Palanka. I don't know how long the meeting lasted, but I do recall that
4 particular encounter. I remember him being there.
5 Q. Okay. But in any event, whoever's recollection is correct, from
6 what you recall, Stanisic didn't say anything but simply sat and took
8 A. Yes. I don't remember him saying anything. There were several
9 of us there and the municipal president of Backa Palanka spoke the most,
10 as well as some people from Novi Sad
11 utter a single word.
12 Q. The meeting that you recall was focused on and concerned with the
13 plight of refugees in the Backa Palanka region; is that correct?
14 A. Yes, it is.
15 Q. It's correct, isn't it, that you never saw Stanisic in the SBWS
16 region in November of 1991?
17 A. Yes, it is correct.
18 Q. And you never heard that he had attended a meeting in November of
19 1991 involving members of the SBWS government?
20 A. Yes, I don't recall that.
21 Q. And you were never told that Stanisic attended prior to the fall
22 of Vukovar and screamed and shouted at members of the SBWS government
23 berating them for failing to take Vukovar? You never heard about that;
24 am I right?
25 A. No, I didn't hear that.
1 Q. Thank you. I'm almost finished, Mr. Bogunovic. I just wanted to
2 ask you about something else.
3 MR. JORDASH: Please could we go to P554. Page 4 of the English
4 and 5 of the B/C/S.
5 Q. Paragraph 18, Mr. Bogunovic. "My impression is that Hadzic was
6 controlled by the authorities in Belgrade. As well I was appointed as
7 minister of the interior but the decisions regarding my police force were
8 taken also in Belgrade
9 Am I correct that -- no, let me strike that.
10 What do you mean by that? Was this just an impression you gained
11 that Hadzic was influenced by authorities in Belgrade? Is that a more
12 accurate way of putting it?
13 A. It wasn't only my impression. Goran Hadzic, as I've said,
14 frequently went to Belgrade
15 return he would tell us, this is no good, we should go about it
16 differently, and he would say that we were to keep in mind that we would
17 be called to task about what we are doing because he had to go to
19 what I stated in the statement is correct.
20 Q. Right. Would you agree that rather than Hadzic being controlled,
21 he was influenced by authorities in Belgrade?
22 A. Yes, I would agree.
23 Q. Thank you.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Jordash, this question has now been put twice to
25 the witness and the answer is different than the first time he says no,
1 the way in which I said it in my statement is right. And the second time
2 you ask him he comes to a different conclusion. So I'd rather explore
4 Mr. Bogunovic.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Jordash makes a distinction between being
7 influenced and being controlled. Now, the difference apparently is that
8 when Mr. Hadzic came back from Belgrade
9 to Belgrade
10 was suggested to him, or did he give you the impression that he was
11 expected to follow any proposals or suggestions and that he was not
12 expected to do it in any way different from what was suggested or
13 proposed to him?
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I have to say that both was the
15 case. Sometimes he would say plainly, we have to do this, and that he
16 was requested to do so. However, there were other cases when he said it
17 would be wise to do it because it is believed that it will be good for
18 us. So both instances took place. There were orders and the other.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Does that mean, have I understood you well, that you
20 gained the impression that Mr. Hadzic was not always free to act in
21 accordance with his own views if they were different from Belgrade
22 that sometimes he was not free to choose his own options but had to
23 follow what was the preference of Belgrade?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think he had to do what was
25 expected of him and what he was ordered to do in Belgrade.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Did it depend on the subject whether you gained the
2 impression that he could follow his own views or whether he was expected
3 to do what was proposed or suggested to him? Did it make any difference
4 on what kind of subjects they had been talking about?
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It was my impression that the issue
6 in question was important. It depended on what needed to be done.
7 JUDGE ORIE: And could you give us examples of issues where you
8 thought that he was free to take a different route as suggested by
10 free to choose his own preferred route?
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I can tell you this: There
12 were cases when Goran returned from Belgrade and said that what we had
13 done thus far and the way we followed can no longer be, and that things
14 needed to change. We were expected to follow what we had been told. To
15 us it was a sign that we had to accept it, but there were also situations
16 in which he said that things were proposed to him but that we would
17 continue along our designated line. Sometimes we accepted that and
18 frequently we had no other choice. We were dependent on Belgrade's and
20 reject anything. My removal from the ministerial position was on the
21 proposal of Radovan Stojicic, Badza. At first my colleagues refused to
22 have me removed but at the next government session, Goran called me aside
23 and he said, it's better that you left. We need to do this because it is
24 requested of us.
25 JUDGE ORIE: From whom -- by whom?
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It was requested or the way Badza
2 said was that there was an order for him to ask for my removal. It came
3 from Belgrade
4 I needed to be removed. I don't know whether he went to see Milosevic or
5 someone else, but that was it.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Jordash.
7 MR. JORDASH: Could we have, please, P2669. 65 ter, sorry.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I wasn't aware that we were already in that
9 number as far as P exhibits are concerned.
10 MR. JORDASH: No, sorry.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
12 MR. JORDASH: Page 1, thank you.
13 Q. Mr. Bogunovic, would you just have a look at this which appears
14 to be minutes from a session of the government of SBWS held on the 28th
15 of November, 1991, in Erdut. I'd like you to, if you would, just take a
16 few moments to read it through. Please indicate when you've finished the
17 particular page.
18 A. I'm done with the first page.
19 MR. JORDASH: Go to the second page then, please.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm done with the second page.
21 MR. JORDASH: Go to 3.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm done reading the third page.
23 MR. JORDASH:
24 Q. Let's leave it there. That's probably enough for my purposes.
25 Do you recall this session?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Was this type of decision-making as reflected in these minutes
3 typical of a government meeting of that time?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. If we go back to page 1, the Ilija Kojic is missing from this
6 session. Do you recall that?
7 A. That's true, he wasn't there.
8 Q. And was there a reason for that, do you know?
9 A. I believe that he was wounded and that he was hopitalised in
11 Q. Thank you. And on the agenda 2 was -- is report and crime in the
12 Serbian district and proposed measures to counter it. Is it correct that
13 the government, the SBWS were making the principal decisions about how to
14 deal with crime in the SBWS region?
15 A. Yes.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Jordash, could I ask you to clarify the question
17 about type of decision-making. I've got no idea, apparently the witness
18 has, but I've got no idea what type, is it that you follow an agenda, is
19 it that you give a brief explanation of the decision-making in the
20 minutes, but what is the type of decision-making you are referring to?
21 MR. JORDASH: Yes, I was coming to that, Your Honour.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but the witness has already said yes. I have
23 no idea how to understand --
24 MR. JORDASH: I was hoping to elaborate on that with --
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but you think the witness would have
1 understood -- we could ask the witness.
2 Mr. Bogunovic, Mr. Jordash asked you whether this was, this type
3 of decision-making, was that typical of a government meeting. Could you
4 tell us how you understood that question? What type of decision-making
5 Mr. Jordash, as you understood him, was referring to.
6 THE INTERPRETER: Could Mr. Jordash please switch off his mike
7 when he is not using it.
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I had in mind the decisions based
9 on the information that was presented at that meeting. The information
10 was provided by people who lived in the area and who either came to me or
11 to Hadzic to convey that information to us. We in our turn presented
12 that information at government sessions. It was already close to the end
13 of the war and the individuals who were there and who committed thefts or
14 any other criminal acts, their doings were put on the agenda, we
15 discussed that point on the agenda, and we made decisions based on our
17 JUDGE ORIE: Is that what you had in your mind, Mr. Jordash?
18 MR. JORDASH: It is, Your Honour.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, whether that's the type of decision-making is
20 still unclear to me but, okay, at least we now understand what was on
21 your mind. If you want to further explore the matter, please feel free
22 to do so.
23 MR. JORDASH: Thank you. Can we go to page 2, please.
24 Q. And item 2 there, please have a look at that:
25 "In addition to the written report, he sent Milorad Trosic,
1 district public Prosecutor, emphasised that after the liberation of
2 Borovo, Naselje, and Vukovar, problems had become even more pressing and
3 that the situation was deteriorating. There is a high incidence of
4 speculation, tax evasions and other crimes which is having a serious
6 And then item 2 reports that these subjects were discussed
7 amongst various people including yourself and Radovan Stojicic. Do you
8 recall this?
9 A. Yes, I do.
10 Q. So is this correct what you were saying a moment ago is that
11 information concerning crimes in villages and towns would be given to the
12 government in written reports; is that correct so far?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. The government including Stojicic and yourself would then discuss
15 these issues and then decisions would be made on how to deal with the
16 situation of crimes on the ground.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Weber.
18 MR. WEBER: Objection just in the context of this report. It
19 very clearly states with respect to this specific item in the last line
20 of item 2 regarding the decisions. I believe we are talking about
21 something general versus specific document. If the questions could
22 accurately reflect what the specific document from the witness states.
23 MR. JORDASH: Well, I'm extrapolating from the document and
24 asking the witness to discuss generally how decisions were made. I'm not
25 sure what Mr. Weber is suggesting I should do other than stick to the
1 document, which I'm not prepared to do.
2 MR. WEBER: Just for the record, the document last line, item 2
3 says, "no particular decisions were adopted."
4 JUDGE ORIE: That's a bit of a problem is, Mr. Jordash, that's of
5 course is puzzling me, I see this document now for the first time that of
6 course some of the matters apparently discussed are not decided at all,
7 whereas others are decided in that someone will form an opinion about it.
8 So to extrapolate from this document seems not to be easy because it
9 covers quite different subjects. The level of decision-making is quite
10 different as well. So if you want to extrapolate from this document, if
11 you want to be clear, it should be fully transparent what you are
12 extrapolating and clearly then put that to the witness.
13 MR. JORDASH: Well, Your Honour, this is what I've done. I've
14 said, so is this correct that what you were saying a moment ago is that
15 information including crimes in villages and towns would be given to the
16 government in written reports. The witness agreed. The government
17 including Stojicic and yourself would then discuss these issues, and then
18 my learned friend jumped up. So I was looking at the --
19 JUDGE ORIE: Well, we are talking about decision-making, and I
20 think Mr. Weber is right that sometimes and say no decisions were made.
21 So to extrapolate a decision-making process where -- or if you would
22 include that these matters were sometimes or often not decided at all, if
23 I see item 2, no particular decisions were adopted with regard to the
24 report. So that means that is the absence of decision-making.
25 MR. JORDASH: But I am a not suggesting that decisions were
1 always made. I'm saying, is this how decisions were made when they were
2 made. I'm not suggesting -- of course decisions were not always made,
3 but of course there has to be a process by which decisions were made.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Item 3, conclusion, the Ministry of Justice and
5 Administration shall give its opinion regarding this. What decisions
6 then are you actually referring to as they appear in this document, say
7 look at this, look at that, look at that, and then you can extrapolate
8 from them. No problem with that. Could you point at the decisions you
9 had in your mind. Or is it about the invalids which later appear in the
10 minutes, I don't think that you are focussing on them very much.
11 MR. JORDASH: I don't have a particular decision in mind. I'm
12 trying to --
13 JUDGE ORIE: No, but if you want to extrapolate something, then
14 at least you have -- there must be a clear basis from where you start
15 extrapolating. Now, if that is about decision-making, that means that we
16 need a couple of decisions in order to start extrapolating or are you, or
17 do you just want to point at the way in which matters were discussed,
18 which is not decision-making but is the way of how the meeting was held.
19 Mr. Weber is right that it should be more transparent in what you are
20 actually using as your basis for, as you said, the extrapolation.
21 MR. JORDASH: Well, the basis I was using -- in item 2
22 information is provided, a discussion is had. In this particular
23 instance it appears a decision was not made. My questions were designed
24 to ask the witness, is this the process by which decisions were made. In
25 this instance no decision was made but that doesn't in any way --
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, don't you think that that could confuse to say
2 is that the usual way of making decisions then you give an example of
3 where no decisions were made. That might -- is this to say that usually
4 if decisions were needed that no decisions were made. That's also a way
5 of extrapolating. Is that what you -- the extrapolation is -- are you
6 putting to the witness that usually where decisions or where matters were
7 reported that no decisions were made? Is that what you are asking him?
8 MR. JORDASH: No, I was asking him, is this, as reflected in item
9 2, the way that the government went from information to the point of
10 decisions or non-decisions. Either way. That's the point. The point is
11 made, and it's the same point in my submission.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Well --
13 MR. JORDASH: If Your Honours --
14 JUDGE ORIE: You could argue on that. Let's ask then the
16 Mr. Bogunovic, was it usual that once reports were discussed that
17 no decisions were made?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There were some points on the
19 agenda whereby information was heard but no decisions were made.
20 Sometimes it did happen, a proposal was put forth for the decision to be
21 made by the Assembly, which was authorised to make them. Sometimes the
22 government made decisions on the information we were provided. This is
23 just information. There was information that was discussed, and there
24 was information that was acted upon by way of were making a decision.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So I do understand that if any reports were
1 put on the table, that this resulted in either deciding on the matter or
2 not deciding on the matter, is that?
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There could have been a discussion
4 without any decision or alternatively decisions were made at the end of
5 such discussions.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And sometimes though the matter was not
7 discussed at all, is that also understood well?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There was always a discussion.
9 However, sometimes information was discussed without any decision. There
10 are also points on the agenda which called for decisions, and we did make
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Sometimes even without discussion, is that
13 well understood?
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Jordash, if you want to explore the matter
16 further, but of course, it's not clear to me what way -- what do we learn
17 from this, the Chamber of course is eager to understand fully what you
18 want to demonstrate by it.
19 MR. JORDASH: I'll try to bring the point some focus. If I --
20 thank you.
21 Q. Mr. Witness, you've just said two things. You've said there was
22 always discussion and then in response to His Honour Judge Orie, you said
23 you agreed with the honourable judge that sometimes decisions were made
24 without discussion. Was there discussion for decisions made at the
25 government sessions or not?
1 A. There were such things on the agenda where only proposal was
2 given for adoption, and there was no need for a discussion, things were
3 adopted and it all depended on the importance of the matter at hand. In
4 other words, not every decision could be made by the government and
5 likewise, there were some points on the agenda which were proposals for
6 adoption and adoptions were indeed made.
7 Q. Would you agree that there was always discussion about how to
8 deal with crime in the SBWS region, crime against civilians?
9 A. That was the most sensitive issues that we discussed. We had to
10 discuss it, of course. Usually such discussions involved several
11 ministers, the prime minister. I would say that over half the number of
12 ministers participated in the discussion because it was the most
13 sensitive issue, and it was the matter of life and death for the citizens
14 who resided in the area.
15 Q. Right. And these discussions led to decisions by the SBWS
16 government as to how to protect the local civilians, is this correct?
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Weber.
18 MR. WEBER: I believe that -- can we just have it clear, I see
19 the witness is still looking at the document in front of him that says no
20 decisions were adopted. If we could have some distinction between, are
21 we talking about Assembly minutes and making of a decision?
22 JUDGE ORIE: That's, of course, the -- outside the whole of the
23 problem. The matter, the fact that no decision was reflected here or
24 even that no decision was made does not finally mean that never a
25 decision was made on the matter and that again, Mr. Jordash, makes it so
1 important to know exactly what is our starting point for extrapolating.
2 If you say is it what we find here does it reflect what happened at those
3 meetings, if it does, then at least on some points no decisions were
4 made. At least not after the matter had been discussed on the basis of
5 those reports. Perhaps elsewhere, other time, other place, I do not
6 know. But let's try to be as factual as possible and not to get
8 MR. JORDASH: Your Honours, I'm having real difficulty
9 understanding how to approach the issue. I'm simply trying to --
10 JUDGE ORIE: Perhaps let's be very practical. I may have a
11 solution for you, Mr. Jordash, which is the following: We first take a
12 break and since I cannot continue to hear this case after the break and
13 since my colleagues indicated to me that they thought it would be in the
14 interest of justice to continue, you may have less problems after the
16 MR. JORDASH: Well, Mr. Weber still would be here.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Well, finally, Mr. Jordash, I'm your problem,
18 not Mr. Weber. We will take a break first, perhaps you'll give it some
19 time to think over, and I might briefly discuss with my colleagues who
20 will take over after the break what was my problem and we'll then see
21 whether they have a similar problem, yes or no.
22 MR. JORDASH: Your Honour, thank you.
23 JUDGE ORIE: We'll have a break, and we resume at five minutes
24 past 11.00.
25 --- Recess taken at 10.32 a.m.
1 --- On resuming at 11.06 a.m.
2 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] Let us resume the session in
3 French and in the absence of Judge Orie pursuant to Rule 15 bis of the
4 Rules of Procedure. Before we start, there are two aspects we need to
5 deal with. First of all, I would like to remind the Defence that they
6 have another 20 minutes for both Defence counsels as yesterday the court
7 had decided to grant an overall amount of time of three hours for the
8 Defence cross-examination. You've already used up 2 hours and 40
9 minutes. This may raise a problem unless Mr. Petrovic doesn't have any
11 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, it is a problem. It
12 is possible that we misunderstood Your Honours' decision. However, I
13 believe there is a basis to perhaps revisit that decision because I
14 believe my learned friend has put relevant questions only, and I believe
15 my questions will be too. I would kindly ask that you revisit your
16 decision to explore further the option offered by Judge Orie yesterday.
17 He said that if the questions posed are deemed relevant, that the Chamber
18 would reconsider the time-limit. I would kindly ask you to consider
19 that, and at this moment I can tell you that I will need at least an hour
20 and a quarter. I will try to cut it short as much as possible and to
21 focus on the most important things, but I would kindly ask that you
22 revisit your decision particularly in view of the fact that the position
23 yesterday was not perfectly clear in the sense of how much time we might
25 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] Mr. Jordash, how long will you
2 MR. JORDASH: Finish in five minutes, Your Honours. May I also
3 endorse Mr. Petrovic's comments and just also highlight that some time
4 was taken up by His Honour Judge Orie's questions and also the lengthy
5 discussion concerning the objection, so I would also throw that into the
6 general balance.
7 [Trial Chamber confers]
8 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] Very well. Mr. Jordash, you will
9 need another three minutes, and Mr. Petrovic, the Court grants you one
11 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
12 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] Mr. Jordash, the floor is yours.
13 As regards the controversy before the break, since this is not really
14 clear to the Court, you are entitled to ask your questions.
15 MR. JORDASH: Thank you, Your Honours.
16 Q. Mr. Bogunovic, I want to deal with this very quickly. Would you
17 agree that the decisions concerning the setting up of police forces and
18 protecting civilians were exclusively made by the government of the SBWS
19 as opposed to having anything do with Milosevic?
20 A. Yes, I agree that the government made such decisions and that we
21 consulted amongst ourselves about the best way to do that. Such
22 decisions were made at the sessions of the government.
23 Q. Based on local information collected at the behest of the SBWS
24 government; is that correct?
25 A. Yes, it is.
1 Q. Thank you.
2 MR. JORDASH: May I tender P -- sorry, may I tender Rule 65 ter
3 2669, Your Honours.
4 MR. WEBER: No objections.
5 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] This document is admitted into
6 evidence. Could you give it a reference number, Mr. Registrar.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honour, that will be Exhibit D76.
8 MR. JORDASH: Thank you. Quickly ... Your Honours, this was --
9 the exhibit we've just tendered is an exhibit was P568 marked for
10 identification. I'm getting a nod from the Prosecution too.
11 MR. WEBER: Apologise, we tendered a group of 12 documents
12 yesterday, this was one of the 12 documents, so I had forgotten also that
13 it received an MFI
14 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] Why was that -- why was it MFI'd?
15 Why could it not be admitted completely? I don't quite remember.
16 MR. WEBER: I believe that there was some guidance on wanting
17 additional information in the form of a bar table as to the relevance of
18 each of the documents in their sections that was provided by the Chamber
19 to the Prosecution yesterday.
20 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] So I suppose it could be admitted
21 without any conditions now. So the document is admitted into evidence
23 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
24 MR. JORDASH:
25 Q. Mr. Bogunovic, I've got to be extremely quick now, so I want to
1 ask you about a comment you made in your second statement P554 where you
2 stated that Stanisic was the link between Milosevic and Arkan and Badza.
3 Do you recall making that comment?
4 A. I remember a conversation between Hadzic and me when we discussed
5 Badza and his conduct as well as his work. Goran told me then that the
6 link between Badza and Milosevic was Jovica Stanisic, those were his
7 words, and I can't say anything more than that. That's what he told me.
8 Q. So you are not suggesting there was a link between Stanisic and
9 Arkan? You are not suggesting that; is that correct?
10 MR. WEBER: Objection. That was not the question that was
11 originally posed. If counsel would like to put the statement to him and
12 have the witness comment.
13 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] It would be easier to provide the
14 witness with the exact reference where this comment is made.
15 MR. JORDASH: P554 on the screen, please. At page 4 of the
16 English and page 4 of the -- page 5 of the B/C/S.
17 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, apologies to the
18 Chamber and my learned friend, but we no longer have e-court on the
19 screen. I don't know whether this is only our problem or does everyone
20 in the courtroom have the same problem?
21 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
22 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] There seem to be problems with
23 e-court and it's not possible to display the documents for the moment.
24 Now, we are talking about the witness statement of February the 8th,
25 2007, and it's paragraph 18 in English, if I'm not mistaken.
1 MR. JORDASH: Yes.
2 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] For the sake of Mr. Petrovic for
3 him to be able to follow the deliberations and for the witness.
4 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
5 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] And before you proceed, D76 has
6 become P568. Exhibit P568.
7 You may ask your question, Mr. Jordash.
8 MR. JORDASH: Thank you.
9 Q. Mr. Bogunovic, the statement says at paragraph 18:
10 "Slobodan Milosevic controlled Hadzic through Arkan and Badza,
11 and Stanisic was the link between Milosevic and Arkan and Badza."
12 Is it the case that you base that comment on something that
13 Hadzic once told you?
14 A. Yes. I based that on Hadzic's words.
15 Q. But throughout 1991 and 1992, you personally saw nothing which
16 corroborated that assertion by Hadzic; is that correct?
17 A. I had no occasion to see that myself. I can't say anything other
18 than what he had conveyed to me, Hadzic.
19 Q. And from what you said a moment ago, what Hadzic in fact said to
20 you was that Stanisic was the link between Milosevic and Badza; is that
22 A. This is what Hadzic told me, and I shared it with you, yes,
23 that's correct.
24 Q. And then you assumed -- you made the assumption that that
25 relationship included Arkan; is that fair?
1 A. As far as Arkan is concerned, he could frequently be seen with
2 Badza. Based on that fact that they were together frequently, I made the
4 MR. JORDASH: Thank you, Mr. Bogunovic. I've got nothing
5 further. Thank you, Your Honours.
6 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] Thank you, I was going to stop
8 Mr. Petrovic, you have the floor.
9 Mr. Bogunovic, you will now be cross-examined by Mr. Petrovic as
10 the counsel for Mr. Simatovic.
11 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
12 Cross-examination by Mr. Petrovic:
13 Q. Good morning, Mr. Bogunovic.
14 A. Good morning.
15 Q. In your statement you say that at some point in time you were
16 assigned an office in Sid. Who provided you with that office and when,
17 if you recall?
18 A. I got an office towards the end of August. The municipality of
19 Sid secured the premises so that I could locate my headquarters there.
20 Q. In your statement when discussing Sid, you also mentioned a
21 person by the name of Petkovic. As far as I understand, he was a colonel
22 with the JNA. Can you tell us who Colonel Petkovic is and what was his
24 A. Ljubisa Petkovic was a JNA colonel. He had a security function
25 with the army.
1 Q. In what unit? What establishment?
2 A. I can't say that off the cuff. I really don't know. I don't
3 think I knew even then, but I did meet with him for a number of
4 consultations or meetings, and he provided a link between Sid and the
5 surrounding villages such as Mirkovci and Negoslavci.
6 Q. In your statement of 2003 which is P553 in paragraph 17,
7 concerning Sid, it says: "As for Sid, Colonel Petkovic occasionally
8 invited me to discuss things that were to be done." Can you tell me what
9 your relationship between you and Petkovic looked like? You say that he
10 invited you to discuss things. Did he also tell you how to go about
11 things, can you explain your relationship with him?
12 A. Well, he suggested some things to me and at times he also issued
13 orders to me. There were some things we jointly discussed in order to
14 try to find the best possible means to achieve our goal.
15 Q. Let's discuss the category of issues whereupon he issued you with
16 orders. Can you tell me what kind of things did Colonel Petkovic order
17 you to do?
18 A. Well, I'll use an example. He ordered me to go to the village of
19 Lovas to tell the White Eagles to leave it within the next 24 hours. If
20 they refused, I was to tell them that he would be forced to arrest them
21 and disarm them.
22 Q. Mr. Bogunovic, did you comply with that order of his?
23 A. I did. I got in touch with Mr. Jovic who was their commander at
24 the time and indeed they withdrew from Lovas the next day.
25 Q. Thank you, Mr. Bogunovic.
1 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Could we please have 65 ter number
2 3910. I can't see it in e-court, but I hope it can be shown to the
3 witness. Your Honour, I don't know whether you will be able to follow
4 unless your e-court is working. Unfortunately I don't have a hard copy.
5 65 ter 3910.
6 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
7 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] The problem being, Mr. Petrovic,
8 is that we can -- we do see the document on our screens, but the public
9 cannot see the documents on e-court, which is a problem in a way. Would
10 you be able to wait a couple of minutes because the technicians will be
11 here in a couple of minutes. Would you be able to perhaps put questions
12 which do not involve the documents, which do not involve e-court
14 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I'm concerned with
15 you being able to see the document. As far as I'm concerned, this is a
16 public document, and we can continue. I only want you to be able to see
17 it and perhaps we can broadcast it later for the public. If you can see
18 it, I believe it would be wise to simply continue.
19 [Trial Chamber confers]
20 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] Mr. Weber, what do you think about
21 this since the public will not be able to see the document? What is your
22 opinion on this matter?
23 MR. WEBER: If I could just check one thing very quickly. Your
24 Honour, I think for the time being I see that this was part of our first
25 bar table motion filed on the 23rd November, 2009, and there may be some
1 outstanding protective measures with respect to this document, so I think
2 it might be best to not broadcast it at this time anyway and proceed.
3 Sorry, it took me a second to check that.
4 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] Thank you very much. This does
5 resolve the problem. In fact, you may continue then, we do have access
6 to the document ourselves.
7 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
8 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: The English booth cannot
9 see the document in e-court.
10 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation]
11 Q. Mr. Bogunovic, have a look at the document. It comes from the
12 first military district issued by Lieutenant-General Zivo Toponovic
13 [phoen]. Have you been able to see it, to view it?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Paragraph 1, please. It says that units are ordered to establish
16 full control in the area of responsibility of those units. Particular
17 attention needs to be paid to --
18 THE INTERPRETER: Could Mr. Petrovic kindly slow down when
20 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] Mr. Petrovic, would you please
21 slow down. The interpreters do not have access to the document, so you
22 would have to slow down slightly and read more slowly.
23 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Certainly, Your Honour. I'm
24 rushing because of time constraints, but this actually does not work in
25 my favour, I fully understand that.
1 Q. I'll read it out again. Establish full control within the AORs
2 of the units. Particular attention needs to be paid to the functioning
3 of the military authorities in all settlements and any influence on the
4 part of local authorities should be disallowed pending full civilian
5 control of the area.
6 Mr. Bogunovic, the contents of this order, do they reflect your
7 knowledge with regard to the position of army commands vis-a-vis civilian
8 authorities during the relevant period of time?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. So military authorities dominated in full in all segments
11 important for the carrying out of operations and security in the
12 territory; correct?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Look at paragraph 2, please. Does it say precisely what Colonel
15 Petkovic ordered you to do?
16 A. It does.
17 Q. Thank you. And now look at paragraph 5 in the same document and
18 tell me, do you know if this part of this order has ever been executed,
19 and it refers to the establishment of the military district and military
20 departments in the villages and towns in Western Srem and Eastern
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Thank you, Mr. Bogunovic.
24 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Could this document please be
25 admitted either as a Prosecution document or as a Defence document.
1 MR. WEBER: No objections. I believe it's been tendered by the
3 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] Very well. So we have a Defence
4 document, and this document will be admitted into evidence. Would you
5 please give it a number.
6 THE REGISTRAR: Thank you, Your Honour. That will be Exhibit D76
7 under seal.
8 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation]
9 Q. Mr. Bogunovic, could you briefly tell us, if you know, of course,
10 what is the area of responsibility of the military unit? What does that
11 term imply?
12 A. An area of responsibility is an area where troops are deployed,
13 or rather, an area where troops are present and for which troops are
14 responsible. Anything that happens in such an area has to be reported to
15 the army. The army has to be aware of what is going on.
16 Q. Mr. Bogunovic, at the relevant time in October 1991, were there
17 any indicia that a paramilitary unit committed crime in the territory of
18 the village of Lovas
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Mr. Bogunovic, is it correct that based on such information, the
21 Yugoslav People's Army carried out an investigation about what had
22 happened in the area?
23 A. Yes. The JNA carried out an investigation. That's why I was
24 issued an order to make all the paramilitary formations leave Lovas
25 within the next 24 hours.
1 Q. Thank you, Mr. Bogunovic. In other words, either you or anybody
2 else were not involved in an investigation. An investigation was carried
3 out but the military investigative organ; is that correct?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Just briefly tell me, please, if you know, do you know in the
6 autumn of 1991, was there still the regional SUP of the autonomous
7 province of Vojvodina in existence, or in other words, was the
8 organisational schematic or the organisation of the SUP kept as it was in
9 the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia previously?
10 A. Yes, I think so.
11 Q. That means that the provincial SUP of Vojvodina was autonomous
12 with regard to the organs of the interior or rather with the MUP of the
13 Republic of Serbia
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Thank you. I have a few more questions with this regard or with
16 regard to the Yugoslav People's Army. When were the elements of the
17 Zemin Corps transferred to Erdut, Dalj, and the area around there?
18 A. I can't tell you exactly. As far as I can remember I believe
19 that that was in late July or early August.
20 Q. Do you know which unit of the JNA were at the time which was the
21 summer or autumn 1991 deployed in the territory of Baranja
22 A. No.
23 Q. Mr. Bogunovic, when was the Guard's Brigade deployed in the
24 southern part of the region, if you know?
25 A. As far as I can remember, that happened around the 20th of
1 September, 1991.
2 Q. Mr. Bogunovic, do you know what the OG South was?
3 A. No.
4 Q. Could you tell us, please, Mr. Bogunovic, when was the circle
5 closed around the city of Vukovar
6 surrounded from the north and from the south? When did that happen?
7 A. As far as I can remember, that happened sometime in the month of
9 Q. Thank you. We've been referring to the Guards Brigade here.
10 Could you -- and accompanying units. Could you please tell us something
11 about the strength of those units, what equipment they had, what kind of
12 a military formation it was? Very briefly if you know something or if
13 you saw something?
14 A. As far as that is concerned, I can't tell you much. I was not
15 there when they were deployed, I could not see how big the unit was and
16 what equipment they had at their disposal.
17 Q. Thank you very much, Mr. Bogunovic. You were in the southern
18 part of the area. You hail from Negoslavci, your office was in Sid which
19 means that you moved south of the city of Vukovar in the relevant period?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Is it true that the Yugoslav People's Army on the 7th of May,
22 1991 sent its tank units and took both parts of the 25th of May bridge
23 between Backa Palanka and Ilok?
24 A. As far as I remember that's correct.
25 Q. Could you please tell us according to the best of your
1 recollection, is it correct that the Yugoslav People's Army had their
2 first flights in Croatia
4 A. I can't remember that.
5 Q. Mr. Bogunovic, is it true that towards the end of July 1991, 50
6 tanks were deployed in the vicinity of Ilok together with some other
7 armoured vehicles of the Yugoslav People's Army and that they were
8 getting closer to Ilok at the beginning of May 1991?
9 A. I know that there were heavy artillery deployed around Ilok
10 including tanks, but I don't know their numbers. I didn't see how many
11 there were, but I did see some pieces of heavy artillery deployed around
13 Q. Thank you. Do you know that on the 26th of September, 1991, the
14 Yugoslav People's Army issued an ultimatum to armed formations in the
15 village of Lovas
16 According to that ultimatum they were supposed to surrender their
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Thank you. Do you know that the Yugoslav People's Army at the
20 beginning of October 1991 issued an ultimatum to the armed formations
21 which were deployed in the town of Ilok
22 according to which they were supposed to surrender and surrender their
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Do you know that at the beginning of October 1991, a commission
1 from the city of Ilok
2 representatives of Novi Sad
3 Palanka and Sid regarding the further destiny of the city of Ilok
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Do you know that on the 12th of October a decision was taken by
7 the city Assembly of the city of Ilok
8 referendum a decision would be reached as to whether the ultimatum issued
9 by the JNA would be complied with?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Do you know what the results of the referendum were, if you know?
12 A. I know that a decision was taken to let the military know that
13 the citizens of Ilok wished to leave Ilok.
14 Q. Is it true that on the 14th of October, 1991, in the presence of
15 Dragoljub [indiscernible] a JNA general and the representatives of the
16 European commission an agreement was dictated about the surrender of the
17 town of Ilok?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Is it true that after that agreement was reached, several
20 thousand, about 8.000 people, which constituted almost an entire
21 population of Ilok on the 17 of October loaded JNA trucks and set out
22 towards Lipovac and further afield into Croatia?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Is it true that very few people remained living in Ilok after
25 that and I am talking about Croatians, effectively the entire population
1 in October 1991 emigrated and moved into the interior of the Republic of
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Is it true that none of the members of the government on which
5 you were minister did not participate in negotiations about the
6 resettlement of the population of Ilok in October of 1991, those
7 negotiations involved only representatives of the JNA?
8 A. No, we were not there. Only the army. Representatives were
9 there negotiated with the others.
10 Q. Mr. Bogunovic, is it true that, as it says in your statement,
11 that all Croats, Slovaks, and others who remained in Croatia after that
12 mass exodus in October remained in their houses until the peaceful
13 integration of Eastern Slavonia in 1997 or 1998?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Thank you. Mr. Bogunovic, is it correct that after the fall of
16 Ilok, certain representatives of the -- of your government demanded from
17 the JNA to assume some positions in the judiciary in the police but that
18 demand was never met; is that correct?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Could you please tell us who issued that demand and how did the
21 JNA respond to it?
22 A. It was the minister of justice, Vojin Susa, who told them that we
23 already had our own judiciary and the police and that we were in a
24 position to try people in Srem and Baranja. He -- Arkan also attending
25 that meeting and Arkan was of the same opinion. He wanted for all the
1 detained persons to remain in Vukovar and to be put on trial there.
2 Q. Thank you very much, Mr. Bogunovic. In your statement from 2003,
3 which is P554, you say that at the beginning of December 1991, the Red
4 Berets appeared in Ilok. My question to you is this: Is it true that
5 you didn't know anything about who had sent those people and why they had
6 been sent to the town of Ilok
7 A. It is correct. I did not have any information to that effect, or
8 rather, I did not have any encounters with them. I did not have an
9 opportunity to talk to them about the situation in Ilok, the situation
10 that prevailed in Ilok at the time.
11 Q. Mr. Bogunovic, is it true that those men were billeted in a house
12 in the town of Ilok
13 as you know they never moved from there, they never participated in any
14 combat during the relevant time?
15 A. At the time combat operations were over, therefore, they could
16 not be engaged. I stated that they were in a house in Ilok known as the
17 white house and they also had some of their members billeted above Ilok
18 in the vinery there, as you said.
19 Q. Are you saying that combat operations were over at the moment
20 when the Red Berets appeared in the area; right?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Is it true that the Red Berets were not involved in the internal
23 relations of the area as far as you know?
24 A. As far as my work is concerned, as far as the work of my
25 colleagues and the civilian authorities in Ilok is concerned, after the
1 departure of the army, they didn't get involved in what we did, in our
2 decision-making processes, they did not have any contacts with us. They
3 were there, but they did not interfere in our business.
4 Q. Thank you, Mr. Bogunovic. Is it true that you never received any
5 information about people being abused or ill-treated by the Red Berets?
6 This is what you stated in 2007; right?
7 A. I stated that there was no ill treatment or --
8 MR. WEBER: If -- we are going a little quick. If we could get a
9 paragraph reference.
10 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, certainly. P554, paragraph
11 8, where Mr. Bogunovic said, "As far as anything else is concerned, I
12 have never received any complaints from civilians about the ill treatment
13 on the part of the Red Berets."
14 Q. Mr. Bogunovic, is it true that --
15 MR. WEBER: I don't see that in that paragraph. Where is it?
16 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Paragraph 8 where it says -- in
17 the middle of that paragraph, paragraph 8.
18 MR. WEBER: [Microphone not activated] ... I see the section where
19 it says, there was a case when a woman refused to hand over -- she came
20 to Crisis Staff to complain, so I see that there's an indication of a
22 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] I believe that Mr. Petrovic is
23 referring to the sentence which reads as follows: "I never received
24 information about physical abuse as committed by the Red Berets." Is
25 that right?
1 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.
2 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] It's limited. There were never
3 any complaints of physical abuses, but of course, there were some people
4 complaining about other things. Is that right?
5 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.
6 Q. Mr. Bogunovic, you yesterday mentioned three or four cases of
7 other complaints concerning vehicles; right?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Here in your statement it is mentioned that a Croatian lady
10 complained because somebody wanted to take her vehicle. She came to
11 complain. I told her not to give them their vehicle, and she kept the
12 vehicle; right?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. And those are the only examples of complaints about the conduct
15 of those people while they were billeted in the territory of Ilok
16 A. I don't remember. There may have been some other petty things,
17 but there was nothing important.
18 Q. Thank you, Mr. Bogunovic. A reference is also made to those men
19 being armed. Mr. Bogunovic, is it true that at the time which is the end
20 of 1991 and the beginning of 1992, almost everybody in Ilok and the
21 general area of Ilok was armed?
22 A. Yes, there was a lot of weapons. People carried weapons, people
23 had weapons.
24 Q. Thank you, Mr. Bogunovic.
25 Mr. Bogunovic, is it true that you never saw Franko Simatovic,
1 aka Frenki, either in Ilok or in the territory of Eastern Slavonia
2 A. No, I never met him, never in my whole life.
3 Q. Is it true, Mr. Bogunovic, as it is stated in paragraph 7 of your
4 2007 statement that you didn't know whether there was just one commander
5 of the Red Berets or were there several commanders of Red Berets in Ilok
6 at that time?
7 A. I didn't know that, I really knew very little about them.
8 Q. As far as I understand, you had several encounters with members
9 of the Red Berets. Is it correct that on such occasions those people
10 obviously didn't tell you anything about why they were there and the way
11 their unit was structured? They also didn't mention who was in command?
12 A. No, they didn't say any of that. None of us in civilian bodies
13 knew about that.
14 Q. Mr. Bogunovic, is it correct, and it is my understanding of your
15 words so far, that you did not know who this unit belonged to in
16 organisational terms?
17 A. That is correct, I didn't know who they belonged to and who was
18 in charge.
19 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] If I may have a moment, Your
21 Q. Mr. Bogunovic, in your statement which is P554, paragraph 7, that
22 is the 2007 statement, you say that some of the Red Beret in Ilok always
23 mentioned Franko Simatovic as their boss, and I think you also mentioned
24 the word "commander." Is it because you were not aware of the
25 relationship between Frenki and those men?
1 A. Yes, I truly didn't know whether he was their boss or commander.
2 I was in no position to know and I still don't.
3 Q. Have you heard -- strike that.
4 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Could we please have document
5 2D169. It's a 65 ter document. Your Honour, we don't have a translation
6 of this document. By your leave, I would like to ask the witness to have
7 a look at it and to have it MFI
8 this witness to tell us whether he knows anything about that, and then
9 the fate of the document should be decided upon later once we received a
10 translation. I apologise for that, and could we please do as I propose.
11 MR. WEBER: Your Honour, unfortunately we just got notice of this
12 document today. So had we gotten notice about it at the beginning of
13 examination yesterday, of course I would have sat down with the language
14 assistant and we could go by that. I do not know what the document
16 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] Which document are you talking
18 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the heading is JSO,
19 the MUP of Krajina in Ilok, the 20th of June, 1992. It is a report which
20 has to do with traffic control and interviews conducted. It has to do
21 with what the witness testified about yesterday, that is why I wanted to
22 show it to him and ask him whether the contents tally with what he could
23 observe those people doing in the area of Ilok.
24 We have D68 which is also from that set, it is almost identical.
25 And I wanted to show it to the witness as well to ask him whether it
1 reflects what he was able to observe. That's all. Perhaps to simplify
2 matters, I can show only D68 to the witness and then we would have dealt
3 with the problem. So let's skip the document for which we don't have a
4 translation and we can move on directly to D68.
5 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] All right. Let's do that.
6 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
7 Q. Mr. Bogunovic, I don't know if you have D68 before you.
8 A. I still don't.
9 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: We still do not have
10 access to e-court.
11 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] [No interpretation]
12 THE INTERPRETER: We can't hear Mr. Petrovic.
13 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] Mr. Petrovic, you have not been
14 translated because the interpreters couldn't hear you.
15 THE INTERPRETER: His microphone is off.
16 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] Mr. Petrovic, your mike is off.
17 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Apologies. I said that it may
18 have been marked as 2D77 and forwarded as such to the Registrar for
19 witness's perusal. Perhaps she can use that designation. It is D68
20 otherwise. It is a document of the 16th of June, 1992. Please show it
21 to the witness.
22 Q. Mr. Bogunovic, do you have it?
23 A. I do.
24 Q. Mr. Bogunovic, does what the report state reflect what you could
25 observe those people doing, the people you referred to as the Red Berets?
1 A. Yes, it does.
2 Q. Thank you.
3 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Could we please have a look at
4 another document from that set. It is 2D79. May it be shown to the
5 witness, please.
6 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] Mr. Petrovic, before the document
7 is taken away, where in that document can you see a reference to the Red
9 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, one cannot see the
10 words "Red Berets" but it does say the unit for special purposes of the
11 Krajina MUP. In our view, these are the persons in question. That is
12 why I asked the witness that question. By your leave, I'd like to
14 May 2D79
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I have it.
16 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] There seems to be a problem. We
17 need to check whether the document is in the system. Please bear with
18 us, Mr. Bogunovic.
19 Your Honours, do you have the document before you? It seems our
20 screens are out again. Here it is. Thank you, Your Honour.
21 Q. Mr. Bogunovic, you saw the document. The same question applies,
22 the contents, the traffic control activities as described in the
23 document. Is this what you could observe members of the Red Berets doing
24 in Ilok in 1992?
25 A. Yes.
1 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I seek to tender
2 this Defence document.
3 MR. WEBER: No objections. We would ask since there seems to be
4 a collection of documents here, if counsel could provide us with
5 information as to the origin, where they are from. It would be useful
6 just in considering these documents is all.
7 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] Mr. Petrovic, how about the origin
8 of those documents?
9 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the source is a
10 potential Defence witness who provided it to us. I am afraid I can't be
11 any more specific than that at this moment. In any case, that person was
12 a part of the whole process and is most likely to appear here as a
13 Defence witness.
14 MR. WEBER: I appreciate the reason that Mr. Petrovic doesn't say
15 a name on the record. If he could just let us know after the proceedings
17 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] So the document is admitted into
18 evidence. Can it be given, Mr. Registrar, an be exhibit number.
19 THE REGISTRAR: Thank you, Your Honours. That will be Exhibit
21 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
22 Q. Mr. Bogunovic, I have a few questions left for you. I believe
23 you were in Ilok with the justice minister, Mr. Vojin Susa; correct?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Do you recall an event in early 1993 when a church was blocked
1 during a search for certain persons who had allegedly taken cover in that
3 A. I don't recall that.
4 Q. Very well then. Thank you.
5 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Could we please have an excerpt
6 from 2D166.1 shown to the witness. I would kindly ask the witness to
7 view it. The booths have received a transcript. Could we please have it
8 played now.
9 Q. Mr. Bogunovic, I hope we can show you this footage and then I
10 will ask you for your comment.
11 A. Very well.
12 [Video-clip played]
13 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] Is it normal that there's no
15 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I don't think it
16 should be this way. We expected to have an audio. Now we have it.
17 Could we replay it from the start.
18 [Video-clip played]
19 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] From the start, please.
20 [Video-clip played]
21 THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover] "Anchor: How did the
22 representatives of the Croatian Armed Forces, whose crimes you have just
23 seen, present themselves on the eve of their surrender to the
24 representatives of the JNA?
25 Reporter: They were sacrificed and deceived by their leadership,
1 which abandoned them in the lairs of Borovo Naselje and Vukovar and
2 ordered them to stay there and die. With no way out, they are emerging
3 from their mousetraps in search of salvation. And all this from the same
4 army, the JNA, which, until the day before, they slammed as being a
5 Chetnik-Bolshevik occupier and for which they lay in wait perfidiously
6 with snipers. Several commanders, lower ranking as they now claim, were
7 received by the commander of the Novi Sad Corps, Major-General Andrija
9 General: We are doing our job and you're doing yours. I feel
10 for the victims. If you are guilty, you will answer for it; if you are
11 not guilty - this is known."
12 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Please stop.
13 Q. Mr. Bogunovic, were you able to view and hear what was shown?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Mr. Bogunovic, could you recognise General Biorcevic on the
17 A. I could.
18 Q. Could you recognise Zeljko Raznjatovic, Arkan, immediately next
19 to him?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Here we can see General Biorcevic and Arkan with Croatian
22 prisoners. Do you recognise any of the prisoners?
23 A. No.
24 Q. Mr. Bogunovic, this was filmed immediately after the liberation
25 of Vukovar?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. My question is this: At the time after the liberation of Vukovar
3 around the 20 of November 1991, did you know that a few weeks before
4 Arkan had killed certain people in Dalj, and you've testified about that?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Do you think that General Biorcevic could have known that?
7 A. Yes, he could have, but I don't know whether he knew it or not.
8 Q. Mr. Bogunovic, did you know about very close co-operation between
9 Biorcevic and Arkan in the territory of Eastern Slavonia and Western
11 A. No, I didn't.
12 Q. If I put it to you that there was indeed very close co-operation
13 between the representatives of the JNA and especially General Biorcevic
14 and Arkan, would that fact explain why neither you nor any other member
15 of the government could do anything against Zeljko Raznjatovic, Arkan, at
16 the time?
17 A. Yes, it would.
18 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, could this portion
19 of the clip be admitted into evidence as a Defence exhibit.
20 MR. WEBER: As to the specific clip, the Prosecution does have an
21 objection. It largely contained the narration of a reporter. I believe
22 it's been discussed in many other exhibits throughout the case, even the
23 Prosecution has used that such narration is not admitted. So to that
24 aspect of that audio, the Prosecution's position is that that is not
25 evidence. If counsel is indicating he doesn't intend to rely on it as
1 evidence, that's another matter. The second thing is that there's only
2 been a very small portion of this video displayed. As it continues, it
3 also has depictions of Croat captives that were kept, and I believe it's
4 misleading the portion that's been played, as to the entire nature of the
5 clip. I don't know if counsel intends to submit a greater portion into
7 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, Your Honours, with
8 regard to the first objection by my learned friend, Mr. Weber, I agree,
9 we will not be concerned with what the anchor said. As for the second
10 part of objection, we can play the rest of the clip from the moment where
11 we left it off. I didn't do it because of the time restrictions, so by
12 your leave, we will play the rest of the clip and then we can perhaps ask
13 for the entire clip to be admitted into evidence.
14 MR. WEBER: I know the Chamber's process has been for the parties
15 to submit tables and so forth. We are familiar with this video, and it
16 may be more efficient just to admit it if the Chamber wants to do that.
17 I don't know if the Chamber wants to maintain its practice, though, of
18 having the tendering party, which would be the Defence in this case, list
19 out all the relevant portions and us provide a chart
20 [Trial Chamber confers]
21 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] Mr. Petrovic, I have a question.
22 You have played part of that video, a portion of that clip. What you are
23 tendering is just that portion that we saw, or are you seeking to tender
24 the whole video?
25 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I believe that we
1 should play the entire video-clip and then we would ask for the admission
2 of the entire video-clip. The video takes about two and a half to three
3 minutes, and if we are allowed to do that, I believe that we will deal
4 with any ambiguities and there will not be any need for any further
5 explanations. I propose to play the entire video-clip and then tender it
6 into evidence.
7 MR. WEBER: Your Honours, the video is much longer than that.
8 What I'm say is that the -- if they want to tender the whole video, we
9 have no objection to the admission of the whole video, and if it's more
10 efficient for timing for Mr. Petrovic to do that, the Prosecution is not
11 opposing it, just noting for the fact that the Chamber has had a practice
12 with respect to the tendering of such a large video.
13 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Petrovic.
14 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] By your leave, in this
15 video-clip -- actually, the video material contains hours and hours, but
16 we obviously don't want to burden the Trial Chamber with that. The
17 segment concerning Biorcevic, Arkan and their conversations with
18 prisoners of war is what we want to play, and the time is from 7.29 to
19 11.21 of this video material. We don't want to tender anything else. It
20 would not be of any benefit, and I will abide by your instructions. I'm
21 entirely in your hands, Your Honours.
22 MR. WEBER: I know we are taking up time with this. That's fine,
23 no objections.
24 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] So what will be admitted is that
25 portion of the video you referred to, i.e., from 7.29 until 11.21. I
1 don't know exactly what that means and which has not been shown to the
2 Tribunal because we only saw the beginning of that video-clip, but since
3 there is no objection to the admitting into evidence that portion of the
4 video, this portion of the video from 07.29 to 11.21 is admitted into
6 Mr. Registrar can you give it an exhibit number, please.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit D78.
8 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] Thank you. Mr. Petrovic, I would
9 like to reminds you that you have little time left.
10 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] [Overlapping speakers] ... if I
11 don't have any more time, but I would nevertheless ask for a couple of
12 more minutes and just one second to consult with my client, if I may.
13 [Defence counsel and Accused Simatovic confer]
14 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. The
15 Simatovic Defence have no further questions for this witness. Thank you,
16 Mr. Bogunovic.
17 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Petrovic. I don't
18 know whether -- do you have many questions, Mr. Weber, to put --
19 MR. WEBER: No further questions.
20 [Trial Chamber confers]
21 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] Mr. Bogunovic, the Chamber has a
22 few questions to put to you.
23 Questioned by the Court:
24 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] I must admit that I did not quite
25 understand all the answers you gave as to the position of the Red Berets
1 in the region where you were. We saw a number of documents where the Red
2 Berets apparently were part of the Ministry of the Interior MUP. We have
3 seen documents where it was said that the JNA was trying to get rid of
4 the paramilitary forces. We have seen or you have told us that the
5 Yugoslav Army was working in close co-operation with Arkan and the Red
6 Berets, so finally, these Red Berets, what was their position in your
7 region? Were they accepted or not? And how come you did not know who
8 was in charge of the Red Berets? I'm sorry, I asked you many questions
9 at the same time, but could you please explain what the position of the
10 Red Berets was in Eastern Slavonia.
11 A. I've already said that I didn't know why they had come, who their
12 commander or boss was. I did not have any points of reference. I was
13 not in a position to know why they were there, whether they had come to
14 assist in restoring peace and order, or whether they were there to do
15 things unbeknownst to us. As far as the relationship between the Red
16 Berets and the military authorities is concerned, they -- that was
17 non-existent but because the military had already withdrawn from Ilok and
18 as far as their relationship with the police is concerned, I was no
19 longer in the police, and I didn't know that they were co-operating with
20 the police.
21 In any case, initially that was not the case and later on in the
22 course of 1992, they may have been tasked with that. As I am a saying at
23 first there was no co-operation between the police and the Red Berets,
24 and it was only 1992 that they were given a task to control vehicles,
25 passengers, and the rest of the things in that area of Srem and Baranja.
1 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] Which means that when you were
2 minister of the interior you had no relationship whatsoever with the Red
3 Berets or they were not yet there, or how was it?
4 A. They had not arrived yet. They were not in Ilok yet. I did not
5 have an occasion to see them, to meet them, to be introduced to them.
6 And my successor, I don't know whether he knew, whether he had any
7 sources of information about them. As for me, I didn't know why they had
8 arrived, and I could only repeat my previous answers to your question.
9 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.
10 Are there any further questions you want to put to the witness?
11 If such is the case, if there are no further questions, Mr. Bogunovic,
12 the Chamber wishes to thank you and you can now leave. Good-bye.
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] And good-bye.
14 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] The Tribunal will now break, and
15 we will start again at 1.00 p.m.
16 --- Recess taken at 12.30 p.m.
17 --- On resuming at 1.17 p.m.
18 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] We will resume for a little
19 half-hour with a number of technical problems which have not yet been
20 solved, which means that we will proceed in the following way: Since we
21 do not have any possibility for image -- face distortion of the image,
22 there will be no image and there's no access to e-court either. Bearing
23 that in mind, we will nevertheless try and proceed for about half an
25 Ms. Marcus, I think that you will be the first one.
1 MS. MARCUS: Thank you, Your Honours. Good afternoon. The
2 Prosecution calls JF-050.
3 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] Can we go in closed session,
5 [Closed session]
11 [Open session]
12 THE REGISTRAR: We are back in open session, Your Honours.
13 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] Thank you.
14 Mr. Witness, you will be called JF-050. You benefit from
15 protection measures which means that your name will not be revealed to
16 the public and your face will not appear on the transmission on the
17 broadcast of the trial. Nobody will be able to see your face.
18 The Prosecution has the floor.
19 MS. MARCUS: Would Your Honours like the witness to take the
21 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] Mr. Witness, could you please read
22 the official oath.
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will
24 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
25 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] Ms. Marcus, you have the floor.
1 MS. MARCUS: Thank you, Your Honour.
2 WITNESS: JF-050
3 [Witness answered through interpreter]
4 Examination by Ms. Marcus:
5 Q. JF-050, can you hear me well?
6 A. Yes.
7 MS. MARCUS: Could I please ask the Court Officer to hand around
8 the pseudonym sheet. We are using hard copies because of the technical
9 problems. That is 65 ter 5379.
10 Your Honours, perhaps I would propose that we return to this and
11 I continue with your leave we'll come back to the pseudonym sheet if it's
12 not available yet.
13 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] That is a slight problem. I don't
14 know what the problem is. Let me confer.
15 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
16 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] All right. We can see it on our
17 screens so you may proceed.
18 MS. MARCUS: Thank you. Thank you, Your Honour.
19 Q. Witness JF-050, do you see the document on the screen in front of
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Do you confirm that what appears on that document is your full
23 name and your date of birth?
24 A. Yes.
25 MS. MARCUS: Your Honours, I would like to tender this pseudonym
1 sheet into evidence under seal.
2 THE INTERPRETER: Would the witness's microphone please be
4 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] This document is admitted. Could
5 you please admitted it under seal, Mr. Registrar.
6 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honour, this would be Exhibit D79 under
8 MS. MARCUS:
9 Q. JF-050, I'm going to ask you to confirm some of the previous
10 information you've provided to the Tribunal. Did you provide two
11 statements to the Office of the Prosecution, one of them dated the 13th
12 to the 15th of December, 1998, and the other dated the 25th of February,
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. And did you testify in a prior case before this Tribunal?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Did you have an opportunity to review your prior statements and
18 your prior testimony in your own language before you came to court today?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Did you provide a proofing note to the Prosecution making some
21 minor corrections to the prior evidence you had provided?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Did you have an opportunity to review that proofing note prior to
24 signing it yesterday?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. If you were to be asked the same questions today as you were
2 asked previously, would you provide the same answers in substance?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Now that you have taken the solemn declaration, do you confirm
5 that the information contained in your prior statements, your testimony,
6 and the proofing note are true and accurate to the best of your
8 A. Yes.
9 MS. MARCUS: Your Honours, at this time the Prosecution tenders
10 into evidence the prior statements, testimony, and proofing note for this
11 witness. Those are 65 ter 5370, 5371, 5372, and 5378 under seal, please.
12 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] There's no objections so these
13 documents are tendered under seal, and could you please give them a
14 number, Mr. Registrar.
15 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, 65 ter 5370 will be D80 under seal.
16 65 ter 5371 will be D81 under seal. 65 ter 5372 will be D82 under seal,
17 and 65 ter 5378 will be D82 under seal.
18 MS. MARCUS: Your Honours, I'm sorry for the interruption,
19 perhaps we could have Prosecution numbers instead of Defence numbers,
20 unless that -- perhaps I misunderstood.
21 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honours. That will be P570 up it to
22 P573 under seal.
23 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] And these documents have been
24 admitted contrary to what I read in the minutes.
25 MS. MARCUS: Thank you very much, Your Honours. In addition, the
1 Prosecution -- in relation to the related exhibits to the witness's prior
2 testimony, the Prosecution submits as follows with respect to the photo
3 albums listed in the related exhibits list as 65 ter 5373, 5374, 5375,
4 and 5376. As was the subject of out of court informal correspondence
5 prior to today's hearing, the Prosecution recognizes that there are some
6 challenges posed by the use of a different numbering system developed by
7 the investigator which was used in the statements and testimony in
8 relation to this witness.
9 The Prosecution prepared indexes and forwarded those to the
10 Defence and Chambers in advance of this witness's testimony to facilitate
11 the cross-referencing of photographs. In addition, Your Honours, the
12 Prosecution has made selections from among these photographs, which it is
13 seeking to tender as part of the witness's 92 ter package as related
14 exhibits to his statement and testimony. The Prosecution prepared and
15 has distributed a demonstrative exhibit. It is in the form of a
16 spreadsheet of photographs from these albums including those discussed by
17 the witness with the investigator's number referenced, the ERN, the page
18 reference to the witness's statement, and the witness's comments. This
19 demonstrative exhibit bears the ERN 0676-7147 to 0676-7159.
20 The spreadsheet has been provide in hard copy and the shaded rows
21 indicate those photographs with the Prosecution seeks to tender into
22 evidence as related exhibits. In making its selection, the Prosecution
23 sought to strike a balance between including photographs of individuals
24 discussed by the witness in his evidence while eliminating duplications.
25 In a very few instances where the quality of the photo or the still was
1 extremely poor, this photo was not selected by the Prosecution for that
3 It is the Prosecution's hope that this demonstrative exhibit will
4 facilitate the work of the Chamber and the Defence.
5 May I request private session for a moment, Your Honour.
6 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] Could we please have private
7 session for the moment.
8 [Private session]
21 [Open session]
22 THE REGISTRAR: We are back in open session, Your Honours.
23 MS. MARCUS: So to summarise, Your Honours, the Prosecution
24 tenders eight related exhibits into evidence as they are. Those would be
25 65 ter 10 under seal, 65 ter 11 under seal, 15, 16, 43, 44, 45, 46, 614
1 under seal, 645, 646, 647, and 4500 page 405 only under seal. Those are
2 the exhibits that we tender as related exhibits with this witness, and in
3 addition to that, we tender the 55 shaded photographs from albums, from
4 the photo albums which are listed as related exhibits.
5 Your Honours, I would propose that perhaps we discuss with the
6 Registrar afterwards the numbering for this, but it's on the record, and
7 with your leave, if we could have them admitted into evidence.
8 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] Thank you, no objections. So
9 these documents will be admitted, some of them under seal, and I suppose
10 the Registrar will provide us with a list with the exhibit numbers of
11 those documents.
12 MS. MARCUS: Thank you, Your Honour.
13 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] An internal memorandum will be
14 drafted and it will be given to us by the Registry.
15 MS. MARCUS: Thank you.
16 Q. JF-050, I will now be reading out a public summary of your
17 evidence. Please note that what I'm reading now is not evidence in this
18 case. It is merely a means of informing the public of the general nature
19 of the information you will be providing to the Court.
20 Witness JF-050 is a Bosnian Croat who was captured by the VRS
21 in --
22 THE INTERPRETER: You are kindly asked to read more slowly for
23 the interpretation. Thank you.
24 MS. MARCUS: I will do so.
25 Captured by the VRS in 1992 and detained by the VRS and other
1 associated armed groups until June of 1995 when he was detained by Arkan
2 and put to forced labour for his unit, the Tigers.
3 The witness was held by Arkan and put to work as part of his work
4 unit from June to October 1995 during the time that Arkan and his Tigers
5 were operating in the regions of Mrkonjic Grad, Kljuc, Sanski Most, and
6 other regions.
7 The witness was then forced to move along with Arkan's Tigers to
8 their training camp in Erdut in October 1995 where he stayed until March
9 1996. During this time, the witness was able to observe the structure of
10 Arkan's Tigers including the distinction of regular Tigers from a group
11 known as the Super Tigers who were said to be the original members of the
12 unit and who were able to operate outside the rules the rest of the
13 Tigers had to abide by.
14 The witness saw several crimes committed by Arkan's Men such as
15 the beating and killing of prisoners of war and on one occasion he saw
16 Arkan himself shoot a prisoner in the chest. In early March of 1996, the
17 witness was asked to go to a location near Erdut with several of Arkan's
18 Men and cover over a well with soil to remove it from sight. The witness
19 overheard one of Arkan's Men say that this well was the location of a
20 mass grave containing victims from the Vukovar region from the years of
21 1991 to 1992.
22 In March 1996, the witness was forced to move along with Arkan's
23 Tigers to Djeletovci to the military base of the Skorpions. In
24 approximately April of 1996, Arkan's forces and the Skorpions pulled out
25 of this region and Arkan relocated his forces to Belgrade. The witness
1 also states that he and the other men were ordered to loot weekend homes
2 in Erdut upon the departure of Arkan's Unit for Belgrade.
3 The witness was thereafter put to forced labour in Belgrade
4 various locations owned and run by Arkan through until July 1997. The
5 witness will testify that the names of several of the persons whom the
6 witness describes in his statement, some of whom were Arkan's Tigers or
7 Super Tigers appear on the DB payment records spanning from 1993 through
8 to the end of 1995.
9 That concludes the public summary of the evidence of Witness
11 Q. JF-050, can you hear me?
12 A. Yes, I can.
13 Q. You described in your statement and in your prior testimony being
14 detained in a camp called Stari Mlin near Prnjavor. You say the Wolves
15 under Veljko Milankovic were in charge of this camp. Who was it who
16 transferred you from Manjaca to Prnjavor to the base of the Wolves of
17 Veljko Milankovic?
18 A. The military police of the Krajina Corps.
19 Q. Was the detention centre in Prnjavor the same place as the Wolves
20 had their base, or was it a different location?
21 A. It was the same location.
22 Q. So you were detained by the Wolves from October 1992 to March
23 1994 at that location; is that correct?
24 A. Yes, it is.
25 Q. Did you ever have occasion to see them in training?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Did you come to learn who it was who was training them?
3 A. I don't know who was training them, but I know that Veljko
4 Milankovic was the main person around there.
5 Q. What sort of uniform did the Wolves wear?
6 A. Two piece, camouflage uniforms.
7 Q. Did you observe any other formations coming to the Wolves camp?
8 A. One could hear vehicles come in during evenings.
9 Q. Were you able to identify any other armed formations who came to
10 the camp of the Wolves?
11 A. I only know that these were predominantly military vehicles.
12 Q. Did those vehicles or those driving the vehicles bear any
13 insignias of any kind?
14 A. I wasn't able to observe that.
15 Q. JF-050, in your statement, page 7 in English and page 9 in B/C/S,
16 that is your 1998 statement now in evidence as P570, you described Arkan
17 coming to you personally with a few of his military policemen and
18 arresting you. Do you recall who came along with him?
19 A. Arkan and his military policemen.
20 Q. Can you describe how they were dressed and whether they had any
22 A. On the left arm they had the patch of a tiger, and on the right
23 arm they had the patches of the Serb Volunteer Guard. The uniforms they
24 wore were those of the NATO Alliance.
25 Q. You say in your statement that Arkan seems to have presumed you
1 were deserters and that is why you were called partisans. Can you
3 A. Yes. We were in the street sweeping and at that time Arkan
4 arrived with vehicles taking away all 30 of us with him.
5 Q. Why would it have been that he would have assumed you were
7 A. The VRS had people who preferred to go to jail than to the front
9 Q. Now, you describe being held in a school at Mala Manjaca along
10 with the Tigers. Can you tell us something about that facility? What
11 sort of a facility was it?
12 A. It was an elementary school at Mala Manjaca, an old building. He
13 spent the night there and the next day he headed towards Pirici and
15 Q. When you say "he," who are you referring to?
16 A. Arkan.
17 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] Ms. Marcus, I see it is quarter to
18 2.00 so you could possibly ask another couple of questions if they are
19 related to the previous questions, otherwise I think that we have to call
20 it a day.
21 MS. MARCUS: Your Honour, I think we could stop here.
22 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] Thank you. Before we adjourn, the
23 exhibit which has the Exhibit D79 should have Exhibit P574 under seal.
24 So D79 becomes P574, D79 being the pseudonym sheet. So we are going to
1 Witness JF-050, the hearing will resume next Monday at 2.15 p.m.
2 in this very same courtroom, and meanwhile, you are not to discuss your
3 evidence with anyone.
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I am aware of that.
5 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] Very well. I think that we have
6 to move into private session to escort the witness outside the courtroom.
7 [Private session]
14 [Open session]
15 THE REGISTRAR: We are back in open session, Your Honours.
16 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] Very well. The hearing is
17 adjourned until Monday at 2.15 p.m.
18 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.48 p.m.
19 to be reconvened on Monday, the 5th day of July,
20 2010, at 2.15 p.m.