1 Wednesday, 15 February 2012
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.04 a.m.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning to everyone in and around the
7 Madam Registrar, would you please call the case.
8 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours.
9 This is the case IT-03-69-T, The Prosecutor versus Jovica
10 Stanisic and Franko Simatovic.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Are there any preliminaries?
12 I have received a list of pre-assigned exhibit numbers. Perhaps
13 we could briefly go to -- through them.
14 The associated exhibits to the previous testimony of Witness
15 Osman Selak, Are there any objections against admission?
16 Ms. Harbour, that this pre-assigned numbers D701 up to and
17 including 729.
18 MS. HARBOUR: No objections, Your Honour.
19 JUDGE ORIE: No objections. D701 up to and including D729 are
20 admitted into evidence.
21 Then the associated exhibits to the Osman Selak chart with
22 witness comments. D731 up to and including D740.
23 MS. HARBOUR: No objections, Your Honour.
24 JUDGE ORIE: No objections. D731 up to and including D740 are
25 admitted into evidence.
1 Then the video tendered by the Prosecution, P3083, under seal --
3 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. All the exhibits I just referred to as being
5 admitted, they are all provisionally admitted under seal because their
6 status have to be verified with great precision.
7 I do understand that the part of the video which the Prosecution
8 tendered by the number P3083 is reserved, that it has not yet been
10 Mr. Bakrac, I see it's a ...
11 MS. HARBOUR: That's correct, Your Honour.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That's where we are.
13 Any other matter? If not, could the witness be escorted into the
15 MS. HARBOUR: Your Honour, while the witness is --
16 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Harbour, yes.
17 MS. HARBOUR: While the witness is being brought in, would now be
18 an appropriate time for a very brief response, oral response to Serbia's
19 motion for protective measures.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
21 MS. HARBOUR: Could we move into private session.
22 JUDGE ORIE: We move into private session.
23 [Private session]
11 Page 17355 redacted. Private session.
8 [Open session]
9 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honours.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
11 [The witness takes the stand]
12 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning, Mr. Selak.
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Please be seated.
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
16 JUDGE ORIE: MR. Selak, I'd like to remind you that you're still
17 bound by the solemn declaration you've given yesterday, that you will
18 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
19 WITNESS: OSMAN SELAK [Resumed]
20 [Witness answered through interpreter]
21 JUDGE ORIE: And Mr. Jordash will now continue his examination.
22 Mr. Jordash, please proceed.
23 MR. JORDASH: Thank you.
24 Examination by Mr. Jordash: [Continued]
25 Q. Good morning, Mr. Selak. We were discussing convoys to and from
1 Belgrade and you described the route to the Court yesterday. Could you
2 explain -- could you explain what happened to the items that were brought
3 from Belgrade. Where did they go? Was -- did they go to the Banja Luka
4 base, or did they go somewhere else first? What was the process?
5 A. The military assets that were carried in the convoy arrived at
6 the Banja Luka logistics base to the depot complex there. Depending on
7 what was involved, whether it was the spare parts, fuel, or other items,
8 that's how they would be stored. Some of the items would be immediately
9 shipped to those units that had sent in requests for replenishment.
10 Now, the items that were intended for the civilian population and
11 had been carried on the military convoy were forwarded to -- or were
12 given, actually, to the various businesses that had been involved in
13 ordering those and they were intended for the population of Banja Luka
14 and the general region.
15 Later on, these material reserves that had been brought over from
16 Belgrade and I'm particularly referring to the ammunition, were used to
17 replenish the unit -- the units locally. There was very little in the
18 way of weapons because the Krajina Corps and the other corps of
19 Republika Srpska had, in fact, too many weapons, and that had a negative
20 bearing on the developments in Bosnia-Herzegovina. So the only thing
21 that needed shipping in was spare parts, fuel, and medications, medical
23 I'm done.
24 Q. Thank you. Who were your contact points in Belgrade, which
25 individuals did you deal with?
1 THE INTERPRETER: Can all the extra microphones please be
2 switched off.
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The Banja Luka logistics base first
4 got in touch to the Main Staff of the VRS at Pale. There were direct
5 contacts still in place from the previous period when there was the JNA.
6 There was a technical administration base of the JNA General Staff in
7 Belgrade, which was charged with providing technical supplies to all the
8 JNA units across Yugoslavia. These contacts remained in the later period
9 as well. We had telephone lines that we used to communicate with them,
10 and, of course, in official correspondence. The requests would be sent
11 in writing, and arrangements would be made by telephone as to where these
12 shipments would take place and who needed to be contacted and where. The
13 requests had to be in good order. When a column -- or, rather, when a
14 request was sent to Belgrade, there had to be the accurate amount of
15 assets requested because otherwise there were very unpleasant situations
16 where certain organs were not precise enough as they handed over items in
17 the sense that they included in these shipments items whose life had
19 I had specialists along with me who were specialised in weapons
20 and they would be in contact with the technical administration in
21 Belgrade. So it was all done very professionally and expeditiously.
22 MR. JORDASH:
23 Q. I'm sorry to stop you, but I want to refer to a flow chart which
24 I think may help you to explain how this worked, once the items arrived
1 MR. JORDASH: Please could we have on the screen D -- sorry,
2 1D05199, which is now D722.
3 Q. Do you recognise this chart? Is this a chart that you've
4 referred to before in the Milosevic case?
5 A. Yes. I personally drew the chart in the Milosevic case. And it
6 bears my initials.
7 Q. Is it possible to zoom out a bit so we get more of the diagram on
8 the screen. Thank you.
9 Now what I'd like you to do very briefly is explain how, on a
10 practical level, on a day to day, your base worked within the territory
11 which you described yesterday. How would the process of administering
12 logistics from the Banja Luka base work? How would it start?
13 A. This chart dates from the period when there was the
14 Yugoslav People's Army in place. This means that it was valid up to the
15 18th of May, 1992.
16 The chart depicts the logistics base which had to send its
17 official requests to the command of the 2nd Military District of the JNA
18 which was headquartered in Sarajevo. In other words, the base was
19 directly subordinated to the 2nd Military District in Sarajevo.
20 The 2nd Military District Command would, in respect of those
21 requests from the logistics base in Banja Luka that it was unable to deal
22 with, forward to the JNA General Staff in Belgrade to its technical
23 administration which was headed by Vladan Sljivic, a lieutenant-general.
24 And his men would then be dealing with these requests for materiel coming
25 from the Banja Luka Logistics Base.
1 Therefore, command responsibility stretched from the
2 General Staff through the Sarajevo 2nd Military District to the Banja
3 Luka Logistics Base. Under the law, it was not possible for me to ask
4 for replenishment directly from the General Staff. I had to go along the
5 chain of command from Banja Luka to Sarajevo and then from Sarajevo to
6 Belgrade. Military organisation was very clear in that.
7 Similarly, the corps command was subordinated to the
8 2nd Military District Command in Sarajevo.
9 Q. So, just, in two or three sentences, a unit was in the field, for
10 example, in Bihac, and that unit required certain supplies. What would
11 happen? How would it obtain those supplies? What would be the chain of
12 reporting or the chain of command?
13 A. The units located in Bihac would seek replenishment from their
14 rear or logistics base which would, in turn, follow its chain through
15 Sarajevo to Belgrade. The same applied to the units in Bihac, in that
16 the Banja Luka logistics centre was duty-bound to ship these
17 replenishments directly to the various locations that had sought
18 replenishment, whatever they may have been.
19 Q. Can we have --
20 A. Excuse me. Save for the fact that up until the start of the war,
21 Bihac was directly subordinated to Zagreb because that's where the
22 boundary was. So they even duplicated the supplies because some of these
23 supplies would arrive from Zagreb, especially when it came to any
24 aviation supplies, because that was the biggest centre in that region.
25 Whereas, the ground force -- that was the air force, of course, and the
1 ground force had its base in Banja Luka. Unfortunately, the airport was
2 blown up with a large amount of explosives in 1992.
3 Q. The beginning or middle or end of 1992? When did that happen?
4 A. In May of 1992. General Talic was proud of the fact that he had
5 spent 71 tonnes of TNT to destroy the Zeljava airport in Bihac. It had
6 never recovered since. It had never been rebuilt, nor will it ever be.
7 Your Honours, the Soviet Union provided the overall military
8 hardware to the JNA over the period of ten years in order to be able to
9 use that third largest military airport in the region, in Bihac.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Selak, the last question was just about when it
11 was in 1992. You answered that by saying "in May of 1992." All the
12 other details may not be relevant for Mr. Jordash. So would you please
13 very much focus your answer on the question that was asked because we
14 have to use our time as efficiently as possible.
15 Please proceed.
16 MR. JORDASH:
17 Q. Just sticking for a moment with the subject of airports --
18 A. I apologise, Your Honour.
19 Q. Sticking with the subject of airports just for the moment, when
20 you were operating the Banja Luka Logistics Base, which airfields or
21 airports existed within your zone of -- within your zone of
22 responsibility, please?
23 A. Shortly before the war in 1991, a large military airport called
24 Mahovljani near Banja Luka, 18 kilometres north-west of Banja Luka, was
25 built. It was in September of 1991 that it was opened. It had finally
1 been built. All the aeroplanes from the 5th Military District in Zagreb
2 and all the various military assets from Bihac were transferred to the
3 Banja Luka airport.
4 There was a smaller military airport in Banja Luka proper, on the
5 outskirts of Banja Luka, that was intended for smaller planes and
6 helicopters. Now the Mahovljani airport was and still is a large airport
7 and is still operational.
8 Q. During 1992, did these two airfields continue to operate as
9 military airports?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Did you, at the Banja Luka Logistics Base, make use of these
12 airfields and airports to transport logistics?
13 A. The logistics base had no need for it, save for medical
14 evacuations of the wounded who would be transported to the military
15 medical academy in Belgrade, and for the purposes of urgent trips of
16 officers. We did provide them with the necessary logistics, whatever the
17 ground forces were able to do in terms of securing the facility,
18 supplying them with explosives, et cetera. We also stored their bombs,
19 whatever explosives they needed. That was stored in the depot --
20 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter didn't catch the name of the
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] And that was for the purposes of
23 the air force of Republika Srpska, previously the JNA.
24 MR. JORDASH:
25 Q. What was the name of the depot you just mentioned, please. Or
1 the location where the depot was.
2 A. Krcmarica was the name of the ammunition depot. And there was a
3 smaller facility in Zaluzani where the airfield was. There were a
4 couple of smaller facilities there, structures that housed assets that
5 could easily be replenished; whereas Krcmarica was a large depot where
6 you had bombs stored and that's on the periphery of Banja Luka.
7 Q. Let's go to, if we can, D716, please. This is a similar -- I
8 want to return to the overview of the logistic flow but this time dealing
9 with after the 18th of May, 1992.
10 Again, this is a diagram you drew for your previous testimony in
11 the Milosevic case; correct?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Now, there are some differences, but let's just deal with one or
14 two of them.
15 First of all, if we look to the left of the diagram, reference
16 there to the Army of the RSK, 1st Operational Group, and
17 2nd Operational Group. Which -- how did this work?
18 A. Operational groups were established by the Main Staff of the
19 Army of Republika Srpska for certain specific operations that were
20 short-term. They were mainly subordinated to various corps, precisely
21 because of the control and command system so that information could flow
22 more speedily because units of the corps were unable to perform these
23 missions on their own, so operational groups were set up for the purpose.
24 They even had their secret names. It says 1st and 2nd here, but they had
25 also secret code-names. And they assisted corps units in accomplishing
1 certain short-term missions, and they were subordinated, some directly to
2 the corps, others directly to the Main Staff of the VRS. And that's the
3 schematic on the left.
4 Q. Thank you. Now, If we look to the right-hand side of the
5 diagram, to the box midway down the page which has within it 27th
6 Rear Service, Pale, and so on. Were these new --
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Were these new?
9 A. They were actually renamed. They were new in new locations
10 because the Sarajevo, Mostar and other bases were liquidated. Only the
11 Banja Luka one remained. This 27th Rear one in Pale was a new one, a
12 former base that was relocated 37 kilometres away from Sarajevo.
13 The one in Bilica is a basis that had been relocated from Mostar.
14 And the 35th in Bijeljina, is a base that had been relocated from Tuzla.
15 A former JNA base in Tuzla was relocated to an area controlled by the
16 VRS. All those three bases were now in the territory of the
17 Army of Republika Srpska.
18 Q. Thank you. Now, I want to try to get to some specifics in
19 relation to day-to-day operations.
20 What kind of staff did you have in the Banja Luka -- when I use
21 the word "staff," I mean what kind of personnel were engaged, the numbers
22 and what they were doing on a day to day?
23 A. You're asking me about the logistics base?
24 Q. Yes, sorry. Yes.
25 A. On the 18th of May, 1992, the base was renamed. It was formerly
1 193rd --
2 Q. I really want to have you explain to the Court who was at the
3 base, what kind of staff, what kind of personnel you had, what kind of --
4 for example --
5 A. Oh, personnel. I hadn't understood the question.
6 In the logistical base in Banja Luka all the personnel remained
7 the same after the 18th of May. Not a single soldier, NCO, or officer
8 was changed or left. Only conscripts that hailed from Serbia, Macedonia,
9 or Montenegro that served on the base were returned to their places of
10 residence, but the entire base continued to operate as it had before the
12 I have no right to speak about the corps, but not even a single
13 officer from the corps left. There was even an order from the Main Staff
14 that disciplinary proceedings would be instituted against anyone who
15 abandons their position.
16 Q. Let me try to ask you some specific questions. What specialists
17 did you have working within the Banja Luka base? Did you have specialist
18 units with -- headed by a specialist personnel?
19 A. Throughout the world, logistical bases employed personnel by line
20 of work. In the base we had mechanical engineers for the repair of
21 hardware. We also had specialists for ammunition and explosives. We had
22 experts for fuel and lubricants, quartermaster specialists, medical
23 staff. The entire base was staffed by the personnel that was specialised
24 in various lines of work because we needed experts and only experts,
25 because any error would be very expensive. Ammunition depots employed
1 specialists for ammunition. In work-shops we had experts for fuels and
2 lubricants for the repair of tanks and weapons. That was the only way it
3 was possible to work.
4 I was specialised in combat vehicles, but as a colonel I was a
5 commander, so I had a double job. My Chief of Staff was an economist, a
6 native of Cacak, Serbia.
7 Q. How would the items be transported from your base to within the
8 territory to service the corps?
9 MR. JORDASH: I think there might be a problem with the -- no.
10 Q. Did you get the question, Mr. Selak? How would the items be --
11 A. I understand the question. Malfunctioning hardware, trucks and
12 vehicles would be brought by trailer trucks; whereas, broken tanks would
13 be transported by freight vehicles. First, they would be lifted by
14 cranes onto freight vehicles and brought to repair shops.
15 For smaller repairs, my units went directly to the place where
16 the broken vehicle was. They would take spare parts. We had mobile
17 work-shops mounted on vehicles that went directly to the front line where
18 the broken hardware was.
19 JUDGE ORIE: [Overlapping speakers]
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Howitzers, mortars, any other
22 JUDGE ORIE: Is there any risk that the witness did wrongly
23 understand your question because I thought your question was how items
24 would be transported from the base, whereas the witness is explaining as
25 to how they came to the base to be repaired.
1 So perhaps if you could get the witness on the right track.
2 MR. JORDASH:
3 Q. Somebody from the corps contacts one of your specialists within
4 the Banja Luka Logistics Base requesting some ammunition or some other
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. What does the specialist do; and how do those items find their
8 way to the unit which made the request?
9 A. The logistics base was required to bring to the unit any materiel
10 required. The units would not come to us. The base had its own vehicles
11 to get to the place where the demand was, so to speak. The units could
12 not move, so it was the duty of the base to bring to the unit whatever
13 the unit needed.
14 Q. And just try to give us a picture. How -- how -- how many
15 vehicles were you operating; and were they travelling every day and -- or
16 every week; and is there any place within your zone of responsibility
17 where they didn't travel to, to service the unit?
18 A. The logistics base had, among others, an automobile unit whose
19 job it was to bring to the units whatever they needed: Ammunition, food,
20 medicines, et cetera, including weapons. The base would load the
21 consignment and send it to the unit as required. There were no problems
23 In cases of emergency, we would also use automobile transport in
24 town. We had an automobile unit in town, and we used them when we needed
25 them against payment, of course. But whenever we did not have enough
1 vehicles of our own, we used civilian transportation.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Jordash, the whole Bench wonders whether this
3 level of detail assists us in what we have to do.
4 Could you please keep that in mind and see -- or focus your
5 questions in such a way that it becomes clear to su why this level of
6 detail would be helpful.
7 MR. JORDASH: I'm hoping that the next few questions will make
8 that clear.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Let's then wait for that.
10 MR. JORDASH:
11 Q. If -- let me just pose a hypothetical to you, Mr. Selak. If your
12 transportation team travelling the length and breadth of your zone of
13 responsibility had encountered other military or civilian units supplying
14 within your zone of responsibility, would they have reported that to you?
15 A. My people would be required to immediately inform me and our
16 organs, and they, in their turn, would let the civilian authorities in
17 the field know that something was going on. Yes, it happened.
18 Q. Were you ever, within 1992, informed that the Serbian DB were
19 operating airfields in your zone of responsibility, supplying goods to
20 paramilitaries, volunteer groups, TO, VRS troops?
21 A. I don't have any official information as to when that happened,
22 but there were cases when in the airfields the police would block the
23 airfield for a couple of hours because of a certain delivery, but I did
24 not get involved in that because it did not touch upon the military chain
25 of command. It was handled by the authorities of Banja Luka and the
1 Main Staff of Republika Srpska, so I stayed outside of it.
2 There were -- there were cases like that, but I don't want to say
3 any more. I am afraid to get something wrong.
4 Q. Did you ever see a training base within your zone of
5 responsibility which was operated by the DB?
6 A. Near Banja Luka, there was a shooting range in Vrbanja where the
7 marksmens' society in Banja Luka was trained but it was later used for
8 the training of those groups. In Manjaca, though, training of
9 paramilitary units went on, especially the Red Berets, whose staff was
10 located in the Bosna hotel.
11 Let me just explain that in March 1992, I was appointed chief of
12 the group for co-operation with the UN force in Banja Luka. My command
13 post is in the Bosna hotel, part of which was housing the Red Berets, and
14 their training ground was 28 kilometres away from Banja Luka in Manjaca,
15 and they were trained in using weapons, tanks, et cetera. I don't know
16 about other paramilitary groups. I know about the Red Berets.
17 Unfortunately, later on, these same forces later unlawfully sold weapons
18 to the citizens of Banja Luka. The military organisation failed to deal
19 with this, regrettably, but the civilian police also failed. This
20 illegal sale went on for sometime but --
21 Q. Sorry, Mr. Selak. I'm asking you about training, but since you
22 brought up the subject of the Red Berets, let's deal with that.
23 What connection did Uzelac have with those Red Berets in
24 Banja Luka?
25 A. General Uzelac occupied his position until the
1 12th of January, 1992. Paramilitary organisations were, at that time,
2 already trained in Manjaca which belonged to the Military Academy in
3 Banja Luka, not -- it didn't belong to the corps.
4 The assistant commander in Banja Luka directly controlled the
5 training of paramilitaries there. I was in the office of Uzelac when he
6 got a call about this training of paramilitaries, and we discussed this
7 with Uzelac. He didn't know the details, but he did talk with Subotic
8 about this training of paramilitaries in Manjaca, which later became a
9 camp. But I'm talking about Uzelac who was there until the 19th of
10 January, 1991.
11 Q. Who was the assistant commander in Banja Luka who controlled the
12 training of the paramilitaries?
13 A. Colonel Bogdan Subotic, who later became defence minister of
14 Republika Srpska.
15 Q. And when you say Subotic controlled, directly controlled the
16 training of paramilitaries, do you include within that the Red Berets?
17 A. Yes, because he was their contact. I know he had meetings with
18 them. I know that because he came to the Bosna hotel.
19 Q. And Uzelac, what was then his relationship to these Red Berets,
20 if any?
21 A. Uzelac also had contacts with them, not only with the Red Berets
22 but also other volunteer units. I was invited to one of those meetings
23 which took place in a restaurant. They later tried to keep me as their
24 permanent contact, but I refuse because I saw that their activities were
25 illegal, unlawful, and I didn't want to have anything to do with them;
1 whereas, Uzelac had permanent contacts with these volunteer or
2 paramilitary groups, whatever you want to call them.
3 And, by the way, the chief of the General Staff gave approval for
4 the formation of volunteer units, and he even stipulated that they would
5 be given officers from the JNA. I have that document in my bag with me
7 Q. Well, were these Red Berets from Banja Luka who were being
8 trained by Subotic also commanded or supervised by JNA officers?
9 A. They were not under JNA command or later under the command of the
10 VRS. It was a volunteer/paramilitary organisation. They did not even
11 take part in combat together with regular army units. First, of the JNA;
12 then of the VRS. They engaged in ethnic cleansing, mistreatment of
13 people, looting, robbing, killing. We have precise documentation about
14 everything they stole from people, beginning with motor vehicles and
15 property going to millions and millions by blackmail, by -- by threats.
16 Q. Did you attend a briefing on the 27th of May, 1992 which had
17 anything to do the Red Berets?
18 A. On 27 May 1992, at the command post of the corps commander, a
19 meeting was held where the Chief of Staff or, rather, the leader of the
20 command team for that day, Dragan Martetic [phoen], reported to the corps
21 commander about was going on on that day within the corps and he said
22 that on that day in Kozarac, near Prijedor, 800 people were killed. The
23 corps commander told him to report to the General Staff that 80 people
24 were killed.
25 Q. Mr. -- Mr. Selak --
1 A. And then the commander ordered that a camp be set up --
2 Q. Are we talking about the Red Berets here? I don't want to go too
3 off the subject.
4 A. Yes. Yes, yes, I'm coming to that. Then Talic ordered, among
5 other things, that all soldiers on the training ground in Manjaca be
6 armed, and those others should pull out from Manjaca. Whereas, soldiers
7 should be armed. Because he ordered the establishment of a camp to keep
8 2.500 people. Whereas, the militaries should be armed, and that's the
9 paramilitary and all the others who happened to be in Manjaca at the
10 time, that they should be removed from Manjaca.
11 So, there was legal training of paramilitary organisations within
12 the barracks of the VRS, because the VRS had already been proclaimed on
13 the 18th of May, and we are talking about the 27th of May.
14 I have official documents here in my bag, and I can quote
15 officially -- I can quote exactly what was ordered.
16 Q. Did anything happen five days later? Did Talic issued any orders
17 five days later?
18 A. Five days later, maybe it kind of conflated in my head the
19 formation of the camp and the arming of those soldiers, the events of the
20 27th of May and some day in early June. But I have my official notebook,
21 and I can look it up, if you want me to, to remember the details. If you
22 allow me, this official notebook had been kept in the Tribunal for a long
23 time, and here I have the original.
24 MR. JORDASH: This is, I think, D702 which is what the witness is
25 looking at, I think.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Do we need to look at the original if a copy
2 is --
3 MR. JORDASH: Perhaps I can shortcut things.
4 Q. Mr. Selak. Mr. Selak, I'm short of time so if we can deal with
5 it without the notebook that would be --
6 A. All right.
7 Q. What I'm interested in is: Did Talic have anything to do with
8 arming the paramilitaries, the Red Berets?
9 A. Your Honours, the corps, as a unit, did not have enough weapons.
10 It was not allowed to have more than a 5 per cent surplus of weapons
11 above the establishment number of personnel. However, after the
12 withdrawal of the JNA from Croatia and Slovenia, the JNA also took with
13 it all the weapons, and it was my duty to receive all those weapons and
14 ammunition in my depots. The transport units that entered the area of
15 Bosnian Krajina where I was, the corps unlawfully took over these
16 weapons. It was unauthorised.
17 Q. Are we -- can we just try to get to the point more quickly. I
18 know you know a lot, but we don't have time for everything. Did Talic
19 have anything to do with arming the Red Berets?
20 A. Yes. Yes, he did. He approved it and he provided them, not only
21 the Red Berets but also other volunteer paramilitary units that were
22 there in that area, Lieutenant Milankovic from Prnjavor and all the other
23 politically affiliated groups. He ordered that resupplies be given to
24 those units, not only weapons but other equipment as well.
25 Q. And the weapons and equipment that Talic ordered to be given to
1 the Red Berets, where did those equipment -- where did that equipment and
2 weapons come from?
3 A. I was just about to explain that these transport convoys from
4 Croatia and Slovenia that were bringing weapons were intercepted by corps
5 units that took those weapons and kept them. And those weapons were
6 later used to arm paramilitary organisations.
7 Corps units intercepted transport convoys not only by -- the only
8 ones that were spared were railway convoys. All the others were stopped
9 and all the weapons from them taken on orders of Talic and other corps
10 commanders. It was not only 1 Corps, it was also the Sarajevo-Romanija
11 Corps the Eastern Bosnia Corps. All the corps took over these weapons
12 that were destined to Serbia. Some of these shipments went by sea, via
13 Montenegro, and other shipments went by road, by rail, et cetera, towards
14 Banja Luka.
15 I have to explain this because this had very negative
16 consequences. For instance, Your Honours, the JNA distributed to the
17 Serbian people 51.000 pieces of infantry weapon, whereas the
18 Serbian Democratic Party alone distributed 17.000 infantry weapons.
19 Where does a political party get that amount of weaponry to distribute to
20 civilians? These were weapons that were unlawfully, criminally, stolen
21 for JNA transports and we should all know that, that was a criminal act.
22 We should be aware of it.
23 Q. Let's have a look at an exhibit to deal further with this
25 MR. JORDASH: Could we please have 1D05184, which is now ...
1 Can I just have a moment, please.
2 JUDGE ORIE: It was an exhibit which had -- a document which had
3 an exhibit number already, I think. That was one of the two out of the
4 31 which had been admitted already; whereas, the others needed a new
6 MR. JORDASH: Yes, that's right. Sorry. P1307. Thank you,
7 Your Honour.
8 Q. Do you recognise this --
9 A. Yes. I have it myself.
10 Q. And, as we can see, it's conclusions from the assessment of the
11 situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina in the zone of responsibility of the
12 2nd Military District, March of 1992.
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. I want to ask you about some of the contents.
15 Let's go, if we can, to page 3. And I'm interested in heading
16 number 3 which is the situation in the field and the JNA.
17 A. This is page 2. I have page 2. Now it's page 3.
18 Q. Page -- sorry. Page 5 of the B/C/S and page 3 of the English.
19 A. I still have page 3, ordinal number 3, the situation in the
20 territory under JNA.
21 Q. We need to move forward with the B/C/S, I think.
22 A. Yes. There it is, page 4.
23 Q. Now it says:
24 "The situation in the field and the JNA," or "situation in the
25 territory and in the JNA."
1 And at (c) -- we need to go over the page in the --
2 A. I have page 4. I still have page 4.
3 Q. Do you have it?
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But what portion would you like
5 to [overlapping speakers] ...
6 MR. JORDASH: [Overlapping speakers] ... (c) --
7 JUDGE ORIE: That is the top of your page, Mr. Selak. And in
8 English it is the second paragraph.
9 MR. JORDASH:
10 Q. And it notes, "Viewed as a whole, the leadership of the SDS" --
11 A. That's it, (c).
12 Q. And the Serbian people accept the army, protected -- wherever
13 that is objectively possible, have turned out for combat, and volunteer
14 groups show the utmost co-operation with the commands and are behaving
15 quite responsibly towards war equipment material.
16 Are you able to comment on that assertion and the accuracy of
17 that assertion?
18 A. Yes, I can, Your Honour. This is true, but from the point of
19 view of the Serbian Democratic Party and the Republika Srpska government.
20 Your Honours, all the JNA units in Bosnia-Herzegovina were simply
21 renamed VRS units, and this document states that volunteer units are
22 allowed to be set up and to be manned and equipped. So viewed from the
23 position of the Serbian people, this is true. But it is directed against
24 the Muslim and Croat peoples in Bosnia-Herzegovina.
25 Q. So --
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Jordash --
2 MR. JORDASH: Yes.
3 JUDGE ORIE: -- if would you look at the transcript, then you
4 would see the consequences of reading too quickly and -- because what you
5 read starts approximately halfway, the paragraph you did read, you
6 started reading as a whole, the SDS leadership, isn't it? That whole
7 first part is missing. Page 23, line 18.
8 MR. JORDASH: Yes, I see that. If I can just fill in --
9 JUDGE ORIE: I don't know how important it is, but
10 perhaps [Overlapping speakers] ...
11 MR. JORDASH: [Overlapping speakers] ...
12 JUDGE ORIE: It would be good to have -- if we ask the witness to
13 comment on something unless it was just an introduction and that you
14 invited him to comment on only the last part of what you read.
15 MR. JORDASH: He has commented on the most relevant bit, I think,
16 Your Honour, so if -- if --
17 JUDGE ORIE: If you think that despite the fact that the
18 transcript is not complete, but that it contains all the information you
19 want to elicit, then please proceed.
20 MR. JORDASH: Thank you.
21 Q. Did -- during 1992, Mr. Selak, during your command of the
22 Banja Luka Logistics Base, was there any prohibition or any impediment
23 to the arming of volunteer groups by the army?
24 A. No, on the contrary. There was no prohibition. On page 5 of
25 this document, and in item 5, it reads that -- that volunteer units were
1 supplied with ammunition, weapons, and even quartermaster items. The SUP
2 got it but so did volunteer units. They got weapons and other assets and
3 there were 61.900-odd pieces of weaponry distributed to these
4 paramilitary units and individuals even. On Serbian houses, there were
5 signs saying, Serbian, so as to indicate which houses -- which
6 households, which individuals needed to be armed. This was the case in
7 Banja Luka, Derventa, Prnjavor. I was able to see for myself houses
8 marked Serbian, Serbian, Serbian, so that by night, they could receive
9 weapons and other sort of military assets. And the army stood behind
11 Q. If we can go to page 4 of the English and 5 of the B/C/S and the
12 heading, number 5, "Volunteer units in the 2nd Military Zone."
13 And we see the figures there, the numerical strength been 69.198
14 men. Do you see that?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. And if we go over the page in the B/C/S to page 6 to the heading:
17 "The number of the men in the zones of the corps."
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. We see a number of figure there is including figures for the 9th,
20 10th, 5th, 17th and 4th Corps, and then under little (f) we see:
21 "The JNA has distributed 51.000, 900 weapons (75 per cent) and
22 the SDS 17.298 pieces."
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Are you able to give the Court --
25 A. Could we also read item (g), please.
1 JUDGE ORIE: No, could you please first listen to the question
2 that Mr. Jordash puts to you and then ... Mr. Jordash.
3 MR. JORDASH: Thank you.
4 Q. Are you able to give the Court an idea of what these figures
5 meant in terms of how many weapons were in circulation, how many
6 volunteer groups were receiving those weapons, were there members of
7 volunteer groups who couldn't obtain weapons, and so on.
8 Can you try to explain from your practical experience what these
9 figures actually meant for the arming of volunteer groups?
10 A. Your Honours, this is a very important document. The amount of
11 79.000 pieces of infantry weapons was distributed to volunteer units,
12 individuals. When I tell you that in war time, a corps has between 15-
13 to 20.000 men at most, this means that several corps have been armed with
14 this amount of weapons. Literally all the population was armed, and
15 behind this was the SDS, the army, and the government, because they
16 distributed weapons to the police and everyone else. This is a shocking
17 piece of information and it contributed to bringing the war in
18 Bosnia-Herzegovina to a head, involving the citizens of
19 Bosnia-Herzegovina. So this would suffice to arm four full corps and
20 already there were five corps in the VRS, in -- or, rather, there were
21 already five corps of the JNA army present in Bosnia-Herzegovina at the
23 Q. And when we started off today, Mr. Selak, you made, and I hope
24 not to misquote you, but you made a comment about not requiring weapons
25 from Belgrade.
1 Did I understand that correctly? You were receiving other
2 logistics, and so on, but not so much weapons. Did I understand that
4 JUDGE ORIE: Could you assist us in a reference to the transcript
5 you are referring to?
6 MS. HARBOUR: I believe it might be on page 4 of today's
7 transcript, if that's what Mr. Jordash is referring to.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Let's have a look.
9 MR. JORDASH: Thank you. Yes, that's right, number -- page 4.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Perhaps you put to the witness what he said so that
11 any confusion is --
12 MR. JORDASH: Your Honour, yes.
13 Q. You said this morning, Mr. Selak, with reference to the convoys
14 from Belgrade and to Belgrade:
15 "Later on, these material reserves that had been brought over
16 from Belgrade, and I'm particularly referring to the ammunition, were
17 used to replenish the unit -- the units locally. There was very little
18 in the way of weapons because the Krajina Corps and the other corps of
19 Republika Srpska had, in fact, too many weapons ..."
20 From which source did the Krajina Corps and other corps of the
21 Republika Srpska have too many weapons?
22 A. Your Honours, let me repeat. All the weapons that were
23 transported from Slovenia and Croatia were transported by the corps and
24 the fact that 21.000 were distributed by the JNA and 18.000 by the SDS,
25 that was the weapons brought over from Slovenia because the JNA units
1 were not allowed to have more than 5 per cent of the overall weapons and
2 equipment with them. There was no need to import weapons from Serbia
3 because there was surplus weapons in the country. What they lacked was
4 ammunition, explosives, bombs and other assets. They had surplus
6 Q. Thank you, Mr. Selak.
7 MR. JORDASH: I notice the time. I --
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. It's -- perhaps it's a good time for a break.
9 MR. JORDASH: Yes, I have approximately 10 to 15 minutes left,
10 that's it.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I think you took until now a little bit over an
12 hour. You indicated yesterday that you need one and a half hours. So
13 you say 15 minutes after the break.
14 MR. JORDASH: Your Honour, yes.
15 JUDGE ORIE: So then if we start at quarter to 11.00, which we
16 intend to do, you will have until 11.00.
17 We take a break, and we'll resume at quarter to 11.00.
18 [The witness stands down]
19 --- Recess taken at 10.17 a.m.
20 --- On resuming at 10.51 a.m.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Groome, you'd like to raise a matter?
22 MR. GROOME: Yes, Your Honour, thank you. Early today at
23 transcript 16, there was evidence led by Mr. Jordash in which
24 Colonel Selak referred to a group of men associated with Manjaca camp as
25 Red Berets. This evidence appears to be both relevant and advanced the
1 Prosecution's case on its face.
2 I interpret our duty as international Prosecutors to bring to the
3 Chamber's attention an occasion when the Trial Chamber should be cautious
4 with respect to evidence which, although on its face appears favourable
5 for the Prosecution, it may still be unreliable and misleading.
6 The Prosecution does not seek to rely on any evidence
7 establishing a possible connection between this group from Manjaca and
8 the two accused in this case. Investigations conducted by the
9 Prosecution did not establish any reliable evidence of such and while
10 there exists the possibility that there may be a connection that is not
11 supported with reliable evidence, and inferences related to it should be
13 This is the reason the evidence was not led when the witness
14 testified in the Milosevic case and why it is not part of the Prosecution
15 case against Mr. Stanisic and Mr. Simatovic. Although I think in light
16 of my comments now additional questions of Colonel Selak are not
17 necessary, if Mr. Jordash were to further explore with Colonel Selak the
18 appearance and conduct of these men he has referred to as the Manjaca
19 Red Berets it would become clear that is he speaking about some group
20 other than the Red Berets which have been the subject of this trial.
21 Thank you, Your Honour.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And that's the -- that group is mentioned in
23 the Milosevic transcript as have to leave the Manjaca camp because it was
24 prepared for prisoners of war to be received there. Is that --
25 MR. GROOME: Yes. That was raised by Mr. Milosevic on the
1 cross-examination. It was not led by the Prosecution.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
3 Mr. Jordash.
4 MR. JORDASH: We're grateful to Mr. Groome for the indication.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
6 Could the witness be brought into the courtroom.
7 [The witness takes the stand]
8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Jordash, you have until ten minutes past 10.00
9 [sic] and if you could suggest that you keep firm control over the
10 questions --
11 MR. JORDASH: Yes.
12 JUDGE ORIE: -- but also on the answers to focus on your
14 Please proceed.
15 MR. JORDASH: Thank you. Could we have on the screen, please,
16 D00682. And as it appears on Your Honours chart, which is now D730, at
17 number 11.
18 Q. You've seen this document before, Mr. Selak, and I just want to
19 deal with the arming of the police by the -- or via the Federal
20 Secretariat. And in the chart, you've noted, in relation to this
21 document, and I'm just quoting part of it:
22 "Although it was quite normal for police to request from the army
23 this kind of supplies, it would have been more logical for the Okucani
24 MUP to turn to the Banja Luka base and not to the Bosanski Petrovac
1 Earlier today you also said at --
2 A. Petrovac, yes.
3 Q. Earlier today, at page 26 of the transcript, you also said in
4 relation to the distribution of arms to volunteer groups, you said:
5 "Literally all the population was armed, and behind this was the
6 SDS, the army, and the government because they distributed weapons to the
7 police and everyone else."
8 In the time that you were commander of the Banja Luka
9 Logistics Base, was there any -- let me strike that. Did the Banja Luka
10 base have any role in arming the police?
11 A. The Banja Luka Logistics Base didn't have any role to play in
12 the arming. These documents indicate that requests were made via
13 Belgrade because it is the sixth -- it is the Petrovac technical base,
14 and that's pretty odd, in fact. These are enormous amounts of
15 ammunition, so my base did not send such requests.
16 Q. What about, then -- what -- what role did the Bosanski Petrovac
17 base play in arming the police of the Republika Srpska?
18 A. 530th Logistics Base in Bosanski Petrovac was set up in 1991
19 from the ranks of the units that were pulled out of Slovenia and Croatia.
20 The ammunition and weapons that were brought from there into this base
21 were -- were used to arm these very units. The base was disbanded in the
22 month of June and was merged with my unit. Once the war reserves that
23 were present in that base were expended, it was disbanded.
24 There was no need for it. It had, in fact, been set up based on
25 the extra assets brought over from Slovenia and Croatia.
1 Q. Are you able to testify to the arming of the police in 1992?
2 A. The police, or, rather, the Ministry of Interior and police
3 administrations did receive, in particular, ammunition. There were
4 weapons supplied but to a lesser extent. They already had weapons and
5 were supplied with ammunition, explosives, bombs, flares, and certain
6 assets that they needed. There was a large request put forth by the MUP
7 in Banja Luka, seeking APCs even. The corps commander nor the
8 2nd District Command in Sarajevo were able to accommodate these requests
9 but they send their request with their positive recommendation on to
10 Belgrade, and that was done outside of my base in -- outside the
11 knowledge of my base in Banja Luka. But they did receive both the
12 weapons and equipment via Belgrade.
13 Q. And where in Belgrade did they come from, as far as you're aware?
14 A. This sort of equipment was something that the technical
15 administration base in Belgrade had. So it was done through the chain of
16 command. And the army accommodated these requests from the police, who
17 did not have either the -- their depots or assets and resorted to those
18 belonging to the army. It was only natural.
19 Q. And do you know how the special police task force at the state
20 security centre in Banja Luka was armed?
21 A. The special police unit in Banja Luka received its arms through
22 the Krajina Corps in Banja Luka. The military police of the corps was in
23 daily contact with that special unit and the MUP in Banja Luka. So it
24 was done directly through them. It didn't go through the logistics base
25 in Banja Luka. This unit had not been officially registered and was set
1 up with the onset of the war.
2 Unfortunately, they committed horrible operations at night.
3 Churches and mosques were blown up at night, and that's what these
4 special units were involved in.
5 Q. Do you know anything about other special police units which
6 existed at the time which were set up by the Bosnian Serbs, other than
7 the Banja Luka Special Police Unit?
8 Do you know how they were armed?
9 JUDGE ORIE: That's a few questions in one.
10 Could we take it step by step.
11 MR. JORDASH:
12 Q. Do you know about other special police units, CSBs, or CJBs, set
13 up by the Bosnian Serbs in 1992?
14 A. I know of units in East Bosnia: Srebrenica, Bratunac, Skelani.
15 But they were mixed units, including people who had come from Serbia.
16 That was where volunteer units and special units were set up, acting on
17 the orders of the Ministry of the Interior, or, rather, operational
18 staffs of these various municipalities. And I mean police operational
20 The army had to step in to help them with ammunition because they
21 had depots. There were no depots belonging to the Ministry of the
22 Interior. So there was this direct contact between the army and police
23 structures. And I can especially vouch for Srebrenica, Bratunac, and
24 those areas. There is supporting documentation to that effect which is,
25 I believe, in possession of the Prosecution here.
1 JUDGE ORIE: To avoid whatever confusion, when you are referring
2 to the Ministry of Interior, the Ministry of Interior of what?
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Republika Srpska.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
5 Please proceed.
6 MR. JORDASH:
7 Q. You said that you can especially vouch for Srebrenica, Bratunac,
8 and those areas. Why is it you can especially vouch for that, or for
9 those areas?
10 A. There is supporting documentation. I believe I have these
11 documents, and we were able to see them here, where even the president of
12 the municipality of Srebrenica and even Teslic - I forgot to mention
13 Teslic - writes about grave problems that they had due to this, Teslic,
14 Bratunac, Vlasenica. The president of the municipality of Teslic was
15 even threatened with weapons. They wanted him to produce his IDs, and
16 had he been a Bosniak he would probably have been killed. As they
17 checked his identity, they left him. Nobody was killed. They left him
18 in peace. But there were quite a few wounded and injured.
19 Q. Okay, you said that -- you referred to supporting documentation.
20 Were you aware of this route to the arming of the police at the time it
21 was happening; or did you gather that knowledge from documentation you've
22 seen since then?
23 A. I didn't know that before. I work with Institute for War Crimes
24 in Sarajevo, and I was able to find some of the documents in that
25 institute. So I came to know about it roughly two years ago as I was
1 reviewing the documentation that they had. That was the first time I
2 learnt of it because Srebrenica is far away in East Bosnia, and I
3 wouldn't have been able to have informing about it at the time.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Jordash could we seek --
5 You said they had problems with this. What exactly were you
6 referring to? You said, "...about grave problems that they had due to
7 this ..."
8 What kind of problems? Due to what exactly?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Am I to answer this?
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please.
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The document that I read said that
12 the president of the municipality described over one or two pages the
13 terrible incidents that happened with these armed paramilitary groups.
14 He even mentioned their names because they were locals. And what they
15 wanted, in fact, was to take over power, to topple the government that
16 had been there hitherto. There was even -- there were even physical
17 assaults and the president of the municipality and an associate of his
18 who is named in the document said that some four to five persons were
19 beaten up, although they were not killed. He was shocked. And his
20 conclusion was that it was their intention to take over the power in
21 these municipalities. That group of people.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Now, you earlier described special police units by
23 saying and referring to Srebrenica, Bratunac, Skelani, and Teslic, that
24 there were mixed units, "including people who had come from Serbia. That
25 was where volunteer units and special units were set up."
1 Now, in your last answer, you referred to locals. Therefore,
2 it's not entirely clear to me whether it was the locals joining
3 paramilitary units and causes these problems; or whether these were the
4 mixed units, including those who came from Serbia.
5 Could you clarify what exactly was the behaviour of units
6 coming -- of -- composed of people coming from where?
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the Prosecution has a
8 document which says that a group of people came together in Serbia, in
9 Valjevo and some other town. Twenty men gathered and came to Teslic in
10 an organised manner where they formed a group of 50, and he goes on to
11 explain what they did.
12 So 20 of them came from Serbia and made a larger group of 50, and
13 they attempted to take over the power in the municipality. There is this
14 document here with the Prosecution. And I think I have it too, but I
15 would have to search it in the documents I have.
16 The Prosecution have it for sure. As we were preparing over the
17 past couple of day, I did see the document.
18 JUDGE ORIE: This whole line of questions started with "other
19 special police units set up by the Bosnian Serbs in 1992."
20 Now, this group, 20 people from Serbia, another 30 joining, so
21 that it made up a group of 50, was there any police involved in there;
22 or was this just --
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, could you tell us what the involvement of the
24 police then was in this specific incident, or this specific group?
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I think that the
1 document reads that even the chief of police participated in these
2 activities, but I don't know if he was on the side of the president of
3 the municipality or not.
4 In -- the Prosecution have the document. Anyway, the police was
5 aware of it. And I suppose that some of their men were part of that
6 group. They were struggling for power in these municipalities. Now, as
7 for the political views of individuals, I don't know about that.
8 JUDGE ORIE: You've answered my question. Thank you.
9 MR. JORDASH: I think I have only got one question left. No,
10 I -- or very few questions left.
11 Q. First of all, there's been evidence in this case, Mr. Selak, that
12 there was a training base at Mrkonjic Grad.
13 MR. JORDASH: And that's, Your Honours, P161 [sic].
14 Q. Did you or your men come across a training base at Mrkonjic Grad
15 in 1992?
16 A. Your Honour, I went to Mrkonjic quite often because there was a
17 huge arms depot there that had been set up in 1991 --
18 JUDGE ORIE: Just to be clear, it's a confidential document. I
19 do not know --
20 MR. JORDASH: [Overlapping speakers]... producing. I was just --
21 for Your Honours' reference, it's the speech from Kula.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Thank you.
23 MR. JORDASH:
24 Q. Sorry, if you would --
25 MS. HARBOUR: Just for clarity of the report, are you referring
1 to P161 or P61?
2 MR. JORDASH: It's P61. Thank you. I made the mistake. Sorry.
3 Q. Sorry, please continue. You went to Mrkonjic Grad quite often
4 because there was a huge arms depot there.
5 Please go on, Mr. Selak, please finish your answer.
6 A. I would often visit the president of the municipality of
7 Mrkonjic Grad. We had common problems. There was a training grounds for
8 target practice nearby, but there was no need for me to visit it. I
9 would go to the depot. I don't know how many there were who attended
10 training, but there was a training ground for target practice for
11 infantry weapons only, not for artillery, so rifles, light machine-guns,
12 machine-guns, but not cannons and artillery, in general.
13 Q. And who was training there?
14 A. It could be used by the civilian police as well --
15 Q. Now --
16 A. -- And some of their associations, but it was for the purposes of
17 the police who also had to train in marksmanship. It was probably used
18 for volunteers as well because every municipality had their own
19 Territorial Defence unit --
20 Q. Mr. Selak, I don't want theory. I want fact. Do you know who
21 trained there?
22 A. I don't know.
23 Q. Okay. Thank you.
24 A. I don't know exactly who they were. I don't want to get it
1 Q. Thank you.
2 MR. JORDASH: Nothing further.
3 Q. Thank you, Mr. Selak.
4 MR. JORDASH: Thank you, Your Honours.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Jordash.
6 Mr. Bakrac, any questions for --
7 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. We have no
9 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Harbour, are you ready to cross-examine the
11 MS. HARBOUR: Yes, Your Honour.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Selak, you will now be cross-examined by
13 Ms. Harbour. Ms. Harbour is counsel for the Prosecution.
14 Cross-examination by Ms. Harbour:
15 Q. Mr. Selak, you've given quite a bit of testimony today about a
16 group that you call the Red Berets who were headquartered at the Bosna
17 hotel in Banja Luka, and you've talked about them training at the Manjaca
18 training grounds.
19 MS. HARBOUR: If we could please have Mr. Selak's notebook which
20 is now in evidence as D702. And if we could please have page 95 in the
21 English and it's page 72 in the B/C/S. And I have no objection if the
22 witness wants to use the hard copy of the notebook.
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I have the original.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Selak, could you please always compare that the
25 page you're using in the original corresponds with the one you see on
1 your screen.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] 14, 4 ...
3 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
4 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Harbour, we have provisionally put all these
5 documents under seal so it should not be shown to the public. And could
6 you please keep in mind when asking questions that nothing would arise
7 which would need -- which would require a private session.
8 MS. HARBOUR: Yes, Your Honour. Although, I don't believe,
9 having checked the records from the Milosevic case, that there was any --
10 and other cases that there was ever any need for this particular
11 document to be under seal. And it's the notebook of this witness who is
12 testifying in open session.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But then we should -- we can't do the two. We
14 can't provisionally put it under seal and then nevertheless show it the
16 Is that would require the status at least of this exhibit to be
17 changed before we can use it as a public exhibit.
18 You would say you verified that it was not dealt with in any way
19 under seal?
20 MS. HARBOUR: Yes, Your Honour.
21 JUDGE ORIE: In any of the proceedings, because we know that the
22 witness, although in the Milosevic transcript, is the 92 ter material,
23 doesn't mean that he didn't testify in other cases.
24 Have you verified the other cases as well?
25 MS. HARBOUR: I have, Your Honour.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
2 Then, under those circumstances, unless there's any objection, I
3 would, for this exhibit, change the status into public.
4 It's hereby decided.
5 Please proceed.
6 MS. HARBOUR:
7 Q. Following that conversation, actually, I've just consulted with
8 counsel and we won't go into the Red Berets issue, as we've clarified
9 that -- these are not the Red Berets that are in issue in our case. So
10 I'd like to move on to a different line of questioning, Mr. Selak.
11 A summary of your career history has been tendered in this case
12 as Exhibit D705. I'm going to ask you a few questions about your career
13 history, just to make sure that it's clear.
14 This document states that you were commander of the
15 Rear Logistics Base 993, in Banja Luka beginning in 1989. And the next
16 item on this document is that in March 1992, you became chief of the
17 liaison group for contacts between UNPROFOR and the JNA.
18 Were you commander of the rear logistics base during that entire
19 time, beginning when you took the post in 1989 and up until March 1992?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. And did you -- correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe you held
22 the position of the chief of the liaison group with UNPROFOR from the
23 12th of March, 1992, until the 8th of April, 1992; is that correct?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Is it correct that during that period, you did not hold the
1 position of commander of the Rear Logistics Base 993 in Banja Luka?
2 A. Yes. I wasn't in that position.
3 Q. Did you retain any responsibilities related to the provision of
4 logistics during that time-period?
5 A. Well, I regularly went to my command post. My deputy,
6 Colonel Celina, was Chief of Staff while I was temporarily absent, and I
7 was removed from that position as politically unsuitable, and then I went
8 back to my position of base commander again.
9 Q. I guess what I'd like to know is whether during that time-period
10 you held the positions -- the responsibilities related to logistics even
11 though you were not, for that time-period, the chief of the logistics
13 A. I did not have command responsibility in that brief period.
14 Q. Okay. During that time-period, would your -- the entries in your
15 notebook reflect meetings that related to your -- to the
16 993rd Logistics Base, or would those entries be limited to your role as
17 the liaison?
18 A. Since there were no more than 50 metres from the logistics
19 command post to my command, I regularly went to check what was going on
20 in the logistics base, and I made some entries for my own information and
21 purposes, but I didn't interfere with the work of the logistics base.
22 But I was not indifferent to how it operated either, because I had worked
23 there for a long time, I cared for it, and I gave advice to the people
24 who continued to work there. The UNPROFOR command was in Ilok. I had to
25 tour the area with them regularly and to keep myself and them informed
1 about what was going on in the area of Bosnian Krajina.
2 Q. And on the 8th of April, 1992, you again assumed the position of
3 the commander of the Rear Logistics Base 993 and you held the same
4 position and the same responsibilities as you had held prior to
5 March 1992; is that correct?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Your logistics base was under the 1st Military District, which
8 was based in Belgrade through the end of December 1991; is that right?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. And on January 1992, due to reorganisation, your logistics base
11 became under the 2nd Military District, which was based in Sarajevo?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. And you've given evidence that you applied for retirement on the
14 19th of May, 1992, but you remained in your same position until the
15 10th of July. Did you continue to perform your job with the same level
16 of responsibility and involvement all the way until the 10th of July?
17 A. Yes, fully. I applied for retirement on 19 May 1992 because an
18 oath needed to be made to the Army of Republika Srpska. I refused that,
19 and instead I applied to be retired. I did not wish to be an officer of
20 the Army of Republika Srpska. I wanted to be an officer of the
21 Yugoslav People's Army.
22 Q. From the 10th of July, 1992, until the 30th of September, you
23 took a three-month holiday, and then you were officially retired from the
24 JNA beginning on the 1st of October, 1992; is that correct?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Now, if we could turn to your notebook, which is admitted into
2 evidence as D702. The page I'm interested in is page 7 in the English,
3 and it's page 5 in the B/C/S version.
4 A. Page 5 in my document?
5 Q. Yes, it should be.
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. This entry relates to a meeting on the 26th of December, 1991,
8 that took place in Belgrade, and -- is that right?
9 A. Yes. At the command of the 1st Military District.
10 Q. At this meeting, under the name of Colonel Mihajlovic, chief of
11 material and financial operations, you wrote:
12 "Impermissibly large number of individual receipts."
13 A. [No interpretation]
14 Q. "Urgent entering of equipment from other units in the books.
15 Real situation remains unknown."
16 Then the commander responded that someone has to answer for the
17 state of the MFP and of equipment.
18 Who is this commander that the notebook refers to?
19 A. The commander of the 1st Military District in Belgrade. I can't
20 remember who it was at the time. I can't remember the last name now.
21 Assistant commander for morale was Vidovic. I'm sorry, the name eludes
23 Q. That's okay.
24 A. At the moment, he was colonel-general by rank.
25 Q. Okay. What was the problem with the state of equipment that gave
1 rise to this discussion?
2 A. The problem was that records were not made on receipt of
3 materiel. Records were not made in the units, and there were no -- not
4 even receipts made in the financial section, so they believed there must
5 be something illegal, something dirty if records are not made. Because
6 the normal legal way is to make records of every single receipt.
7 MS. HARBOUR: Could we go on now to page 41 in the English, which
8 is page 29 in the B/C/S, I believe. Although it may be page 30,
9 actually, in the B/C/S.
10 Q. This entry relates to an analysis of logistic support units
11 included in the 993rd Logistics Base system, and the date is the
12 16th of January, 1992. Have you found the entry?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Here it states that --
15 A. 16 January.
16 Q. 16 --
17 A. Just a moment. I've found it.
18 Q. Here it states that:
19 "TO Staff and TO units were added to the logistical support
20 system but their actual numbers never defined."
21 If the number of TO units requiring weapons and equipment was not
22 defined, could that result in units being given more weapons than their
23 actual membership?
24 A. Yes. If no clear records are kept, it creates problems, and
25 that's why I underlined this issue in my working draft. Because it was
1 huge problems that arms were delivered without any records, and then you
2 don't know who would use it and how, for what purpose. So we officially
3 started the procedure for Territorial Defence units to define exactly
4 their number of personnel, what operations they're going to engage in, so
5 that they could be held accountable for all the ammunition and weapons
6 they use.
7 If they -- they draw supplies from logistical bases, they had to
8 report in their war diary, which has to be kept in every unit, their
9 expenditure of ammunition. And it's against the law to fail to keep a
10 war diary, and that entails disciplinary and criminal consequences.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Harbour, what we see on our screen, does that
12 reflect what you just read in B/C/S? The English I am able to find, but
13 I have some difficulties in ...
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] 52. That's it.
15 MS. HARBOUR: It should ...
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We have it now. The schematic is
17 here. I have the schematic -- I have the -- I have the page on the
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I think I see it now, yes.
20 MS. HARBOUR: If we could now go to page 42 in the English, which
21 is page 30 in the B/C/S as well, same page. Oh, actually, it might be
22 page 31 in the B/C/S.
23 Q. Here it states:
24 "MFO not defined at TO staffs and units legitimate," and then
25 there's an illegible portion, "... impossible."
1 Mr. Selak --
2 A. I haven't found it.
3 Q. Okay. It's the same entry?
4 A. Yes, yes. Oh, 54. Sorry. Yes.
5 Q. Now the line we're interested in was, "MFO not defined at TO
6 staffs and units legitimate," and then the next portion is illegible.
7 And I was wondering if you could decipher the words and tell us what this
8 entry means?
9 A. Inability to secure legal accountability for the expenditure of
10 ammunition, fuel, et cetera, even funds. What is defined here as MFO,
11 material and financial operations organ.
12 Q. The next entry goes on, "Abuse of authorisation in [illegible]
13 and using military property."
14 Can you decipher that word "abuse of authorisation in" and the
15 words that comes right after that?
16 A. It's my handwriting. I wrote this myself. It says, "Abuse in
17 the handling and use of weapons, ammunition, fuel."
18 There are huge expenditures of ammunition not justified by
19 specific missions. The units in Eastern Bosnia had very view operations
20 but expended huge amounts of ammunition. They didn't keep war diaries
21 and we were wondering where all this was going because they kept asking
22 for new supplies of ammunition, and I wanted to clear it up with the
23 competent authorities of the 1st Military District in Belgrade. That's
25 Q. And the first item under "The abuse of authorisation" is that
1 fuel was given to business organisations but also to socio-political
2 organisations and socio-political communities. What kind of
3 socio-political organisations and communities was the JNA supplying fuel
5 A. All these municipalities were in the area of responsibility of
6 the corps covered by the logistical base in Banja Luka. There was no
7 food and shortages of fuel --
8 Q. [Overlapping speakers]
9 A. -- in that whole area so they addressed the army and wanted the
10 army to bring supplies from Belgrade to help the population survive, fuel
11 and everything else.
12 Q. Sorry to interrupt you. Let me clarify. I'm most interested in
13 what these organisations were. Were they Serb organisations?
14 A. Yes. All of them were Serbian organisations because the whole
15 government in that area was Serb government. There was not a single
16 municipality in this area where Bosniaks or Croats would be in power.
17 The SDS, or, rather, the Republika Srpska took all of the power in its
18 hands, and there were even very few civilian servants of other
19 ethnicities who remained. For instance in Banja Luka, out of 40.000
20 non-Serbs, only 3.000 remained, and that was the same in all the other
21 areas of Bosnian Krajina. That is the area I that covered with my
22 logistics base.
23 MS. HARBOUR: Could we now go to page 43 in the English and it's
24 page 32 in your copy, in the B/C/S copy.
25 JUDGE ORIE: When looking at that -- Witness, could you give us
1 one example of what you considered a socio-political organisation. Was
2 that a political party or was that a -- what -- could you give us one
3 example, just not a long explanation, but just to better understand what
4 you wrote down.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There's not a single example,
6 Your Honour. I'm talking about the institution of municipalities, as
7 municipalities and how they operated, because they were without fuel,
8 without medicines, without food and they addressed the logistics base to
9 provide them with these, and we sent convoys to Serbia to bring those
10 things from Serbia.
11 It was not a specific party nor institution. It was the
12 municipality. Food companies, business organisations, petrol stations,
13 hospitals, civilian hospitals, et cetera, those are the institutions,
14 Your Honour. And I tried to organise convoys to solve the problem --
15 JUDGE ORIE: You've answered my question.
16 Please proceed, Ms. Harbour.
17 MS. HARBOUR: If we could turn to page 43 in the English now and
18 it's page 32 of the B/C/S.
19 Q. And I notice that it is numbered page 56 in your hard copy, if
20 that assists you in finding it, Mr. Selak.
21 A. No problem. 56. Found it.
22 Q. Here we see, "Conclusions."
23 And the third one down reads:
24 "The war booty was never entered in the books, and my personal
25 opinion is that this matter should be looked into by the military."
1 And then the next word is, "Illegible."
2 Could you please tell us what that last word is and then explain
3 what this entry refers to?
4 A. What this is about, Your Honour, is that war booty, especially
5 from Croatia, was never put on the books --
6 JUDGE ORIE: Could you first tell us what that word is before you
7 start explaining.
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Oh, I can. I can.
9 I'm reading the whole item 3:
10 "The war booty was never recorded and I believe personally that
11 this issue must be given greater attention by the military organisation."
12 The military organisation should deal with this, because war
13 booty included ammunition, weapons, and other military assets.
14 MS. HARBOUR:
15 Q. Under that, it says:
16 "Legality has not been observed in the use and distribution of
17 materiel. The consumption of ammunition, fuel, and equipment has not
18 been," and the next part is illegible "... and because of that, a vast
19 quantity of materiel has not been registered by the KC or in the units."
20 Could you tell us what that illegible portion referred to?
21 A. The law was not observed in the handling and distribution of
22 material assets. Expenditures of fuel and equipment were not
23 justified --
24 Q. I think you've misunderstood me. There was a portion of that
25 sentence that was not legible to the translators and that was -- it
2 "The consumption of ammunition, fuel, and equipment has not
3 been ..."
4 And then what does it say after that?
5 A. A record has not been made of it in the KC, which is the
6 bookkeeping centre.
7 Q. Does this entry relate to the issue of illegally arming the Serb
8 Territorial Defence and the Serb population?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Now, could we turn to page 172 in the English. And that's
11 page 140 in the B/C/S version. And this is an entry from the 6th of
12 June, 1992, if that assists you, Mr. Selak.
13 A. Which page is it in my version, please.
14 Q. It says page 26.
15 A. 126 or 26? I'm not clear what the question is.
16 Q. The page is from an entry on the 6th of June, 1992, and the
17 notation on the page in your notebook is 26. I'm not sure why that is
18 because it's a lower page number than the previous page.
19 A. No, that can't be. And what is the date again? The 6th of June,
20 you said?
21 Q. Yes.
22 A. Give me a moment. 4th of June ... 1st of June ... 2nd ...
23 4th ... there it is, the 6th. I do have the 6th of June entry. If that
24 is the bit that's torn from the rest of the booklet. Yes, I do have it.
1 Q. The very first line in this entry says something about Vrbanja,
2 but the person who translated the entry could not make out the rest of
3 the words. Could you please tell us what it says?
4 A. Fire -- or, rather, the members of the automobile company are
5 engaging in target practice in Banja Luka. It's a local commune within
6 Banja Luka where there was a target practice, and members of an
7 automobile company were practicing firing from infantry weapons.
8 So that would come under my logistics base.
9 Q. Let's skip to number 3, which says -- which is about the
10 situation in the 14th Logistics Base section in Bosanski Petrovac.
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Here it says:
13 "Material from Croatia and Slavonia has not been entered into
15 And then the line right under that is illegible. Could you read
16 that second line for us?
17 A. There were no transactions. This was the situation in the
18 section of the 14th Logistics Base. It was just one branch of it where
19 transactions were not done in keeping with the law because they did not
20 make records in appropriate books about assets that they had given out.
21 It was just a note I made to that effect. When I say that there
22 were no transactions, I meant there were no lawful transaction or
23 transactions in keeping with the law. Later on, that particular section
24 or branch was disbanded and came under the Banja Luka base.
25 Q. What materiel from Croatia and Slavonia is being discussed here?
1 A. First, the withdrawal of units from Slovenia and Croatia
2 proceeded across Bosnia. Some went to Serbia; some went by sea to
3 Montenegro. Those that arrived in Banja Luka brought along weapons,
4 ammunition and war assets. Unfortunately, they even brought along
5 certain trivial item, such as office furnishings, et cetera, and I was
6 really angry about it because it was an additional burden on the convoy.
7 But there was also war booty that they got along from Croatia that had
8 never been discussed, and I wanted this issue to be raised since I
9 didn't believe those practices to be lawful. That's why I made a note
10 about it. And I did say that no records of it were made in the official
11 documentation of the JNA.
12 Q. So --
13 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Harbour, the document as we find it on our
14 screen talks about Slavonia; whereas, the witness explains, and that may
15 be more logical, Slovenia. Could we verify the accuracy of the
16 transcript in this respect?
17 MS. HARBOUR: I was just going to clarify that with the witness,
18 Your Honour.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, if you would please do that.
20 Before but we do that, I have another question. Page -- which is
21 numbered as a bit of a surprise, page 26, you say that's the 6th of June.
22 Looking at the date, I have some difficulties in understanding why this
23 is interpreted as the 6th of June, what we see on the screen. Have you
24 given that any consideration?
25 MS. HARBOUR: Do you mean in the original?
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, in the original.
2 MS. HARBOUR: Should we ask the witness to clarify that?
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, we could ask him and perhaps compare the
4 previous page and the following page.
5 MS. HARBOUR:
6 Q. Mr. Selak, can you recognise the date on the top of this page as
7 the 6th of June?
8 JUDGE ORIE: That is the question. The page we were -- some
9 questions were asked about the page which is numbered 26. Can you still
10 read, although there seems to be a perforation in it, what the date of
11 that entry is?
12 Perhaps we go from the back. The last digit is -- seems to be
13 a 2. Is that ...
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, everything is clear.
15 The problem is that this is my second official notebook. As I was
16 fleeing Banja Luka, I had to hide my work book because I went through
17 Banja Luka to Germany so --
18 JUDGE ORIE: If you would be -- if you'd first be so kind to
19 answer my question. I am looking at this page at the right top corner.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
22 JUDGE ORIE: I -- the last two digits seems to me to be 9-2.
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Now, the digit before that, could you still decipher
25 what number that is?
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Six. It's the 6th of the 6th,
2 meaning month, of 1992. And I also have the 5th of June on the previous
3 page. You see, in my notebook - I can show it to you, Your Honour - I
4 have the full entry for both the 5th and the 6th of June, 1992.
5 JUDGE ORIE: I see that. Now, I have difficulties in comparing
6 when I compare your 6th on the 5th of June, with the middle digit of what
7 you say is the 6th of June, they seem to be of a quite different form,
8 and it -- and if I then go to the 7th of June, I also see that I have
9 great difficulties to reconcile your month, your indication of the month,
10 with the 6s I found on the 5th of June and the 7th of June.
11 Do you understand my problem? It looks to me more as if it were
12 a 2, for example.
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, can perhaps some of
14 your staff have a look at the original that I have because the photocopy
15 perhaps is not visible. It is the 6th of June. I maybe made a mistake
16 when writing it because I was upset or something, and then I corrected
17 it. It is my handwriting - you can check it - because the page before
18 and after that bears my handwriting, and I can state with full
19 responsibility that it's the 6th of June, 1992. I probably inadvertently
20 made a mistake writing in and then corrected it but not precisely because
21 I couldn't imagine that I was going to be looking at it and studying it
22 is in great detail.
23 So it is the 6th of June, 1992.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Perhaps you should see for
1 yourself. I can bring it over to you, the original.
2 JUDGE ORIE: The usher will assist you in handing it.
3 Could the usher take the original from the witness, show it to
4 the parties, and then to the Bench.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Just a moment, please. There, the
6 5th of June, 25, 26, 27.
7 [Trial Chamber confers]
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, there would be no
9 reason to falsify this in any way. It was all done spontaneously.
10 [Trial Chamber confers]
11 JUDGE ORIE: The original is, by far, clearer, and is -- I have
12 no further questions on the date of the 6th of June.
13 MS. HARBOUR:
14 Q. Mr. Selak --
15 JUDGE ORIE: Part of the problem, as a matter of fact, is
16 apparently a stain on the photocopy which hides, more or less, that it is
17 a corrected other number, which then is made a 6.
18 Please proceed.
19 MS. HARBOUR:
20 Q. Mr. Selak, I would just like to clarify, based on your last
21 answer and what we see in the translation at least of this page, you've
22 been speaking of materials pulled out of Croatia and Slovenia. Is that
23 what the notebook also reflects? Does it say Slovenia or Slavonia?
24 A. Yes, Slovenia. Not Slavonia. Slovenia.
25 Q. Could we turn to page 191 of this notebook, which is -- that's
1 the English and page 157 in the B/C/S copy. And the number noted on
2 your page, Mr. Selak, is number 60. Page 60. And this ...
3 A. 60. Mm-hm.
4 Q. It should be an entry from the 5th of July, 1992.
5 A. Page 60. My page 60 has an entry for January. Yes, it has to be
6 at the end. The 6th of July?
7 Q. The 5th of July.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Harbour, I'm trying to follow it in e-court as
9 well. You said page 191, and we usually refer to e-court pages. Now,
10 the document is 162 pages in e-court. So if you could ...
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, the 5th.
12 MS. HARBOUR: It's page 191 in the English, and 157 in
13 [overlapping speakers]
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I made a mistake. I looked at the B/C/S
15 original. I apologise.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I found it.
17 MS. HARBOUR:
18 Q. This entry relates to a meeting with logistics organs of the
19 1st and 2nd Krajina Corps, the 14th Logistics Base, air force and
20 anti-aircraft defence command and assistant for logistics in the
21 Main Staff of the VRS regarding logistical support to units in the area
22 of responsibility.
23 Item 5 here says:
24 "The problem of keeping records of equipment, especially with
25 respect to property handed over to TO Staffs."
1 Is this the same problem that you've been discussing?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Thank you. I'm done with your notebook for the moment.
4 At transcript page 22201 of your Milosevic testimony --
5 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Harbour, if we are entering a new area, I think
6 we are at 75 minutes. So then perhaps we first take a break.
7 And could you give us, after the break, an indication as to your
8 time estimates so that we can still further consider whether we would --
9 whether it's useful to have a short session tomorrow and to finish.
10 Could I also ask the other parties to give their thoughts on how
11 much time they would need after having heard the cross-examination by the
13 And, Mr. Jordash, could I also inquire with you whether, if we
14 would sit - again, it has not been decided yet - tomorrow, and if
15 Mr. Stanisic would not be present, whether he prefer to be -- to have the
16 video-link active in the UNDU, which still, of course, is an option.
17 Perhaps you find out during the break.
18 MR. JORDASH: I will.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Then we take a break and resume at 25 minutes to
21 --- Recess taken at 12.05 p.m.
22 --- Upon resuming at 12.40 p.m.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Harbour, to start with, a time estimate would
24 be ...
25 MS. HARBOUR: Your Honours, I'm not sure exactly how long it will
1 be, but it will definitely be under the original estimate of three hours.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but for scheduling purposes, I'd like to know
3 what time you'd approximately need.
4 MS. HARBOUR: Another two hours.
5 JUDGE ORIE: I'm looking at the Defence.
6 Mr. Bakrac, Mr. Jordash. [Overlapping speakers] ...
7 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] [Overlapping speakers] ...
8 Your Honour, a minute or two, as things stand now. And that would be
9 more of a clarification or correction than a question.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And then additional minutes to be deduced
11 rather than to add it, isn't it? To be added, yes.
12 Mr. Jordash.
13 MR. JORDASH: So far none.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Okay.
15 MR. JORDASH: But I'm anticipating that the reason that Mr. Selak
16 was called, according to the 92 bis response, will give rise to some
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
19 MR. JORDASH: And sorry, Your Honour, could I also add that we
20 can carry tomorrow without video-link and without the client, too,
21 without the accused.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
23 Then please proceed, Ms. Harbour.
24 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
25 MS. HARBOUR:
1 Q. Mr. Selak, at transcript page 22201 of your Milosevic testimony
2 which has been tendered into evidence in this case you testified about a
3 time when General Uzelac requested you to dispense weapons from the
4 logistics depot at -- to TO units in Sipovo, Mrkonjic Grad and for the
5 5th Kozara brigade near Prijedor.
6 You said:
7 "This was contrary to the law because weapons could be issued
8 only following an official declared mobilisation and this has not been
10 Now, I'd like to show you the transcript of an intercepted
11 conversation between Radovan Karadzic and Slobodan Milosevic on the
12 8th of July, 1991, and you were asked about this document at transcript
13 page T.22246 to 47 of your Milosevic testimony.
14 MS. HARBOUR: Could we please have Exhibit P626 on the screen.
15 And page 3 in the English and in the B/C/S.
16 Q. Here, Karadzic says:
17 "All right. Let them arm them there. Here I ... we've got 170
18 ready in Mrkonjic and 150 in Sipovo, and they are ready to go to Kupres."
19 Milosevic then asks:
20 "Is Uzelac also in charge of that?"
21 And Karadzic responds:
22 "No, no, this is -- I think that it is him, yes, yes."
23 Mr. Selak, when you testified in Milosevic, you agreed that,
24 based on your later interaction with Mr. Uzelac this conversation related
25 to his request for you to supply TO units.
1 My question for you is whether this intercept reveals that
2 Milosevic and Karadzic were co-ordinating with Uzelac in something that
3 was illegal at the time.
4 A. Yes. It had to do with the arming of TO units which could be
5 done only once mobilisation was officially called, around it could only
6 have been done by the Bosnia and Herzegovina TO Staff. Since
7 mobilisation had not been called, I refused to obey the order, although
8 I had problems with Uzelac later on, but there was no basis for it. I
9 called the General Staff in Belgrade to tell them that I would not obey
10 that order and asked that I be removed from my position. They went along
11 with my decision. They said, You are right, and you will not be removed
12 from your position.
13 It was General Siber and General Crneric in Belgrade who
14 responded. The latter was commander of the Military District in Belgrade
15 and they gave me their support.
16 Q. If we could just really focus in on the question that I'm
17 asking, that will help the Court safe -- make the best use of its time.
18 Now if we could now please turn to page 4 in the English and in
19 the B/C/S.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Have we received an answer on the matter? I don't
21 think so.
22 What Ms. Harbour asked you is whether this --
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I don't see it here.
24 JUDGE ORIE: One second.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I didn't have the right page.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Then -- you mean of the intercept?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
3 JUDGE ORIE: [Overlapping speakers]
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I didn't have that part of the
5 right page.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now the relevant portion is what Ms. Harbour
7 read to you. And, Ms. Harbour, could we ...
8 MS. HARBOUR:
9 Q. Mr. Selak t begins with Dr. Karadzic saying:
10 "All right. Let them arm them there. We've got 170 ready in
11 Mrkonjic and 150 in Sipovo and they are ready to go to Kupres."
12 Do you see that?
13 A. Yes. Can I see that.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, the question was whether this reveals
15 that Mr. Karadzic and Mr. Milosevic were -- and let me get back to the --
16 whether this transcript reveals that --
17 MS. HARBOUR: Shall I assist, Your Honour?
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I'm just trying to find again the question you
19 put to the witness.
20 The question was: Whether this intercept reveals that
21 Mr. Milosevic and Mr. Karadzic were co-ordinating with Uzelac in the
22 matter which you have described as illegal.
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, they were.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. What the transcript reveals sometimes is just
25 a matter of interpretation of what is in there. So -- But apparently the
1 witness has no other explanation for it.
2 Please proceed.
3 MS. HARBOUR: Thank you, Your Honour.
4 Q. If we could now turn to page 4 in both the English and the B/C/S
5 of this document.
6 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
7 MS. HARBOUR: I think it must be further down on the page.
8 Q. Referring to Uzelac, Karadzic states:
9 "Is he going to accept more of our boys if he needs them or just
10 the ones that already ..."
11 And Milosevic then states:
12 "He shall receive them, if needed. But you give him as many as
13 you judge that should stay there. Everything shall be transported for
14 them in the helicopters so that they've got everything, so that they stay
15 and guard."
16 Here we have the president of Serbia and the head of the
17 Bosnia Serb political party discussing sending manpower to a commander of
18 the federal army; is that correct?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Karadzic refers to "our boys," and Milosevic responded that,
21 "Uzelac shall receive them, if needed."
22 Do you know what Karadzic is referring to, meaning who were the
23 boys of Karadzic and Milosevic?
24 A. I think those were members of special purpose units trained in
25 special operations.
1 I cannot specifically say what kind of operations, but I suppose
2 those were sabotage units, groups of men who would be attached to the
3 corps for special missions, for setting explosives, or removing mines.
4 That's how I understand it. There was no need for other specialities
5 because the units had a full complement of all other specialisations
6 apart from, perhaps, assault and landing and these activities like
7 removing mines and explosives. I don't see any other problem that needed
8 to be solved.
9 Q. These units that you've referred to, these special purpose
10 units, you've referred to them in a general sense --
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, the witness did not say that these were
12 special purpose units but that is what he thinks and then later he said
13 that he could not specifically say and then he explained why that was his
14 understanding. But it is not knowledge.
15 So, therefore, to ask further questions you should be very
16 careful because there semi-automatics to be no personal knowledge of the
17 witness about -- it's just interpreting the text. Could you please keep
18 that in mind.
19 MS. HARBOUR: Your Honour, I was just going -- I apologise for
20 interrupting. I was just going to clarify that with the witness, what
21 his basis of knowledge was and what he actually knows.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that's fine then. Yes.
23 MS. HARBOUR:
24 Q. Mr. Selak, you've referred to, as we've discussed, these special
25 purpose units, and I want to ask you if you know of any units who would
1 be considered belonging to or under the responsibility of both Karadzic
2 and Milosevic?
3 A. I don't know of any units that were directly linked to Karadzic
4 and Milosevic. I don't believe they existed because there was a
5 political organisation and a military organisation. That's where they
6 would be, special purpose units. In the engineering regiment there were
7 units that set and removed mines. I don't -- I can't think of any units
8 that would be directly subordinated to Milosevic or Karadzic or would be
9 directly established by these two.
10 I hope this is a sufficient answer. I don't know anything more
11 about such units. Apart from engineers, those were people trained for
12 that -- that kind of activity. They destroyed bridges and other features
13 during combat.
14 Q. So your testimony is that you don't know what units that Karadzic
15 and Milosevic are talking about; is that correct?
16 A. Yes.
17 MS. HARBOUR: Could we please have 65 ter 6380 on the screen.
18 Q. This is a letter that you wrote for Mr. Osmanagic who worked in
19 the embassy of Bosnia and Herzegovina in Croatia. Let's wait for it to
20 appear. And Mr. Selak, you had your son send this to your brother,
21 Emir Selak, who was to deliver it to Mr. Osmanagic; is that correct?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Very briefly, could you tell us what the purpose of this letter
24 was. Why did you send it to Mr. Osmanagic?
25 A. Mr. Osmanagic worked in the BH embassy in Zagreb. I wanted to
1 send information about what was really going on in the area of
2 Banja Luka. Information that I first wanted my son to know. Because I
3 was forbidden from moving in Banja Luka after I left the service and my
4 son was concerned because I had to stay and live in Banja Luka, and I
5 wanted to send this information to -- through the embassy in Zagreb to my
6 son, primarily.
7 Q. Under item 2 in this letter you state that in 1991 you refused to
8 carry out the order of General Uzelac for arming the Serbs from Sipovo
9 and Mrkonjic Grad because they wanted to go to Kupres to assist the JNA
11 This refers to the incident that we've been discussing? Did you
12 confirm that this refers to the incident that we've been discussing?
13 A. There was combat around Kupres because already towards the end of
14 1992 when Croatia became independent, fighting started there.
15 Q. I'm sorry to interrupt you. I just wanted you to confirm that
16 this was the same incident with Uzelac asking you to illegally
17 arm --
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Then further down in this letter you state that:
20 "On three occasions in April and May 1992, representatives of
21 Serb municipalities came requesting to be issued weapons, ammunition,
22 hand grenades, and the like. They said they had to protect themselves
23 from the Muslims and the Croats."
24 After you had denied the request for the second time, they went
25 to see General Talic, and after you had denied for the third time -- and
1 here we move to the top of page 2 in the English:
2 "Weapons were issued by Colonel Vaso Tepsic, assistant for the
3 logistics in the 5th Corps. They had earlier relocated the weapons from
4 the logistics base to the warehouses of the 5th Corps."
5 And then you remark:
6 "I was certain that those were actually paramilitary formations."
7 In your view, is this an example of the JNA co-ordinating with
8 the civilian authorities to arm Serb paramilitaries?
9 A. Yes, quite. Because my own deputy, Colonel Cendic [phoen], was
10 in favour of supplying those weapons.
11 Q. Could you please tender this document into evidence.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar, the number would be?
13 THE REGISTRAR: Document will receive -- document 6380 will
14 receive number P3084, Your Honours.
15 JUDGE ORIE: And is admitted into evidence.
16 Please proceed.
17 MS. HARBOUR:
18 Q. After you refused Uzelac's order to illegally arm the TO in
19 Mrkonjic Grad and Sipovo, Uzelac starting asking you to come to meetings
20 half an hour after they began; is that true?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Did this begin around September 1991?
23 A. Yes, that was September 1991, precisely after that refusal.
24 Because it was chief of the General Staff who sent me to Croatia to size
25 up the situation and then I refused certain things, and there were some
1 personal matters between us. He invited me half an hour late so I
2 wouldn't hear what he and the corps commanders and his deputies decided
4 Q. When you were asked about this in the Brdjanin case at transcript
5 reference 12924, you said:
6 "It was my assessment that they discussed the tasks of the corps
7 within its area of responsibility and that I, as a Bosniak, should not
8 hear that."
9 Do you maintain that assessment today?
10 A. Yes. And I must tell you it hurt quite a bit. It wasn't easy.
11 Because they -- that meant they doubted my love for my homeland.
12 Q. In your Milosevic testimony, at transcript page 22206, you said
13 that you were not invited to any meeting where an agreement and a promise
14 from Belgrade was made with respect to TO units in your area of
15 responsibility. And you explained that:
16 "They probably felt that I shouldn't hear these things because
17 arming units of the TO and volunteer units applied only to the Serbian
18 people and not to the Bosniak and Croatian peoples in Bosnia and
20 Do you stand by this previous assessment?
21 A. In full.
22 Q. When you were excluded from meetings, you were not informed
23 afterward about what was discussed while you were not present; is that
25 A. They did not inform me. That's correct.
1 Q. Would you agree that the JNA officers in your area of
2 responsibility were intentionally excluding you from certain discussions
3 because you were not a Serb?
4 A. Yes. They did not trust me. They did not trust my intentions.
5 Q. Do you acknowledge, then, that you were not privy to all of the
6 information regarding the arming of TOs in your area of responsibility?
7 A. I did not know any details because my deputies in charge of
8 ammunition and weapons went to those meetings, and my Chief of Staff
9 attended those meetings, but it was quite clear to me, and I had to
11 Q. In several places in your previous testimony, you have testified
12 about instances when you did not know how or by whom paramilitary units
13 were being armed or whose orders they were following.
14 In particular, I refer to your testimony in the Krajisnik case at
15 transcript page 13384, and your -- the statement that you gave to the
16 Office of the Prosecutor in 2000. And that's on page 8.
17 Would it be accurate to say that you did not know how all of the
18 Serb paramilitary and volunteer formations in Bosnia and Croatia were
19 armed, even in your area of operations?
20 A. I said already somewhere that the JNA had issued 51.000 pieces of
21 weapons to the SDS and then 17.000, and that was the weaponry distributed
22 to the paramilitaries and other groups. Because the JNA could not -- I
23 mean, the parties could not have weapons from any other source. It had
24 to come from the army.
25 Q. Well, you would agree, would you not, that you did not even know
1 about all of the illegal arming that was carried out by the 5th Corps; is
2 that correct?
3 A. It's not that I didn't know. I not only didn't know, but these
4 transports of weapons that they intercepted, they couldn't keep. They
5 had to put them in depots and then distribute them. Of course, I knew
6 they went from house to house and distributed weapons, and they also gave
7 weapons to paramilitary and volunteer groups, that the SDS distributed
8 weapons itself, but not to Bosniaks and Croats but only Serb volunteer
9 units. I'm speaking about Bosnian Krajina but not only.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac.
11 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I'm sorry, I have to
12 make an intervention. I think it is important.
13 On page 41, lines 19 through 23, the witness mentioned another
14 institution, saying "they did not have that kind of weaponry."
15 Perhaps we should ask the witness again or listen to the
16 recording what exactly did the witness say, which institution did not
17 have that kind of weapons to be able to distribute it to the troops and
18 the civilians?
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. You're referring to page 41, although on the
20 left screen we're already at 71, I will work on the basis of my screen to
21 my right. 41 ... I'll read how it was transcribed, Mr. Selak. And to
22 the extent that it is incomplete, I invite you to repeat what you said
23 and what does not appear on the transcript:
24 "I said already somewhere that the JNA had issued 51.000 pieces
25 of weapons to the SDS and then 17.000, and that was the weaponry
1 distributed to the paramilitaries and other groups. Because the JNA
2 could not -- I mean, I parties could not have weapons from any other
3 source, it had to come from the army."
4 Now, what is missing here, what you said, and what is not
5 included in what I just read?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't have that on my transcript
7 before me.
8 JUDGE ORIE: No. That's -- that's the issue.
9 What did you say in addition to what I just read to you as part
10 of that answer?
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I said that those weapons were the
12 weapons that corps units intercepted from convoys coming from Slovenia
13 and Croatia and kept them, and they distributed those weapons, as they
14 saw fit, to their volunteer units, and the police maybe, and any
15 organisation they needed to carry out some tasks for the Serbian Republic
16 of Bosnia-Herzegovina. That's what I meant. I don't know if I was clear
17 enough. But there is a document how much was issued by the army, how
18 much by the SDS, et cetera.
19 JUDGE ORIE: [Overlapping speakers]
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It was all given to volunteer
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Bakrac, the matter has been resolved, I
24 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Ms. Harbour.
1 MS. HARBOUR:
2 Q. In these circumstances where illegal arming was being carried out
3 and you were being excluded from meetings in your own area of
4 responsibility, you would not expect to be informed if the Serbian state
5 security was also participating in illegally arming the Serb TO and other
6 Serb units, would you?
7 A. Yes, yes. They would not be informing me.
8 Q. So you can't exclude the possibility that the Serbian DB was
9 involved in providing weapons to the Serb units and the Serb TO in
10 Croatia and Bosnia in 1991 and 1992; is that correct?
11 A. Correct, yes.
12 Q. In fact, you testified today and this is at temporary transcript
13 page 15, when asked when the Stanisic Defence asked you whether the
14 Serbian DB were operating airfields in your zone of responsibility, you
16 "There were cases in the airfields. The police would block the
17 airfield for a couple of hours because of a certain delivery, but I did
18 not get involved in that because it did not touch upon the military
19 chain of command."
20 Now, let me ask you: How many occasions did -- how many times
21 did you observe this happening?
22 A. I witnessed it only twice, when I was seeing off my son who was
23 fleeing Banja Luka first by plane to Belgrade and then onto Germany. And
24 another time when one of my commanding officers was injured, and I
25 accompanied him by car to see how it's going to go because it was
1 18 kilometres from Banja Luka, an airfield in Mahovljani. I know only
2 about those two cases. I just saw the police cordon off the area and
3 that that was quite normal. That was their legal activity.
4 Q. You've testified today about --
5 JUDGE ORIE: Could I ask one follow-up question.
6 Mr. Selak, do I understand your answer correctly when, I think
7 that it was by coincidence that you found out about the airports being
8 blocked by the police and that you did not receive regular and official
9 information about it?
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
12 Please proceed.
13 MS. HARBOUR:
14 Q. Today you've given evidence about the JNA and then the VRS's role
15 in arming volunteer units, in arming various police units of -- and
16 special police units, including mixed units, that included people from
17 Serbia, and your evidence today was in the context of Bosnia in 1992.
18 You do not know what role the Serbian DB or the Serbian MUP may
19 have played in arming groups such as these; is that correct?
20 A. I did not have that kind of information. I only saw something in
21 documents that I've read since then. But, at that time, I didn't have
22 such information. All I learned about it was from the documents in the
23 War Crimes Investigation Institute where I worked contemporaneously. I
24 had no access to such information because I was working on -- in a
25 different field providing logistics to that whole area.
1 Q. Mr. Selak, General Manojlo Milovanovic was chief of the
2 Main Staff of the VRS beginning in May 1992. Do you know of him?
3 A. I know he was in that position, yes.
4 Q. He provided evidence that when he attend add meeting in
5 January 1993, which was also attended by Jovica Stanisic and
6 Radovan Stojicic, Badza, at that meeting, General Penic [phoen]
7 introduced Milovanovic to Mr. Jovica Stanisic for the first time, and
8 Milovanovic did not know who Mr. Stanisic was. Milovanovic testified at
9 transcript page 4385 in this case, to being:
10 "Quite amazed with the extent of Stanisic's knowledge and
11 information about particular areas in Bosnia."
12 If the chief of the VRS Main Staff did not know who Mr. Stanisic
13 was or what role he played in Bosnia in 1992, would you have expected to
14 know such information?
15 A. I would not have expected that, and there was no need for anyone
16 to keep me informed about this, because my position was in the area of
17 logistics, not security. So I -- there was no need for me to know, and
18 no need for anyone to inform me, unless, of course, it touched upon my
19 work in my area. Otherwise, not.
20 Q. In your Milosevic testimony, you twice stated that Milosevic had
21 control over JNA units, beginning in June of 1991. And this was at
22 transcript pages 22329 and 22357 of your Milosevic testimony.
23 What was the basis for this assertion?
24 A. If he was the prime minister or the president of the state, the
25 army is just an executive branch of the political authority, and
1 Milosevic was the head of that political authority, so it was quite
2 logical. The army executes whatever the government asks it to do.
3 Q. In your evidence, including documents that you've testified about
4 in the Milosevic testimony, there's evidence that orders were issued from
5 the highest levels of the JNA regarding arming of Serb TO Staffs and
7 If Milosevic had command and control over the JNA, he would have
8 responsibility for these orders; correct?
9 A. Milosevic issued orders to the JNA General Staff in Belgrade,
10 which was his executive organ. And the General Staff, in turn, issued
11 orders to all the units across Yugoslavia, and later on, as they seceded,
12 then it was Bosnia.
13 But before that, yes, that was the chain, General Staffs to
14 units, and Milosevic had the authority to issue orders to the JNA
15 General Staff but also the government of the Federal Republic of
17 Q. You've said that Milosevic was the head of the political
18 authority. At this point, in June of 1991, he was president of Serbia.
19 He wasn't the head of Yugoslavia; is that correct?
20 A. Yes, that's correct. However, as the president of Serbia, he had
21 that authority because 95 per cent of the General Staff were officers of
22 Serb ethnicity. I say 95. At any rate, it was the vast majority. And
23 they had the same political objective. And where objective is concerned,
24 you don't -- you're not careful about using the means that you're going
25 employ and that was clear to all of us who lived in the former
2 Q. If Milosevic was involved in decisions to provide arms to the
3 TOs, he may have also been involved -- through the JNA, he may have also
4 been involved in providing arms to the TOs through other avenues. You
5 cannot exclude that, can you?
6 A. Yes. I'm talking about Bosnia-Herzegovina, or, specifically,
7 about the Bosnian Krajina and the reports that came from other units.
8 I don't want to comment on information concerning the situation
9 in Serbia because I am not in a position to do so. I do not have the
10 right information. And I don't want to go wrong. I am speaking under
12 Q. I appreciate you speaking only about what you know of.
13 So would you agree with me that you cannot exclude that Milosevic
14 engaged structures an individuals other than the JNA to arm the Serb TOs
15 in Croatia and in Bosnia in 1991 and throughout the conflict?
16 MR. JORDASH: Sorry, I thought we've just asked that question,
17 and the witness very fairly said he didn't want to comment on it because
18 he didn't know.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Which almost automatically leads to an answer to the
20 question, that he could not exclude because he doesn't know.
21 MR. JORDASH: I mean, I [Overlapping speakers] ... sorry,
22 Your Honour.
23 JUDGE ORIE: The question whether you can exclude something is
24 usually a question which could be easily answered by no, unless you ask
25 whether there are any reasons known to the witness which would allow for
1 any other conclusions than that he could not exclude. I mean, we're
2 talking about whether you can exclude something. I cannot exclude a lot
3 of things. It does not say anything about whether it's -- that happened
4 or not. But everything I do not know about, I have difficulties in
5 excluding it, unless there are either specific circumstances known to me,
6 which would allow me to say, I cannot exclude, or there are specific
7 circumstances which says, I can exclude.
8 Now, what we need is to hear from a witness any matter known to
9 him personally which would allow the witness to make any statement as to
10 whether he could definitely exclude something, yes or no.
11 We're talking about facts, and usually the fact that you cannot
12 exclude something is -- is not something that sheds any additional light
13 on whether it happened or not. And I take it that that is what you're
14 interested in.
15 MS. HARBOUR: Your Honour, I'm interested in establishing that
16 this witness's extensive knowledge and evidence about the JNA's role does
17 not exclude that there may have been other people involved.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And now -- of course, you can't exclude that
19 perhaps on the basis of what he said until now, so -- so unless you ask
20 for any specific knowledge, it's clear from the evidence that if the
21 witness says, I do not know what happened on the 15th of November, if you
22 then ask, Could you exclude on the 15th of November there was snow, of
23 course he couldn't exclude that because he didn't know what happened on
24 the 15th of November. So that is a matter of logic rather than anything
1 What you could ask the witness, Have you ever obtained any
2 information which would allow you to know something more about rain or
3 snow on the 15th of November, and then he could say, I heard that from my
4 sister or -- but if he doesn't know anything about his own observation,
5 does not allow for any conclusions. That's clear from the answers.
6 So if he has any additional information, then you could ask for
7 that. But just to say at the end of every question when the witness
8 says, I do not know, you can't exclude for the possibility, of course, he
9 can't, unless there is something very specific which would allow him to
11 Please proceed.
12 MS. HARBOUR: I think, as Mr. Jordash and Your Honours have
13 pointed out, the witness's evidence from this point is clear, so I will
14 move onto a different issue.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Please do so.
16 MS. HARBOUR:
17 Q. Mr. Selak, you were familiar with Colonel Stevilovic, were you
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. He was killed in June 1992, and in the Tadic case, you testified
21 at transcript page 1924 that Colonel Stevilovic was killed on the
22 Banja Luka-Kotor Varos road, that the official report said he was killed
23 by Muslims but that you believed that he was killed by the Serb
25 You said that this was the second such attempt on his life in two
1 months. I want to show you a document that the Prosecution's military
2 expert has relied on in relation to Colonel Stevilovic.
3 MS. HARBOUR: Could we please have Exhibit P1438 on the screen.
4 Q. This is an undated document called an explanation regarding the
5 death of Colonel Stevilovic. In the first paragraph, it states that
6 Mladic knew who killed Stevilovic and then states that this was
7 Drazen Jocic, the commander of the special company in Teslic.
8 If we continue to the third paragraph which begins at the bottom
9 of page two in the English and the end of page 1 and continuing on to
10 page 2 in the B/C/S, we can see that a source said that Jocic,
11 Drazen Jocic, was in close relations with a number of people, including
12 at the bottom at the paragraph, Bozovic, commander of the Red Berets.
13 Following Stevilovic's death, did you ever hear of Drazen Jocic
14 being linked to the murder?
15 A. I did not hear that Drazen Jocic was connected with this murder,
16 but I did speak to my colleagues about it in Banja Luka because
17 Colonel Stevilovic was a very decent and capable security officer. I was
18 really sorry to see him go and I was convinced that it was the VRS and
19 the 5th Corps who were behind his assassination, and I still believe so
21 I didn't know about Jocic. This was suppressed. It was never
22 made public and has not to this day, and, unfortunately, the truth will
23 never come out.
24 There were no Muslim forces at the time present there to be able
25 to kill him, but they had to fit them this way into the story.
1 Q. I take it that you also did not know or hear of Bozovic being
2 linked to Stevilovic's death?
3 A. I did not hear of it because all the mass media and the public
4 information coming from the 1st Krajina Corps in Banja Luka was that he
5 had been killed by Muslims in Teslic. This is something that they are
6 claiming today and it isn't true. It was the radio, television,
7 newspapers, contacts with senior officers. All of them claimed that he
8 had been killed by Muslims. But he was in the way of certain people
9 because he was all in favour of the laws and customs of war, and that was
10 the reason why he was killed.
11 Q. In your Milosevic testimony, Mr. Selak, at transcript page 22228
12 to -29, and then again at transcript page 22248 through -50, you have
13 already given evidence about the significance of the Posavina corridor
14 and the operations to gain control of it. You have testified in other
15 cases, other than the Milosevic case, that Milan Martic participated in
16 the Posavina corridor operations.
17 Did Milan Martic have a unit that -- lead a unit in these
19 A. I don't know that Milan Martic led a unit participating in these
20 operations, but it was logical that he should be interested in the
21 corridor because it was the only communication, physical and in terms of
22 supplies of personnel and men with Belgrade, and the entire Serbian
23 Krajina in the Republic of Croatia depended on it. That was why Martic
24 was interested in seeing or making sure that the corridor was
25 operational. But I don't know that there was a units that he led. I'm
1 not aware of it.
2 Q. In your Brdjanin testimony at page 13142 to -43, you testified
3 that Martic led a large group of fighters in the Posavina corridor
4 operations. Do you recall that now?
5 A. I can't recall all the details. I suppose I did say that. But
6 Martic - and not only him but the entire Serbian Krajina in the Republic
7 of Croatia - had an interest in the corridor. It stretched along the
8 bank of the Sava river, down near Brcko, so Martic was interested in
10 I don't know the details.
11 Q. I'm Sorry to interrupt to you. The importance of the corridor
12 operations is well documented in your Milosevic testimony, so since
13 that's already in evidence, let's just stick to the questions that I'm
14 asking you.
15 In the Brdjanin case, you were asked at transcript page 13438:
16 "Do you know that when police units become part of combat units,
17 they become subordinated to the military commanders of those combat
19 And this question was asked in the context of Martic's police.
20 And you responded:
21 "That need not be the case. That particular unit can be given a
22 set assignment."
23 I ask you now: Did Martic's -- do you know of Martic's police
24 participating in operations with the JNA in the corridor?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. And would you agree that they were not necessarily subordinated
2 to the army combat unit with which they were participating in joint
4 A. If they carried out operations together, then they had to agree
5 on what the tasks of the respective units would be. They each had their
6 own task and goal set, but there had to be agreement between them. They
7 had to act in co-ordinated action.
8 Q. Do you know if Arkan also participated in the Posavina corridor
10 A. I am not able to answer the question. I'm afraid that the
11 information I have is from people I was in contact with, and I don't
12 know, really, the answer.
13 I know that he did participate, but when, where, and how, don't
14 ask me that. I won't know the answer.
15 Q. Were other paramilitary and volunteer formations also
16 participating in the Posavina corridor operations?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. You testified in Brdjanin, at transcript page 13143 that you know
19 that these units, volunteer and paramilitary units, were fully armed.
20 But you do not know how they were all armed, do you?
21 A. I didn't know who had given them weapons. But, now, on the basis
22 of the documentation that we saw the amount given by the army and the
23 amount given by the SDS, I realised that it was from the army's units and
24 the SDS. It was 69.000 men and this particular number is subsumed in the
25 69.000 men armed by the army and the SDS. And they shared the same goal.
1 And that is my answer.
2 Q. You don't know whether the Serbian DB also participated in arming
3 these units, do you?
4 A. That's true. I don't know the amounts. But I do know that it
5 was interested and involved. I heard it from several sources. I don't
6 know the specific amount.
7 There is documentation to that effect before this Tribunal, too.
8 Q. Mr. Selak, I don't want to go outside of the bounds of what you
9 know, but you have just said that you do know that the Serbian DB's
10 involvement in arming these units was interested and involved.
11 Did I understand you correctly?
12 A. Please. Some of the men from Serbia, you remember when I spoke
13 of the 20 that I was aware of, but there were other volunteers from
14 Serbia coming to the Serbian Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina and were
15 given weapons. It was none other than the army that gave them these
16 weapons. They did not participate in combat but they did take part in
17 the ethnic cleansing of the area. That was the political objective that
18 was achieved by these paramilitaries. And the DB of Serbia was aware of
19 it. Because the goal was the same. The Ministry of the Interior and
20 their security branches were aware of it and supported it. There is
21 documentation to that effect as well.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Let's avoid to -- to invite witnesses to draw
23 conclusions on the basis of documents which we are not fully aware of,
24 which documents they have consulted, and if such conclusions could be
25 drawn on the basis of such documents, I think the Chamber could do that,
1 if the documentation would be in evidence. Yes.
2 I'm also I'm looking at the clock, Ms. Harbour, and I think at an
3 earlier moment I'm -- no, perhaps I first -- I first address the witness.
4 Mr. Selak, we're going to adjourn for the day, and this is also
5 to inform the parties that we would continue tomorrow.
6 If I understand your estimate well, you would need, if you stay
7 well within the three hours, you have used approximately one hour and a
8 half at this moment, I think. That would mean that one session tomorrow
9 will do tomorrow, Ms. Harbour?
10 MS. HARBOUR: One session will do, yes, Your Honour.
11 JUDGE ORIE: One session will do, perhaps even less, which means
12 that we could then conclude the evidence of the witness tomorrow.
13 I again instruct you, Mr. Selak, that you should not speak with
14 anyone about your testimony, whether already given or still to be given,
15 and we'd like to see you back tomorrow morning at 9.00.
16 Madam Usher, could you please escort Mr. Selak out of the
18 [The witness stands down]
19 JUDGE ORIE: Then I may not have been very clear on the issue of
20 questions like, Could you exclude for the possibility.
21 Let me try to make clear what I meant by giving you an example.
22 If a witness says that, he knows nothing about Mr. A being killed
23 on the 1st of January of, 2012, or that he doesn't know anything about
24 who could have perpetrated that murder, then next question to ask is, So
25 you could not exclude that it was Mr. X, seems to suggest that this is a
1 logical conclusion from what the witness has told us. If you don't know
2 anything about it, you cannot exclude Mr. X.
3 Now the most relevant question in those circumstances would be,
4 Do you know of any circumstance, on the basis of which you could exclude
5 Mr. X as the perpetrator?
6 That's the most relevant question.
7 Most likely, the witness would not be able to answer that
8 question unless he has any specific information about Mr. X as the
9 possible perpetrator. For example, if his answer to that question would
10 be, No, I can exclude Mr. X because Mr. X had died already the 1st of
11 November, before that date. Then, of course, it makes sense to ask
12 whether there's any such specific information.
13 But to introduce such a question as a kind of a logical
14 consequence of what the witness earlier said, is -- is -- is not what we
15 really need. What we need is any additional facts which would allow or
16 would not allow for an exclusion of, in my example, Mr. X as the
18 I hope this is clearer than the way in which I presented it
19 before, and, therefore, questions like, So you therefore could not
20 exclude, we always should know whether we are just asking for a
21 conclusion on the basis of what the witness said or whether we are
22 seeking any additional information which would allow for another
24 If that's clear, then ...
25 Then we adjourn. We will resume tomorrow, Thursday, the 16th of
1 February, 2012, in this same Courtroom II, at 9.00 in the morning, and we
2 expect not to need the whole of the day.
3 And, further, Mr. Groome, I do understand that you wanted to
4 address the Court on a matter -- for which an opportunity will be given
6 MR. GROOME: Thank you, Your Honour.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
8 We stand adjourned.
9 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.47 p.m.,
10 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 16th day of
11 February, 2012, at 9.00 a.m.