Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 1053

 1                           Thursday, 8 October 2009

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           --- Upon commencing at 9.01 a.m.

 5             THE REGISTRAR:  Good morning, Your Honours.  Good morning

 6     everyone in and around the courtroom.  This is case IT-08-91-T, the

 7     Prosecutor versus Mico Stanisic and Stojan Zupljanin.

 8             JUDGE HALL:  Good morning, all.  May I have the appearances first

 9     of all, and we were alerted on our way into court by the usher that there

10     are a number of -- that there may be a number of preliminary issues, and

11     whoever is moving those, perhaps we can deal with that before the witness

12     resumes to take the stand.

13             MS. KORNER:  Good morning, Your Honours.  It's Joanna Korner and

14     Crispian Smith for the Prosecution.  I wasn't aware there were a number

15     of preliminary issues.  I simply said I wanted to mention timings.  I

16     didn't appreciate there were other issues.

17             MR. ZECEVIC:  Good morning, Your Honours.  For Stanisic Defence,

18     Zecevic.

19             Well, there is just one issue, which I raised yesterday before we

20     adjourned, and we agreed that it should be brought this morning.  Thank

21     you.

22             MR. PANTELIC:  Good morning, Your Honours.  For Zupljanin

23     Defence, Igor Pantelic, Dragan Krgovic, Brent Hicks, and Eric Tully.

24             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.  Ms. Korner, your issue of timing.

25             MS. KORNER:  I'm sorry.  I anticipate taking another hour and a

Page 1054

 1     bit with this witness.  I've still got a number of documents to go

 2     through with him although I'm going to try and speed it up if he answers

 3     just the questions I ask.  There's then another witness organised for --

 4     well, another two, in fact, for this week.  I understand from Mr. Zecevic

 5     and Mr. Pantelic this witness will go in to tomorrow with

 6     cross-examination.  We then have another witness, not Ms. Hanson, and

 7     it's simply a question of whether Ms. Hanson is likely to start or not

 8     tomorrow, because -- because of the arrangements made, it had been

 9     arranged that cross-examination would in any event be delayed.  So

10     whether it's worth starting her tomorrow I just don't know, but it seems

11     to me that it's unlikely with cross-examination of the next witness after

12     all of this, plus the videolink on Monday.

13             I'm asked to ask Your Honours on behalf of the lawyer who is

14     calling Ms. Hanson if we can take one and a half hours.  It's obviously

15     an important piece of evidence.  It's about -- she's the expert on Crisis

16     Staff.  So the lawyer says an hour and a half in chief would be very

17     helpful.

18                           [Trial Chamber confers]

19             JUDGE HARHOFF:  I understand that the remaining witness other

20     than Mrs. Hanson is ST-13; is that correct?

21             MS. KORNER:  That's right.

22             JUDGE HARHOFF:  And ST-13 is called as a 92 ter witness.

23             MS. KORNER:  That's right.

24             JUDGE HARHOFF:  May I then ask the Defence counsels if they have

25     made up their mind as to how much time they would need for their

Page 1055

 1     cross-examination of ST-13.  Do you know?

 2             MR. ZECEVIC:  I'm not -- I'm not sure, Your Honours, that I can

 3     give you that answer.  My co-counsel is not present, and he will be

 4     leading the cross-examination of that witness, but I will provide you

 5     with the information as soon as possible.  Thank you.

 6             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Thank you.

 7             Mr. Pantelic.

 8             MR. PANTELIC:  Your Honour, ST-13 is -- yes.  Just a second,

 9     please.

10                           [Defence counsel confer]

11             MS. KORNER:  The e-mail, maybe it will help Mr. Zecevic because

12     we turned up an e-mail we got about him.  30 minutes is what -- 60

13     minutes, I'm sorry, is what Mr. Cvijetic seems to have estimated.

14             JUDGE HARHOFF:  So one hour for Zecevic team to -- you said 60?

15             MS. KORNER:  No, no, sorry.  For us.  No, I think it's -- I

16     haven't actually discussed it with the lawyer who is calling him either.

17     I don't think it's more than half an hour.  Oh, yes.  For us it's half an

18     hour.  The Stanisic team sent us an e-mail saying they would be one hour

19     with ST-13, and 30 minutes for the Zupljanin team.

20             MR. PANTELIC:  Forty-five, would I say, but we shall do our best

21     maybe to -- depending on the line of answering.  Forty-five, I would say.

22             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Very well.  The Chamber is of the opinion that

23     since the Prosecution asked for Mrs. Hanson to be called on Friday for

24     examination-in-chief, and since we have now twisted the arms of the

25     Defence counsels to accommodate that request, I think we should keep it

Page 1056

 1     that way.  So if we go on for the rest of this day with the current

 2     witness and we finish him off early tomorrow morning and then proceed

 3     directly to --

 4             MS. KORNER:  ST-13.

 5             JUDGE HARHOFF:  -- ST-13, then we might or might not finish ST-13

 6     tomorrow, and that spills into next week.  So this is why we thought that

 7     it might be preferable if we could finish ST-13 today.  I don't know if

 8     that is possible.

 9             MS. KORNER:  ST-13?

10             JUDGE HARHOFF:  No, sorry.  Sorry.  We will finish the current

11     witness today, and tomorrow, Friday, we'll take whatever is left for this

12     witness, and then we will proceed with Mrs. Hanson.

13             MS. KORNER:  Sorry, Your Honour.  If --

14             THE INTERPRETER:  Microphone for Mrs. Korner, please.

15     Microphone, please.

16             MS. KORNER:  The estimate from both sets of -- oh, sorry.  Thank

17     you.

18             The estimate from both Defence counsel for the current witness is

19     two hours each to cross-examine.  That means that he cannot be completed

20     within today's session.  So he will spill into tomorrow definitely, to be

21     followed by ST-13, who if the estimates are right we are talking about a

22     further possibly two and -- an hour and a half, two hours for ST-13.

23     Thirty minute -- yes.  So the most we could probably ask Mrs. Hanson for

24     her name and maybe get a couple of things in, and then she'd be adjourned

25     part heard in -- in examination-in-chief, to come back Wednesday or

Page 1057

 1     however long the videolink takes.  The videolink at the moment -- or

 2     maybe Tuesday afternoon, because the videolink is set for Monday and to

 3     go into Tuesday.

 4             JUDGE HARHOFF:  How is this to the Defence?

 5             MR. ZECEVIC:  Well, Your Honours, I wasn't here on Monday and

 6     Tuesday when this was reflected upon, but it is my understanding that we

 7     would prefer that Ms. Hanson goes first before the ST-13 so that we hear

 8     her in chief, and that will give us some time to prepare for our

 9     cross-examination, because as you know, we received some -- some

10     additional documents very -- very lately about Ms. Hanson.  So that was

11     my understanding, that she would be in chief on Friday and then we -- we

12     will cross-examine her probably on Wednesday.

13             So it would be preferable for the Defence if we can instead of

14     ST-13 hear Ms. Hanson in chief and then have on Monday and part of

15     Tuesday videolink, then after that we can have ST-13 on Tuesday, perhaps,

16     and then start the cross-examination of Ms. Hanson on Wednesday.  That

17     would be our suggestion if -- if --

18             MS. KORNER:  Can I -- personally and from our point of view,

19     we're happy to fall in with whatever the Chamber orders, but I think

20     you'd have to make your peace with VWS on this.  Witness ST-13 has been

21     here since Wednesday and that would mean that he wouldn't get in to give

22     his evidence until the following Wednesday.  And I don't know what

23     commitments he has either, but that would certainly cause, I'm sure, VWS

24     a problem; whereas, Ms. Hanson is here, works here, so she can give

25     evidence any time.

Page 1058

 1             MR. ZECEVIC:  Your Honours, this is definitely not the first case

 2     in this first Tribunal where the witness stays for a bit longer period

 3     than anticipated, so I don't see a big problem there.

 4             MS. KORNER:  Sorry, I've just been reminded.  It is a problem

 5     because of his work.  We had to write a letter to his employer in any

 6     event asking that he be allowed to come here.  So if he doesn't give

 7     evidence on Friday that would cause a serious problem to him, as well as

 8     to VWS, plus cost.

 9                           [Trial Chamber confers]

10             JUDGE HARHOFF:  We have discussed the matter, and we think that

11     the most reasonable solution is to hear ST-13 tomorrow, Friday.  But I

12     must also say, and the Chamber was unanimous in expressing its -- its

13     concern about these changes, I think we could have foreseen that

14     Mrs. Hanson finally would not be testifying this week had we been looking

15     more deeply into our crystal ball.  So we don't think that if we put

16     Mrs. Hanson off until Wednesday next week that in that case no prejudice

17     will be made to the Defence.

18             You may recall that the whole exercise about having her

19     examination-in-chief was designed to compensate the Defence teams for the

20     inconvenience of having her come early.  Now since -- if she's no longer

21     coming early, that is to say, if she would only come Wednesday next week,

22     the Defence should have ample time to prepare for its cross-examination.

23             So the order is that we will hear ST-13 tomorrow, and after when

24     we have finished off this witness, the current witness, and then we will

25     proceed with the videolinks Monday and Tuesday, and if we adjourn early

Page 1059

 1     Tuesday then so be it, and you will then be ready to start your

 2     examination-in-chief of Mrs. Hanson Wednesday.

 3             MS. KORNER:  Yes.  Your Honour, I think there's an added problem

 4     I'm not going to trouble the Court with it now.

 5             THE INTERPRETER:  Microphone, please.

 6             MS. KORNER:  That's all -- sorry.

 7             I think there's an added problem but I need to check on it before

 8     I trouble the Court with it.  All I was concerned about was whether

 9     Mrs. Hanson would be starting tomorrow, and Your Honours have made that

10     clear.

11             JUDGE HARHOFF:  To us it wouldn't make any sense nor any

12     difference really because she would be called only to, basically as you

13     say, state her name.  And so for reasons of convenience I think it's best

14     that we now set the time that Mrs. Hanson will be called to testify first

15     thing Wednesday morning.

16             MS. KORNER:  Well, Your Honour, may I -- once may I address Your

17     Honour on this when I've taken some -- taken instructions, got further

18     information in the break and leave it to that, because I think there may

19     be an added problem about another witness.  I'm sorry, about this, Your

20     Honour.  I'm afraid it's happening because, A, trying to estimate times

21     for witnesses and cross-examination; B, because of the orders about not

22     calling witnesses.  We've served extra statements.  I'm not going to

23     trouble Your Honour unless it's going to be a problem.

24             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mrs. Korner, may I be fair and frank and say that

25     it is exactly this kind of shuffling back and forth that causes the

Page 1060

 1     uncertainty in the planning of the trial.  I think by now you should be

 2     able to calculate exactly which witness can come when.  The ban that

 3     was -- the two months' ban that was imposed on the Defence -- on the

 4     Prosecution, sorry, should now be dealt with, and the initial planning

 5     problems that this ban may have caused for the Prosecution should be

 6     overcome by now, and -- and I would strongly invite you to ensure that

 7     the planning holds from now on so that we don't have to come into these

 8     constant rearrangements of calling witnesses.  There should be by now a

 9     fixed plan for the calling of the witnesses for the next coming weeks.

10             Mr. Zecevic wanted the floor.

11             MR. ZECEVIC:  Well, I understand the ruling of Your Honours.

12     That's what I wanted to say, and I was wondering when we can make the

13     submissions on the procedural matters.  That was the only ...

14             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Yes.  Let's have them now.

15             MR. ZECEVIC:  Your Honours, I will try to be very short.

16             I understand the ruling by Your Honours that the witness like --

17     the witness that we are having, who is coming viva voce, the Trial

18     Chamber would like to have his previous statements.  I'm just wondering

19     what -- will these previous statements be exhibited in this -- in this

20     case or not?  That is the question number one.

21             JUDGE HARHOFF:  They will not be admitted into evidence by the

22     Chamber.  If any of the parties seek to have them admitted, we'll make a

23     ruling on that.  But the reason why the Chamber wanted to see the

24     statements is that it is an element which facilitates the

25     comprehension -- the Chamber's comprehension and understanding of the

Page 1061

 1     witness's testimony if we have been able to read the statements in

 2     advance.  And in particular, when we come into situations such as the

 3     situation we had a couple of days ago where the Prosecution and the

 4     Defence were eagerly discussing what was in the witness's earlier

 5     statement, while we had not seen the statement.  So the Chamber felt

 6     completely isolated from the discussion and couldn't understand what was

 7     going on because we had not been able to read the statement.  This is why

 8     the Chamber ruled that from now on we would like to be able to read the

 9     statements before the witness comes into the courtroom so as to have a

10     better understanding and orientation of the area and the questions which

11     the witness is going to testify about.

12             They will not be admitted by the Chamber without requests from

13     any of the parties.

14             MR. ZECEVIC:  Yes, but with all due respect, Your Honours, I

15     believe in the previous situation we were cross-examining the witness on

16     his credibility on his previous statements, and they were both exhibited.

17             They were not?  Okay, sorry.  Now I understand -- I understand --

18     now I understand the concern of the Trial Chamber.

19             And the second thing -- thank you very much for this explanation.

20             The second thing is, I was reflecting yesterday evening again

21     about the P66, the map document.  I'm sorry, but just one observation.

22             I believe the ruling of the Trial Chamber sort of departs from

23     the -- from the guidances.  In which sense?  Your Honours have ruled that

24     only the documents which are on 65 ter list will be admitted as evidence.

25     Now, this document is not exactly a document which appears on the 65 ter

Page 1062

 1     list because it has been redrafted by -- by this witness.  And I know

 2     it's a small thing, but I just want to make sure that we -- that we have

 3     understanding of -- of what are the rules in the court, because I mean,

 4     we might come into this situation in the future, and I would like this to

 5     be clarified if possible.  Thank you very much.

 6             JUDGE HARHOFF:  I think the situation yesterday with P66 was a

 7     bit -- was a bit shaky, but the principle stands that for this trial all

 8     evidence that comes -- that is finally admitted into evidence and given

 9     an exhibit number shall have to come through the 65 ter list, and if a

10     party wants to have a document admitted into evidence and given an

11     exhibit number in this trial, then that party shall have to seek first

12     introduction of that document into the 65 ter list.

13             The purpose of this is for the Chamber to control the inclusion

14     of evidence into the trial.

15             Now, for the map, I understand that the raw map exists as a

16     65 ter number.  Prior to the testimony of yesterday, the Prosecution

17     apparently sat down with the witness and made some markings on the map.

18     Well, I mean, the map was pre-marked by the witness, we understand.

19             MS. KORNER:  It wasn't.  He marked it in court.

20             JUDGE HARHOFF:  No, madam --

21             MS. KORNER:  No.

22             JUDGE HARHOFF:  But there were pictures and a line and a red dot

23     on the map.  That is not an original --

24             MS. KORNER:  Sorry.  Yes, I see what Your Honour means.  We -- we

25     produced the maps with the 65 ter -- with the pre-trial brief in which we

Page 1063

 1     indicated where various things were like the police station and all the

 2     rest of it.

 3             When the witness was shown the maps yesterday, as I indicated in

 4     the note I sent, he said, "You've got the police station in the wrong

 5     place."

 6             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Sure.

 7             MS. KORNER:  It went back to the analyst who prepared them, who

 8     prepared a new map to show it in the right place.  And then he made some

 9     markings on it when he was giving evidence.

10             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Sure.  But -- so what you're telling me is that

11     what was included in the 65 ter list was the original map with this

12     witness's indications of the location of several buildings.

13             MS. KORNER:  No.  What was --

14             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mrs. Korner, please.  What we saw yesterday was a

15     map on which electronic markings had been made, and then in addition to

16     those the witness made an additional marking, a further marking, during

17     his testimony.

18             I'm talking about the first version that appeared on our screen,

19     that is to say the map with the electronic markings.  Those, I

20     understand, were added -- or were suggested by the witness prior to his

21     appearance in court.

22             MS. KORNER:  One change was made to the original electronic map

23     as a result of what he said.

24             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Right.  Now, the ruling yesterday was that as a

25     matter of principle, we would prefer to have the raw maps without any

Page 1064

 1     markings, be they electronic or otherwise, because this ensures the

 2     Chamber that the markings are really made by the witness himself or

 3     herself.  So as a general rule, when you come with maps, with

 4     photographs, or whatever it is, and you wish to have the witness's

 5     markings or indications onto that picture, then please bring the raw

 6     picture, the raw material, and then add the witness in court -- ask the

 7     witness in court to add the markings that you wish to have included into

 8     it.  That is the general rule.

 9             MS. KORNER:  Can I just ask on that -- I'm sorry, Mr. Zecevic,

10     but just so I get it clear.

11             At the moment all the maps which are attached to the various

12     municipalities where appropriate have photographs of the buildings which

13     are of relevance, we submit, indicating where they are.  That's how they

14     went into the pre-trial brief.

15             If I understand Your Honour's ruling rightly, the witness should

16     be shown a completely unmarked map with the photographs obviously by the

17     side but not indicating where they are on the map.  Then if he

18     indicates -- if the witness is able to indicate where these buildings are

19     on the particular map, he should do so, and if they correspond with the

20     electronic version that's been pre-prepared, rather than get him to mark

21     another map with exactly the same indications as has already been

22     pre-prepared, would it not be preferable to use -- no.

23             JUDGE HARHOFF:  No, it would not, sorry.  It would not.  I think

24     if you have the map and you have the photos of the buildings next to the

25     map or aligned in the margin of the map, then you ask the witness in

Page 1065

 1     court to draw a line from the building to the place on the map where the

 2     building is.

 3             MS. KORNER:  So that we would have -- obviously if numbers of

 4     witnesses are asked to do it, we would have a number of different

 5     versions marked by witnesses, that's what Your Honour is suggesting.

 6             JUDGE HARHOFF:  If it is necessary for the testimony of that

 7     witness, yes.

 8             MS. KORNER:  Thank you, Your Honour.  I'm just seeking

 9     clarification.  Thank you, Your Honour.  It means, can I just say, we

10     will have to withdraw the present maps from the -- they will have to be

11     replaced with maps without indications.

12             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Yes, please.

13             MR. ZECEVIC:  Thank you, Your Honours.

14             MS. KORNER:  On the question of the previous statements and/or

15     interviews of the witnesses, those being called viva voce, I think

16     Mr. Zecevic has withdrawn his objection.  What we've done with this

17     witness's previous statements, as I think Ms. Featherstone has informed,

18     is they're in e-court now so that Your Honours can extract them or look

19     at them on e-court.

20             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Thank you.

21             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.  The witness may take the bench again,

22     please.

23                           [The witness takes the stand]

24                           WITNESS:  NEDJELKO DJEKANOVIC [Resumed]

25                           [Witness answered through interpreter]

Page 1066

 1             JUDGE HALL:  Good morning, sir.  I remind you that you're still

 2     on your oath.

 3             Yes, Ms. Korner.  Please proceed.

 4             MS. KORNER:  Thank you, Your Honour.

 5             THE INTERPRETER:  Microphone, please.

 6             MS. KORNER:  And microphone.

 7                           Examination by Ms. Korner: [Continued]

 8        Q.   Mr. Djekanovic, I just want to return briefly to a couple of

 9     things I asked you about yesterday, if I may.  You told us that in

10     accordance with the December 1991 instructions you did establish an

11     Assembly of the Serbian People.  Is that right?  Can you just answer yes

12     or no, because we dealt with this yesterday.  I'm just setting the scene.

13        A.   We formed the Assembly of the Serbian People of the municipality

14     of Kotor Varos, but I don't know whether we had committed ourselves to

15     the decision of December.

16        Q.   All right.  Did the Assembly of the Serbian People meet in the

17     municipal building in Kotor Varos?  Before June the 11th, 1992.

18        A.   We did not meet in the Municipal Assembly building in Kotor

19     Varos.  These meetings were informal and held at other locations.

20        Q.   Could you just mention a couple of locations where they were

21     held, please.

22        A.   In some of the local community premises.  Some of the meetings

23     were in Maslovare, some were in Grabovica, and so on and so forth.

24        Q.   And they were held, were they, in the two municipalities that

25     you've mentioned, they were both ones which were majority Serb --

Page 1067

 1     municipalities, sorry, places.

 2        A.   These were local communes within the Kotor Varos municipality

 3     with a majority Serb population.

 4        Q.   And as regards to the Crisis Staff which we started to look at

 5     the minutes of from June, that was, however, established earlier, was it

 6     not?

 7        A.   The Crisis Staff was formed much earlier, even during the

 8     conflict in Croatia when we were receiving refugees and giving material

 9     aid to them, and so on and so forth.

10        Q.   All right.  And I just want to ask you about the regional Crisis

11     Staff for a moment, which we've touched on.  That was headed by Radoslav

12     Brdjanin, wasn't it?  He was the president.

13        A.   I really cannot be sure after so much time has passed.  I think

14     that he was for a while at least.  I don't know if he was that for the

15     entire period.

16        Q.   All right.  Well, it's a matter of public record, but don't worry

17     about that.

18             You -- did you attend those meetings?

19        A.   Some, yes, but not all.

20        Q.   If you couldn't go, did representatives of your Crisis Staff

21     attend those meetings?

22        A.   In most cases, yes, somebody did attend, except for the month of

23     June when we had problems with the roads to Banja Luka because of the

24     conflicts in the Kotor Varos municipality and the lack of safety on the

25     roads.

Page 1068

 1        Q.   Did you see at those meetings Stojan Zupljanin?

 2        A.   I did see him at some of the meetings, of course.

 3        Q.   And what about General Talic?

 4        A.   I don't think that I attended any meetings where General Talic

 5     was present.  It's possible that there was one when we had problems in

 6     Banja Luka with the roads to Serbia.  I think that that was one meeting

 7     that I did attend when General Talic was also there.

 8        Q.   If he wasn't there was there a representative of the 1st Krajina

 9     Corps?

10        A.   I didn't attend all of the meetings.  He did attend some, others

11     he didn't, so I could not really say that a police of the -- a

12     representative of the police or of the corps was present at each of the

13     meetings.  At some, yes; at some, no.

14        Q.   And finally before we look at the next record of -- of a Crisis

15     Staff meeting in Kotor Varos, when you made the request for a special

16     unit or the request for assistance from Banja Luka for the taking of

17     power in Kotor Varos, to whom did you make that request?

18        A.   There is no written request.  We had been asking for assistance

19     for a while, probably for two or three months when it was evident that

20     the authority was not functioning in Kotor Varos and when it was evident

21     that the inter-ethnic conflicts in the territory of Kotor Varos were

22     inevitable.  Yesterday I said that the majority of militarily fit men of

23     Serbian ethnicity from Kotor Varos --

24        Q.   Please.  I'm so sorry, Mr. Djekanovic, but I am going to stop

25     you.  That's not an answer to my question, and time is of the essence.

Page 1069

 1     Whether it was written or oral, to whom was the request made in the Banja

 2     Luka CSB?

 3        A.   We addressed everyone:  The corps, the military corps, the police

 4     station, the Crisis Staff.  We sent the request to all addresses.

 5        Q.   To whom in the CSB did you address the request, written or oral?

 6     Simple, straightforward question.  Who, Mr. Djekanovic?

 7        A.   We spoke with Zupljanin and with some others.  It wasn't always

 8     Zupljanin.  There were several persons at different posts.  But since

 9     Zupljanin was the head of the Crisis Staff and he was from our

10     municipality, it's quite normal that we spoke with him the most.

11        Q.   Right.  Thank you.  Now, let's please look at another record of

12     one of your meetings, the 21st of June, and that is 65 ter 702.

13             MS. KORNER:  Your Honour, while we're doing that I can't remember

14     whether I made the meeting of the 19th of June an exhibit or asked for it

15     to be made an exhibit.  The one we were looking at yesterday with the

16     65 ter number of -- no, I'll have to ask for that to be marked for

17     identification.  It wasn't actually on our 65 ter list, yesterday's.  65

18     ter 10105.  But it's just -- that's one of the imaginary numbers, so can

19     I have it marked for identification, please.

20             JUDGE HALL:  So marked.

21             THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibit P77 marked for identification, Your

22     Honours.

23             MS. KORNER:

24        Q.    You see on the screen there the 31st meeting of the Crisis

25     Staff, 21st of June.  You were having these Crisis Staff meetings on a

Page 1070

 1     very regular basis, were you, at this stage?

 2        A.   In June it was almost on a daily basis, because that's what the

 3     situation called for.  Sometimes even twice a day.

 4        Q.   Can we come to the part at the bottom where Savo -- and that's

 5     Savo Tepic, is it?

 6        A.   Savo Tepic was the -- a member of the Crisis Staff.

 7        Q.   Yes.  But that's him speaking there, is it?

 8        A.   I assume that it is him.  There's nobody else.

 9        Q.   Right.  Highlighted the problem of a lack of personnel for

10     special training of the police.

11             What sort of special training did the police want?

12        A.   The time didn't permit that, nor was there any kind of special

13     training.  The word "special" was quite often used, but it was necessary

14     to replenish the police forces.  There was a shortage of personnel.  The

15     reserve force of the police had to be mobilised.

16             I don't know of any special training being conducted,

17     particularly at that time in the Kotor Varos municipality.

18        Q.   So it had nothing to do with, for example, techniques of

19     interrogation?

20        A.   That has nothing to do with that in particular, no.

21        Q.   "It was concluded that Savo should invite Ljuban or Zdravko to

22     the next Crisis Staff meeting."

23             Ljuban was who?

24        A.   I don't know specifically who was meant here.  It was a long time

25     ago.  I don't even know which Zdravko it was.  There were two Zdravkos at

Page 1071

 1     that point in time in the police.  There was Zdravko Pejic and Zdravko

 2     Samardzija.  I knew Ljuban only slightly, but there was more than one

 3     Ljuban, so I don't know exactly which one they're thinking of here.

 4        Q.   Okay.  Well, which Ljuban did you know who was in the police?

 5        A.   I didn't know any of them.  I had heard of Ljuban Ecim, but there

 6     were some local Ljubans who were in the police, so that it's -- it's a

 7     name that frequently appears.  It's a common name in our area.

 8        Q.   All right.  We'll come back to that in a moment.  And he was --

 9     sorry.  And he was there, and that's he, Savo, was given the task of

10     briefing Stojan Zupljanin on problems were experiencing and scheduling a

11     meeting, attendance at which had been ensured from the following persons

12     in addition to the Crisis Staff members:  Brdjanin, Peulic, Zupljanin,

13     and other competent people who might be able to help the Crisis Staff in

14     addressing these problems.

15             Stojan Z., who was that?

16        A.   Stojan Z.  If you're thinking of the task given to Savo, then

17     it's Stojan Zupljanin that's referred to.  I don't know about the rest.

18        Q.   All right.  And so where we see Brdjanin, Peulic, and Zupljanin

19     there, the second time Zupljanin is mentioned do you know which Zupljanin

20     that was?

21        A.   Well, because it's this unit, which was under the command of

22     Peulic, and Zupljanin was one of his assistants, even Chief of Staff at

23     that point or battalion commander, it's possible that this is about

24     Slobodan Zupljanin who was in command of one of the lower ranking lesser

25     units.

Page 1072

 1        Q.   All right.

 2        A.   Who frequently attend our meetings too.

 3        Q.   All right.  Did you have a meeting at which these people

 4     attended?

 5        A.   I think that the meeting, the way it was planned to be held, was

 6     actually not held.  I don't know if any meeting was held where all of

 7     these people attended.  I don't remember Stojan Zupljanin attending any

 8     meeting of the Crisis Staff.  We did attend some other meetings together,

 9     however, when we were talking with the church officials of the Muslim and

10     Catholic faiths.  I don't know of Stojan Zupljanin attending any Crisis

11     Staff meetings though.

12        Q.   All right.  Well, I'll come on a bit later to meetings you

13     actually had with Zupljanin, but can you turn to the next page or item 3,

14     which is certainly on the next page in the -- in English, and also I

15     think in the B/C/S.

16             Item 3:

17             "A new proclamation on the return of weapons should be drawn up."

18             Had there been an earlier proclamation that weapons had to be

19     returned to the police?

20        A.   There were several proclamations -- or, rather, actions to

21     collect weapons and to place them under control in order to avoid gunfire

22     incidents in the area.  I don't know which one you're specifically

23     thinking of or whether it was issued by the War Presidency or some other

24     structure.  I don't know.

25        Q.   Don't worry about that.  All I'm -- but there were orders for the

Page 1073

 1     surrender or return of weapons as a result of an order issued by the

 2     Crisis Staff, the autonomous region Crisis Staff?

 3        A.   We didn't act in accordance with nor were any Crisis Staff orders

 4     reaching us at the time, especially this type of orders.  This is more of

 5     an action than an order, and it has nothing to do with any decisions by

 6     the autonomous region Crisis Staff.

 7        Q.   All right.  And then finally on this document:

 8             "A decision on the proclamation of individual enemies of the

 9     Serbian people should be prepared ..."

10             Who were the individual enemies of the Serbian people?

11        A.   Could you please help me, tell me where to find that item,

12     please?

13        Q.   It's item -- under item 3 after the bit I just read to you about

14     the return of weapons.

15              "A decision on the proclamation of individual enemies of the

16     Serbian people ..."

17             It follows straight on.

18        A.   I see it.  Well, please believe me, I really cannot answer that

19     question.  I don't know.  The way you ask me now, I don't know what it

20     referred to or whether such a decision was made.  I don't know if anyone

21     had a problem with that or was placed on any list of that nature or

22     whether it -- this had any kind of practical value.

23        Q.   You were there, Mr. Djekanovic.  You were presiding over this

24     meeting.  Whether it was carried out or not, a decision was apparently

25     made.  Who was to be named as an individual enemy of the Serbian people?

Page 1074

 1     What group?

 2        A.   I repeat that I don't know any individual enemies.  I mean, it

 3     says here individual enemies.  I don't know specifically to whom this

 4     referred.  I really don't know.  And we did not make any such list ever

 5     nor are there any traces of such a list having been compiled.

 6        Q.   So it wouldn't have included, for example, Anto Mandic, or

 7     Mr. Petrusic, or Mr. Sadikovic?

 8        A.   In my opinion, no, it was never so.

 9        Q.   All right.  Thank you.  That's all that I ask on that document.

10     Can that be made.  That is a 65 --

11             MR. ZECEVIC:  I'm sorry, I was just notified by my assistants,

12     Your Honour, that there might be a problem with the -- with the document

13     which was tendered as a P77, marked for identification.  It's on page 17,

14     10 to 12 of this transcript.

15             I was notified by my assistants that what was used yesterday was

16     10106 and not 105.  The OTP, therefore, used 10106, and now -- now they

17     said they used 105, which is not correct, and that is -- that one has

18     been marked for identification under P77.  Thank you very much.

19             MS. KORNER:  Your Honour, it's quite right.  I'm sorry, it's my

20     fault.

21             THE INTERPRETER:  Microphone, please.

22             MS. KORNER:  It's quite right.  It's my fault.  It's 1 -- it was

23     101 -- 10106, not 5 as I said.  So it's my fault.

24             Right.  However, this one, this document that we've just looked

25     at was on our 65 ter list, and it was number 702.  So could that be

Page 1075

 1     admitted, please.

 2             JUDGE HALL:  Admitted and marked.

 3             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit P78, Your Honour.

 4             MS. KORNER:  Yes.

 5        Q.   Could we just briefly please now move to the -- the hearing --

 6     the meeting that was held on the 23rd of June, which is not on our 65 ter

 7     list but has been given the fake number 10107.  I just want to ask you

 8     about one matter on this.

 9             It's under item 1.  Two matters, actually.

10             This is Lieutenant-Colonel Peulic informing the members of the

11     Crisis Staff about combat activities in and around the area.

12             He said this:

13             "The situation was stable, a breakthrough by which a corridor

14     would be established towards Serbia, and he informed the Crisis Staff of

15     the operations planned for today, Savo Tepic informed the Crisis Staff of

16     the situation and the police."

17             So at this state by the 23rd of June, you and other members of

18     the Crisis Staff were being kept fully informed.  Is that what this says

19     about the military and police operations?

20             MR. KRGOVIC:  Your Honour, I object.  It's a very leading

21     question.  Here is the document.  There is no mention the action conduct

22     by the military and police.  That's a very leading way.

23             MS. KORNER:

24        Q.   Just tell us, would you, Mr. Djekanovic, what the Crisis Staff

25     was being informed about then.

Page 1076

 1        A.   That depends on who attended which session of the Crisis Staff.

 2        Q.   On this -- on this occasion, were you being kept, as it says, "of

 3     the military operations planned for today"?

 4        A.   No.  At the War Presidency sessions there was never any mention

 5     of military or police operations which were to be conducted on that day.

 6     Unfortunately, we had a situation in which there were rumours going for a

 7     couple of days through the town saying there will be an operation this or

 8     that day, but that topic was never discussed at War Presidency sessions.

 9     Such a decision was never made, and the War Presidency was never notified

10     of such things.

11        Q.   Sorry.  So what that sentence reads is plain, downright wrong.

12     Is that what you're saying?  You were not given any information about the

13     military operations.

14        A.   We received some information -- or, rather, a brief analysis that

15     covered the territory of Republika Srpska.  It was not an obligation on

16     the part of Mr. Peulic, but he just wanted to brief us on the situation

17     on the ground.  There was no information or notification of any military

18     combat operations during the Crisis Staff sessions.

19        Q.   Okay.  I want to be very clear about this, Mr. Djekanovic.  Are

20     you saying you knew nothing about the operations on Vrbanjci?

21        A.   Vrbanjci?

22        Q.   Vrbanjci.  I apologise.

23        A.   There were several operations in Vrbanjci and in the general

24     region of Vrbanjci.

25        Q.   So you were told about them, and you were told about them, were

Page 1077

 1     you, by Lieutenant-Colonel Peulic or Captain Zupljanin.

 2        A.   No.

 3        Q.   Who told you about them?

 4        A.   On the day of operations, I with know when -- where they would

 5     take place, but no -- Peulic or Zupljanin did not tell me that there

 6     would be an operation at Vecici, no, absolutely not.

 7        Q.   How about Hrvacani?

 8             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Ms. Korner, may I?

 9             MS. KORNER:  Of course you can, certainly.

10             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Witness, I hear you say that you were not

11     informed of the operations to come.  Were you informed of the operations

12     that had taken place beforehand?

13             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation]  No, not even that.  As part of the

14     situation analyses, we would occasionally receive information on certain

15     operations sometimes, but there were no regular reports on military

16     operations.

17             MS. KORNER:

18        Q.   Were you informed about the -- the takeover of Hrvacani?

19        A.   No.

20        Q.   I want you to think about this, please, Mr. Djekanovic, quite

21     carefully.  Are you saying you were not told today?

22        A.   That I was told that Vrbanjci had been taken up or occupied

23     Hrvacani?  No.  Even if you have that in a document, I claim with full

24     responsibility that such a thing was not conveyed to me.

25        Q.   All right.

Page 1078

 1             MS. KORNER:  Well, Your Honour, we're going to reach a stage

 2     which I think is going to require some kind of discussion in respect of

 3     what's contained in the interview and what the witness is now saying.

 4     It's a situation that has arisen in a number trials, but my application

 5     is going to be that I could put to him what he said in interview.

 6                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 7             MS. KORNER:  Your Honour, so can I just interrupt for a minute.

 8     There is law on this as well, on this issue.  I don't know if there's

 9     going to be any argument from the Defence.  If there is, maybe the

10     witness ought to withdraw.

11             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Yes.  Mr. Witness, do you understand English?

12             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.

13             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Then I would kindly ask you to take off your

14     earphones.  The --

15             MS. KORNER:  There was a --

16             JUDGE HARHOFF:  -- situation, I suppose, is whether you will be

17     asking for the right to cross-examine your own witness.

18             MS. KORNER:  Exactly.  I mean, that's in essence what it comes

19     down to.

20             JUDGE HARHOFF:  But that requires a formal request from your

21     side.

22             MS. KORNER:  I'm making the request now, Your Honour.  That's the

23     point.  I couldn't make the request before the situation arose.

24             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Are you now asking the Chamber to declare this

25     witness a hostile witness --

Page 1079

 1             MS. KORNER:  Well, Your Honour --

 2             JUDGE HARHOFF:  -- which will allow you to cross-examine?  Be

 3     specific about what it is you want.

 4             MS. KORNER:  I am, but it's an interesting -- the rules don't

 5     actually deal with a question of a hostile witness.  It's not like a

 6     common law situation, and that's always been the interesting part of

 7     practice here.  There is no specific mention in the rules of either

 8     leading or non-leading questions or indeed when a witness is -- should be

 9     treated as hostile.

10             We are calling a witness who in essence, as Your Honours can

11     tell, is not sympathetic to the Prosecution's case.  In a common law

12     situation that wouldn't happen, because it's clearly a witness is one

13     side or the other.

14             As my understanding of the civil law is, that doesn't apply

15     because the witness is there at the -- effectively at the Court's

16     request.  There's, therefore -- and presumably that's because the rules

17     were drafted by a mixture of those who come from a civil law background

18     and a common law background no mention of hostile witnesses, but I'm

19     certainly saying, we've called this witness because we feel that Your

20     Honours need to hear from people who were on the other side and not just

21     from those who are victims, alleged victims of what happened.  In so

22     doing, we have a problem in that they are not sympathetic, and

23     particularly where they've said one thing to us in interview and are now

24     saying another thing in court, we are asking for leave, if that's

25     required, to, as you put it, cross-examine our own witness.  And as I

Page 1080

 1     say, there's a -- there's an Appeals Chamber decision in the Popovic

 2     case.

 3             JUDGE HALL:  You indicated that the rules are -- just a moment,

 4     Mr. Pantelic -- that the rules are specifically silent on this point, but

 5     within the framework could you direct me to the -- such rule exists on

 6     which peg you hang the present situation.

 7             MS. KORNER:  I'm hanging it on the jurisprudence of this

 8     Tribunal, Your Honour.  I can't -- there's no peg in the rules.  It says

 9     one side calls his witnesses and the other side calls his witnesses but

10     the rules are specifically silent on this.

11             JUDGE HALL:  And the Popovic appeal ruling says what?

12             MS. KORNER:  The Popovic appeal ruling says -- I've just been

13     handed it -- that a calling party must -- I'm just going to the very last

14     page of the decision Your Honour.  "The calling party must seek the

15     permission of the Trial Chamber to impeach its own witness in relation to

16     the credibility of that witness or the substance of his or her testimony

17     and the scope of challenge must be subject to the control of the Trial

18     Chamber."  Effectively we can do it but we have to apply to you for

19     permission and then you control how much, how far we can go.  I can get

20     copies of the whole decision for Your Honours if --

21             JUDGE HALL:  And you say you're now making that formal

22     application.

23             MS. KORNER:  Yes, I am.  Because the witness, in our submission

24     as you will see, said something directly contrary to what he said in

25     interview.  Indeed he says -- and he actually referred to it obliquely by

Page 1081

 1     saying he may have said something else on paper but he's now changing his

 2     mind.

 3             JUDGE HALL:  Mr. Pantelic.

 4             MR. PANTELIC:  If I may, Your Honours.  Yes.  The essential here

 5     about this particular situation is that as my learned friend Ms. Korner

 6     mentioned that we are here dealing with the so-called hybrid of two

 7     systems:  Common law and civil law.  So I believe that following this

 8     arguments this witness should be questioned along the lines of his

 9     personal knowledge on the direct questions of the situations in

10     accordance with the principle of civil law, because he is OTP witness in

11     chief.  You are sitting here as a Trial Chamber to conduct these

12     proceedings, and of course you are also allowed and you will exercise

13     your right to pose any questions you might think which are important,

14     like you did in previous -- previous situation.  That's a first level.

15             Second level is the specific -- second level --

16                           [Trial Chamber and senior legal officer and

17                           registrar confer]

18             JUDGE HALL:  Please continue.

19             MR. PANTELIC:  Yes.  Thank you, Your Honours.  Second issue is

20     that my learned friend Ms. Korner, during the process of interviewing

21     this witness, misused her capacity and on many occasions she put it

22     suggestive and -- and leading questions to this witness where he was at

23     that time questioned in capacity of suspect.

24             JUDGE HALL:  Are you giving evidence now, Mr. Pantelic?

25             MR. PANTELIC:  No, no.  I'm not giving evidence.  I'm just making

Page 1082

 1     submissions relating to the circumstances around this witness.  And even

 2     now he should be warned that answers which might be answered by him might

 3     incriminate him in any future proceedings.  So that's the point of my

 4     submission.

 5             I do not agree with the approach taken by OTP in this particular

 6     situation, because they should limit themselves only on the line of

 7     question regarding this witness and his personal knowledge about certain

 8     situations.  Otherwise, he is not a witness.  He doesn't have capacity to

 9     be a witness, because his personal answers might incriminate him, and we

10     don't see any particular warnings towards that.  So thank you, Your

11     Honour.

12             JUDGE HALL:  Unless I have missed something you have said,

13     Mr. Pantelic, I don't -- you aren't taking issue with the jurisprudence

14     on this point that where in the OTP's view there is such an inconsistency

15     between the viva voce testimony of the witness and a previous statement

16     that they cannot seek to -- and I'm trying to avoid the language of a

17     hostile witness, but they are not prevented from seeking to do what they

18     are now implying.  You aren't saying that.  I understand your -- the

19     thrust of your reservation, but you aren't going so far as to suggest

20     that they can't do what they're now seeking to do.

21             MR. PANTELIC:  Yes, Your Honour.  That's exactly the point and

22     the ground of my submission, because, you know, with this twisting of --

23     of strategy in approach of this -- to this witness is really without any

24     grounds in -- in legal and jurisprudence issues.  That's --

25             JUDGE HALL:  But you would have the opportunity, of course, in

Page 1083

 1     cross-examination to deal with this, wouldn't you?

 2             MR. PANTELIC:  Yes.  I will be in situation, Your Honour, but you

 3     know, this is a specific moment that we have to react, because this

 4     witness was -- might be confronted with certain answers that he gave in a

 5     previous proceedings; namely, the process of interview made by OTP on a

 6     line where they didn't fulfil all standards of diligence in this -- in

 7     this situation.  They -- they submit this witness to -- to leading

 8     questions, and they practically created a kind of situation which is not

 9     applicable to this particular moment that we have here.  So I really

10     object to -- to any reference to previous interviews that this witness

11     gave to the OTP.

12             So he is here.  They have questions.  They have line of

13     questions.  He can answer, yes, no, remember, don't remember, simply as

14     that.  Thank you.

15             MS. KORNER:  Your Honours, would it assist, it's pretty close to

16     the break anyhow if I were to get copies for you before you rule on this

17     of the decision in Popovic and also I can also provide it to my learned

18     friends.

19                           [Trial Chamber confers]

20             JUDGE HALL:  Mr. Zecevic, did you wish to be heard on this point?

21             MR. ZECEVIC:  I fully agree with what Mr. Pantelic is saying.  I

22     understand his reservations and I share them.  I'm not sure I understand

23     all of it, but the part which I understand I do share, Your Honours.

24             JUDGE HALL:  All right.  Thank you.

25             Yes.  We will take the break at this point then.

Page 1084

 1             MS. KORNER:  We'll get copies through your legal officer of the

 2     decision.

 3             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.

 4                           [The witness stands down]

 5                           --- Recess taken at 10.18 a.m.

 6                           --- On resuming at 10.59 a.m.

 7             JUDGE HALL:  Yes.  We have been alerted that in the extended

 8     break when the Chamber's been considering this procedural question that

 9     counsel has been similarly industrious, and, Mr. Zecevic, you would wish

10     to further assist us on this point.

11             MR. ZECEVIC:  I hope that I will assist you.  It's just that we

12     did a quick research on the subject, Your Honours, and I would like to

13     raise a couple of issues.  I think it will assist the Trial Chamber in

14     taking the decision.

15             First of all, let me just briefly say what I started.  I think

16     the facts which are undisputed is that this witness has been -- has been

17     interviewed as a suspect, that's number one; and the second thing, what

18     we have is not his statement, it's just the transcript of his interview

19     in English, and he doesn't speak English, so there was no --

20             JUDGE HALL:  Sorry, could you repeat the last point you just

21     made.

22             MR. ZECEVIC:  Yes.  Witness was interviewed by the Office of the

23     Prosecutor and their investigators as a suspect.  That is number one.

24     The second thing is, his interview, it is not the statement what he gave.

25     He gave an interview, and it has been transcribed in English language

Page 1085

 1     which he doesn't speak.  So he didn't have any opportunity to correct

 2     possible mistakes.  Those are the facts.

 3             Now, Your Honours, it come to my attention that the law on the

 4     transfer of cases from the ICTY to the prosecutor's office of BiH and the

 5     use of evidence collected by ICTY in proceedings before the courts in BiH

 6     of 2004, which is applicable right now in -- in the country where the --

 7     where the witness comes from, in Article 5 really does give the

 8     opportunity of the state court of BiH to use the evidence of this witness

 9     in the proceedings before that court.

10             Now, I have researched the -- the European Court of Human Rights,

11     and I would like to draw attention of Your Honours to a number of cases.

12     Marttini v. Finland, Shannon v. United Kingdom, and Heaney &

13     McGuiness v. Ireland.  Basically what these cases are saying, what is the

14     jurisprudence of the European Court of law.  Basically comes down to the

15     finding of the court that the appellant's right not to self-incriminate

16     goes beyond the right to refuse individual questions, meaning that he

17     cannot be forced to respond to the questions and then that be used

18     against him, in fact, self-incriminating him.

19             This raise -- this raises a concern with me, Your Honours, which

20     I -- which I wanted to share with you that I think that the witness

21     should be at least assisted by -- by an advice of the counsel in this

22     matter.

23             Thank you, Your Honours.

24             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mr. Zecevic, I think there's a point for

25     clarification.  As far as I understand the matter before us, the issue is

Page 1086

 1     not whether this witness can be held responsible for his actions relating

 2     to the events in 1992.  That is not the issue.  He's not -- the issue

 3     which we had before us here in this court today is not whether he should

 4     be regarded as a suspect in relation to the events during the war.  The

 5     issue here is only whether the witness is testifying truthfully, and I

 6     think the impression that this witness had made -- has made on the

 7     Chamber, or at least has made on me, is that because of his -- his

 8     knowledge of the events that took place in 1992, he may not have

 9     testified with very much precision.  I have understood some of his

10     answers to us during the course of his testimony here to be somewhat

11     vague, and I understand his reasons, and I think we should make it clear

12     to him that he will not be prosecuted before this Tribunal because of

13     what he has testified.

14             Now, whether his testimony here may be used before the special

15     court in Sarajevo is another matter, but in any case, he is required to

16     testify truthfully and accurately before us in this courtroom.

17             So when it comes to the issue of his previous interview, I fully

18     appreciate the fact that this interview was made not as an ordinary

19     statement made by the Prosecution's investigators, but was conducted as

20     an interview in which he was himself a suspect and that he was told that

21     he was a suspect.  So that, of course, puts the interview in a very

22     special light.  But we will take this into consideration if ultimately we

23     allow the Prosecution to confront the witness with what he is saying --

24     with his interview back then.

25             MR. ZECEVIC:  Your Honour, if I may.  I fully agree with your

Page 1087

 1     assessment.  It is not the -- you're 100 per cent right.  It is not the

 2     case before this Tribunal that he is suspect or anything.  There is no

 3     pending investigation as far as we know.  But he is a suspect in his

 4     country, and his country, by the rule of the law has the power to use his

 5     statement over here in order to use it before the court of law in his

 6     country.  Therefore, what I'm concerned about is the witness -- there is

 7     no doubt that the Trial Chamber has the wish to have a truthful answer

 8     from the witness, but if this truthful answer would ultimately

 9     self-incriminate him, then I would have a problem, Your Honours, and I

10     think we should -- that he should be cautioned and get separate legal

11     advice on how is he to -- supposed to -- to answer these questions before

12     this Trial Chamber.  That is my concern, Your Honour.  Thank you.

13             JUDGE HARHOFF:  But just to reply to that, as far as I have

14     understood, but we can ask Mrs. Korner about it, but as far as I have

15     understood the questions that have been put so far to this witness, these

16     questions do not seem to implicate the witness in terms of possible

17     criminal proceedings in Sarajevo.  The questions have so far, and I think

18     correctly, been addressed to the witness in order to elicit evidence from

19     this witness about the participation and the role of your client and of

20     Mr. Zupljanin, especially Mr. Zupljanin.

21             MR. ZECEVIC:  Well, in essence that is true, but, Your Honours,

22     the few last questions, I believe, have been directed directly against in

23     my -- at least in my view and my opinion against this witness, and that

24     is why ultimately our friend from the Prosecutor's side ask that he be

25     treated like a hostile witness.  That is my concern.

Page 1088

 1             Thank you very much.  I'm sorry I took some time.

 2             MR. PANTELIC:  Yes, Your Honours.  If I may, I fully support the

 3     submission of my learned friend Mr. Zecevic, and I would like to outline

 4     another very important aspect of this particular issue.

 5             Mr. Djekanovic, being treated or qualified as a hostile witness

 6     will be in situation that in relation to the law of co-operation between

 7     the jurisdiction of BiH and Tribunal might be confronted with certain

 8     criminal proceedings there.  He needs legal advice.  He needs to be

 9     informed about all aspects of possible consequences of his testimony here

10     and confrontation with the previous statement that he gave to the OTP,

11     and I think the Association of Defence Counsel here in the Tribunal

12     should be informed immediately about this particular situation, because

13     now we are entering into the sphere of the basic rights of a person to be

14     informed about the consequences, to be informed about the possibility to

15     have legal advice and aid, and so on and so forth.

16             I don't have, Your Honours, any problem if Prosecution will treat

17     him as before like OTP witness on the 65 ter list, but I have, personally

18     as a professional, this is actually the basis of my Code of Professional

19     Conduct, I have a problem seeing the possible violation of an

20     individual's right here without putting my submission on the record.

21             Thank you.

22             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mr. Pantelic and Mr. Zecevic, what you are

23     suggesting is that the Prosecution cannot cross-examine this witness

24     without somehow implicating him in the events that took place during the

25     war, and this is where, at least from my own personal point of view, I

Page 1089

 1     may differ from you, because I think that it would be possible to

 2     cross-examine a witness, even it is done by the calling party, for the

 3     purpose of eliciting evidence that relates to the accused in this case.

 4             I don't see that necessarily confronting this witness with what

 5     may have told the Prosecution's investigators earlier on that this would

 6     necessarily have to imply any criminal responsibility on the part of this

 7     witness.

 8             MR. PANTELIC:  Yes, Your Honour.  I agree with you if we are

 9     speaking of the potential and future proceedings against this witness

10     before this court, but this witness needs now, at this moment, he needs a

11     personal legal advisor sitting beside him if he will be confronted with

12     an interview that he gave to OTP in his capacity of a suspect, simply as

13     that.  Otherwise, he can -- he should be informed but not -- well, in

14     part by you but not by us or by OTP, but with an independent legal

15     advisor of the consequences of the possible answer that he will give in

16     confrontation with his previous statement which was made under a specific

17     mental condition where he was a suspect in the office of the prosecution

18     in Sarajevo, and that certain development of his testimony now might --

19     might have very, very serious consequences for him.  That's my point.

20             Thank you.

21             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Ms. Korner.

22             MS. KORNER:  All right.  Your Honour, the Defence counsel -- I'm

23     sorry -- are muddling a number of different concepts at the moment.  The

24     first is the application that I made which is simply to treat, putting it

25     in its common law session -- way, this witness as a hostile witness, in

Page 1090

 1     other words, hostile to the Prosecution's case.  That is a separate in

 2     itself and there is ample jurisprudence from this Tribunal that, subject

 3     to Your Honours' leave I should be allowed to do it.  That's perhaps that

 4     matter, and they're not really dealing with that matter, because as Your

 5     Honour Judge Harhoff has pointed out, putting to him what he said in his

 6     original interview doesn't necessarily implicate him in anything.

 7             The matter that they're now raising is a matter that effectively,

 8     virtually since the trial of Brdjanin, which is the first -- in what I

 9     call insider witnesses gave evidence has come up over and over again, and

10     that is why Rule 90(E) is in place.

11             Clearly where witnesses who are called who are suspects within

12     the meaning of the rules in that they are implicated in the events of --

13     which this trial is dealing with, and indeed this witness is so

14     implicated from the fact of his position and the actions he did or did

15     not carry out, should give evidence to enable the Trial Chamber to arrive

16     at the truth of what happened, and therefore, it's quite clear why Rule

17     90(E) was passed.

18             The situation of such witnesses giving evidence in these trials

19     has continued since the state court, not only in Bosnia but also in

20     Serbia and Croatia, took over war crimes.  The reality is that is why it

21     is said under Rule 90(E) it's the witness's privilege to object to making

22     any statement which might tend to incriminate him.  The Chamber may,

23     however, compel the witness to answer the question.  Testimony compelled

24     in this way shall not be used as evidence in a subsequent prosecution

25     against the witness for any offence.

Page 1091

 1             And, Your Honour, the reality is once that is --

 2             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Please read the sentence to the end.

 3             MS. KORNER:  Other than false testimony, yes.  I'm sorry.  I'm

 4     leaving aside perjury for the moment.  Your Honour, that's one thing

 5     obviously one can show that when compelled, he told a complete lie,

 6     that's one thing.  But the reality is although the case papers concerning

 7     this witness, for example, may be sent to the state court, once he's been

 8     compelled in this way to answer - and can I say that I spent some months

 9     in setting up the war crimes court in Sarajevo, in the Prosecutor's

10     office - it cannot be used against him.  It's not admissible against him

11     even in a proceeding in the state court, and that I know is the situation

12     that is being followed.

13             So from that point of view, it's not a valid argument made by

14     Mr. Zecevic or Mr. Pantelic, but as I say, at the moment that's an

15     entirely separate issue.  All that Your Honours are considering at the

16     moment is whether or not on this particular aspect, namely, whether they

17     were told about the actions in these various towns he said something

18     totally different in the interview to what he has now said to the Court.

19     That's all I'm asking.

20             MR. ZECEVIC:  Just very quick, Your Honours.  I appreciate what

21     Ms. Joanna Korner said about the law in BiH, but I have provided the

22     copies to Ms. Featherstone and to all parties of that particular law, and

23     let me read Article 5:

24              "Evidence provided to ICTY by witness --"

25             MS. KORNER:  I'm sorry, just a moment.  Can I have a copy?  You

Page 1092

 1     haven't given us a copy.

 2             MR. ZECEVIC:  I sent it by mail.  Well, I'm sorry, I don't have

 3     the means to print it out in court.

 4              "Transcript of testimony of witness given before the ICTY and

 5     records of the positions of witnesses made before the ICTY in accordance

 6     with Rule 71 of the ICTY RPE shall be admissible before the courts

 7     provided that that testimony or this position is relevant to a fact in

 8     issue."

 9             Under 2:

10             "The Court may exclude evidence given by a witness with

11     protective measures where the probative value is outweighed by its

12     prejudicial value."

13             And 3:

14             "Nothing in this provision shall prejudice the defendant's right

15     to request the attendance of witnesses referred to in paragraph 1..." and

16     so and so on.

17             It is my reading that this Article 5 gives the power of the Trial

18     Chamber in Sarajevo, in Bosnia, to use this -- the testimony of this

19     witness, and in that respect I do not agree with the overview that --

20             JUDGE HALL:  That's notwithstanding our own Rule 92(E)?

21             MR. ZECEVIC:  I'm sorry?  You mean Rule 90(E)?

22             JUDGE HALL:  Rule 90(E), yes.

23             MR. ZECEVIC:  I believe so.

24             JUDGE HALL:  I see.

25             MR. ZECEVIC:  Thank you.

Page 1093

 1                           [Trial Chamber and senior legal officer confer]

 2             MR. PANTELIC:  Sorry, Your Honour, just one word.  Again for the

 3     record.  This man, Mr. Djekanovic, needs a legal help.  He needs to -- I

 4     don't know, whether it's the registry who will take care about his

 5     rights, but definitely before entering in any kind of scenario here, he

 6     needs legal advice.  Thank you.

 7             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Thank you, Mr. Pantelic.

 8             We have discussed the matter, and the ruling is the following:

 9     That according to the Appeals Chamber's most recent decision of 1st of

10     February, 2008, in Popovic, we can divide the proceedings here into two

11     steps:  The first step is that we can allow the Prosecution to confront

12     the witness with an earlier interview or statement without having to

13     declare this witness adverse or hostile, but only for the limited purpose

14     of clarifying one particular issue and only one, and this is what we will

15     do.  So we will allow the Prosecution to confront Mr. Djekanovic with his

16     earlier interview but only for the limited purpose of clarifying whether

17     or not he was informed of the actions taken as a part of the military

18     operation and for that purpose only.  For this, we do not need to declare

19     him hostile at this moment, and for that same reason we do not see it

20     necessary to have a counsel.

21             Now, if during the further examination of this witness the same

22     problem arises again, then we will proceed to step two, which is then to

23     declare him formally, upon the Prosecution's request, an adverse witness.

24     And I'm using the term "adverse" in order to avoid the special

25     connotation under common law that applies or that attaches to the

Page 1094

 1     expression "hostile."  So we will call him adverse.  But if the problem

 2     continues during the further examination-in-chief, then the Prosecution

 3     may ask the Chamber to declare him an adverse witness, and then we may

 4     proceed to do so with the consequence that from that point on the

 5     Prosecution can cross-examine him and put earlier and other statements to

 6     him in order to challenge his -- to impeach his credibility.

 7             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Yes.  Just for the record, I think that the

 8     particular inconsistency we're talking about is not only about the

 9     military operations but as well the police operations.  Both military and

10     police.

11             MS. KORNER:  Your Honour, just so it's clear, this particular

12     inconsistency relates specifically to the military actions.

13             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Do the parties agree to this?

14             MR. ZECEVIC:  Well, it is your ruling.  We have to accept it,

15     Your Honours.

16             MR. PANTELIC:  Yes, Your Honour, it's an absolutely reasonable

17     ruling, but if I well understood you, for the other line of questioning

18     that you might allow, I believe, and I again outline my position that he

19     should have legal advice prior to enter to this second line of

20     questioning.

21             Thank you.

22             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mr. Pantelic, it was your own submission that you

23     would have no objections to the Prosecution continuing to examine him in

24     chief as a viva voce witness, and that is exactly what we'll do, and if,

25     as I said, if the problem occurs again, we will then consider a request

Page 1095

 1     from the Prosecution to declare this witness adverse, and at that point

 2     we will also consider to supply him with a counsel, and the registrar is

 3     currently in the process of checking out with the ADC whether there is a

 4     counsel available for this purpose.  So we are preparing ourselves for

 5     that.

 6             Let's proceed.

 7             MR. PANTELIC:  Thank you, Your Honour.  It was my understanding,

 8     too, so thank you.

 9                           [The witness takes the stand]

10             MS. KORNER:

11        Q.   Mr. Djekanovic, I'm going to give you one last chance to answer

12     the question before I show you the interview.  Did you, as is stated in

13     that document that we were looking at, the 23rd of June, 1992, get a

14     briefing from the military about the operations they were carrying out?

15        A.   As I've already said, from time to time, occasionally at some

16     sessions there were some tentative briefings, very superficial, and I do

17     not in any way claim that there were no such desultory bits of

18     information at that session, but as to what type of means would be used

19     and where exactly we had no such information.  No mention was made at

20     all.

21        Q.   All right.  In which case, do you agree you were informed about -

22     and I keep mispronouncing this - Vrbanjci?  Do you agree?

23        A.   Specifically what operation or action are you referring to I'm

24     not sure, but from time to time I was informed on actions in Vrbanjci as

25     well as some others.

Page 1096

 1        Q.   And the others included, didn't they, Hanifici, Crko Brdo, and

 2     Kninska?

 3        A.   Cirkino Brdo.

 4        Q.   You were told about those operations, weren't you?

 5        A.   Not specifically.  Not separately.  I was not informed of those

 6     operations, nor was it anyone's duty to inform me thereof.

 7        Q.   Well, then if -- we keep getting side-tracked.  If it wasn't

 8     their duty to inform you of it, what was the purpose of

 9     Lieutenant-Colonel Peulic attending the Crisis Staff meetings then?

10        A.   For the needs of the army -- or, rather, for their normal

11     functioning it was necessary to provide supplies in the rear -- or,

12     rather, logistics.  We needed to provide them with clothes, shoes,

13     foodstuffs.  There was a lack of all of these items.  It was necessary to

14     take out the wounded, to take them for treatment, those who were wounded,

15     to inform their families, and so these were the aspects where we received

16     detailed information so that we could take measures on our part.

17        Q.   All right.  I'm going to leave the topic.  Can you just look,

18     however, at the next page of the document in English.  It's the same

19     page, actually, in B/C/S, but it's page 2 in English.

20             MS. KORNER:  It's the same document we were looking at.  You mean

21     you've taken it off.  In English it's two pages.  In B/C/S, you're right,

22     it's one page.  23rd of June.  Okay.  It's all one page.  I'm sorry.

23     It's just a different copy of the translation.

24             Is the B/C/S up?  Yes.  Thank you.  And the English up, please,

25     as well.

Page 1097

 1        Q.   Under item 2, the members of the Crisis Staff are to -- who are

 2     to go to Banja Luka to carry out certain tasks were designated.  What

 3     were the tasks to be carried out in Banja Luka?

 4        A.   It was necessary to provide food.  We were to find such

 5     foodstuffs.  Also, fuel.  We also had to find donors in order to provide

 6     these supplies, because all normal supply routes were cut off.  There was

 7     no electricity.  The phone lines were down.  There were no medicines.

 8     And we had dead people on a daily basis.  They had to be buried.  We had

 9     to visit their families and provide them with some form of subsistence.

10     And this was the most frequent reason why we went to Banja Luka, because

11     that's where we sought all these means in order to provide a normal

12     existence for these people as much as we could.

13        Q.   Okay.  And was that assistance sought from the Crisis Staff of

14     the autonomous region?

15        A.   Well, we sought assistance from companies, from individuals,

16     donors, and also from the regional Crisis Staffs.  Why not?  We sought to

17     find assistance wherever we could in order to provide any minimal

18     quantity of fuel, if we could, and so forth.

19        Q.   Thank you.  I'm going to move to the next meeting.

20             MS. KORNER:  Your Honours, may that just be marked for

21     identification?

22             JUDGE HALL:  Yes.

23             MS. KORNER:  Thank you very much.

24             THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibit P79, marked for identification, Your

25     Honours.

Page 1098

 1             MS. KORNER:

 2        Q.   Can we then move, please, to 65 ter number 075.  The meeting of

 3     the 24th of June.

 4             Under item 3, please:

 5              "Inspector Pejic informed the Crisis Staff about the work of the

 6     security service and the results of the questioning of the persons who

 7     had been brought in."

 8             Now, is that the inspector Pejic that you referred to who had the

 9     first name of Zdravko?

10        A.   Yes.  That was the only inspector Zdravko Pejic.

11        Q.   And what was he telling you about the results of the questioning?

12        A.   Well, 17 years on I can't really recall the things that he

13     mentioned then.

14        Q.   Did he tell you that he had questioned, for example, Mr. Petrusic

15     who was the --

16        A.   No.

17        Q.   That was fairly quick.  Or Anto Mandic or anybody like that?

18        A.   No, he did not discuss the questioning of these individuals.

19        Q.   Well, then, can you -- can you think back?  I mean, this dramatic

20     period of your life, Mr. Djekanovic.  What was he telling you about the

21     questioning?

22        A.   I've already said that I cannot really recall the details of the

23     questioning, whom it was that he questioned, and 17 years is really a

24     long time, and I can't recall the details.  If there were -- if there was

25     any more detail in these minutes perhaps that would jog my memory, but

Page 1099

 1     just off the top of my head I really can't.

 2        Q.   He goes on to suggest that a session of the Crisis Staff be

 3     devoted to the problem of detained persons.  What was the problem of

 4     detained persons?

 5        A.   There were a number of ways in which persons were detained.  One

 6     of the ways, and this was of concern to the Crisis Staff staff and where

 7     we engaged in some sort of action, was in the situation where there were

 8     families who had been abandoned after certain combat operations and the

 9     families were not provided for.  And frequently those families themselves

10     would just come and seek for some kind of protection so that they could

11     be put up and accommodated somewhere.  And for the most part, most of the

12     time we discussed how to provide accommodations and where for those

13     families, how to feed them, to provide them with food, because I've

14     already mentioned before what the living conditions were then and all the

15     things that we did not have.

16        Q.   Just a moment, Mr. Djekanovic.  Are you telling us that the word

17     "detained" effectively means people who've been made homeless?  Is that

18     what you're telling the Court?  As opposed to people who had been

19     imprisoned.

20        A.   Well, this refers more to people who did have their homes, but

21     these homes were exposed.  They were not protected.  There were a lot of

22     armed members and armed groups milling around.  They were from all sorts

23     of structures.  These people did have their homes, but they did not feel

24     safe there, and they sometimes felt they needed to leave them and seek

25     some sort of protection or shelter.  Sometimes they wouldn't even -- they

Page 1100

 1     weren't even sure that they would reach the next morning.

 2             MR. PANTELIC:  [Previous translation continues] ... simply

 3     inspector Pejic allegedly informed me about the detained persons known

 4     Serb nationality who allegedly committed blah, blah, blah and they were

 5     in the prison and they were questioned by the authorities.  Because here

 6     we're going along the lines whether it was some kind of people, displaced

 7     people, et cetera.  It doesn't have any sense this kind of -- thank you.

 8             MS. KORNER:  Well, I must say I'm amazed by that interjection.

 9     Absolutely amazed.  One it's improper, but, two, is it now suggested that

10     I should put to the witness that he's certainly not telling the truth and

11     this is all about people who have been captured and imprisoned?  Is that

12     what Mr. Pantelic would like me to do?

13             MR. PANTELIC:  No, Ms. Korner.  I mean, of course you can do

14     whatever you think that's appropriate to do, but I'm telling you that

15     this transcript is not logical due to your maybe unprecise question or

16     maybe due to the interpretation, because this witness is speaking --

17             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mr. Pantelic.

18             MR. PANTELIC:  -- about displaced person and you are thinking

19     about the people who were --

20             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mr. Pantelic.

21             MR. PANTELIC:  -- detained.  Thank you.

22             JUDGE HARHOFF:  I think this can be sorted out during your

23     cross-examination.  I think we should leave it for the moment to

24     Mrs. Korner to complete the examination-in-chief of this witness.

25             MR. ZECEVIC:  Your Honours, I just try to help Ms. Korner in this

Page 1101

 1     respect.  I believe there is a slight ambiguity about the -- about the

 2     translation of this, because the word in Serbian which is written on this

 3     document does not clearly, hundred per cent, correspond to "detain," to

 4     be "detained."  So maybe that could be clarified with the witness.  Maybe

 5     that's the reason for miscommunication between Ms. Korner and the

 6     witness.

 7             MS. KORNER:

 8        Q.   All right.  What does the -- can you just read out, so that I can

 9     get a translation, please, the sentence that begins, if it does begin,

10     "He suggested."  Can you read it out from the actual original document.

11        A.   He proposed that a meeting of the Crisis Staff be devoted to the

12     problem of persons who had been detained or brought in.  After the

13     discussion of the work of the security station, it was concluded that the

14     Crisis Staff has no right --

15        Q.   It wasn't, was it, Mr. Djekanovic, that Inspector Pejic was

16     talking about people who had been made homeless.  He was talking about

17     people who had been arrested and brought into the police station.

18        A.   I don't remember session -- that Pejic talked about interrogating

19     persons who had been detained at the public security station, at the

20     Crisis Staff, and the Crisis Staff was not authorised over such matters.

21        Q.   All right.  Well, let's -- all right.  Let's move on to the next

22     sentence which you started to read.

23              "After a discussion of the work of the security station, it was

24     concluded that the Crisis Staff had no right to interfere in the

25     professional work of the police and the army and that no one wishes

Page 1102

 1     to ... take upon itself security and the creation of conditions..." et

 2     cetera.

 3             As far as you were concerned, did the Crisis Staff have the

 4     authority to order the police what to do and how to do it?

 5        A.   No, the Crisis Staff did not have that authority.  The Crisis

 6     Staff only sought the assistance of the police occasionally when it was

 7     necessary to secure or to provide protection for certain people or for

 8     certain persons or families.  We could not issue orders to the police.

 9     We didn't have the right to do that.

10        Q.   All right.  So who had the right to issue orders to the head of

11     the SJB in Kotor Varos, namely Savo Tepic?

12        A.   I never worked at the MUP and am not familiar with the

13     organisation and the hierarchy of the police.

14        Q.   All right.  We'll move on.

15             MS. KORNER:  Your Honours, may that then, please, be exhibited as

16     it's on our 65 ter list.

17             JUDGE HALL:  Admitted and marked.

18             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit P80, Your Honours.

19             MS. KORNER:  26th of June, please, which is exhibit -- 65 ter

20     707.

21        Q.   This particular meeting, no doubt, Mr. Djekanovic, you do

22     remember quite clearly.

23        A.   This is your assumption.  I really only slightly recollect these

24     events, and in the preparation for this hearing a few days ago I read

25     something.  Some things I saw for the first time, but as for the nature

Page 1103

 1     of that, I don't recall -- it is my nature I don't recall things that

 2     happened three days ago or something.  So I'm not able to remember things

 3     that happened 17 years ago in every detail.

 4             Of course, I do recall generally what happened, but I don't

 5     remember each move, each detail, no.

 6        Q.   Well, if we look at that, and you had a chance to read it

 7     yesterday and you were asked about it in interview, this meeting came

 8     after the killings, didn't it, outside the medical centre in Kotor Varos?

 9        A.   Yes, but this was preceded by some other events.

10        Q.   Sorry, what was preceded by some other events, the killings or

11     this meeting?

12        A.   The killings preceded the meetings.  There were killings.  There

13     were some of our people who died.  There were ambushes, killings, and

14     then this other killing occurred in return for this other killing which

15     we disagreed with.

16        Q.   I'm sorry, you've lost me completely.  Are you saying that the

17     killings that took place at the medical centre in Kotor Varos were in

18     retaliation for some other killings?

19        A.   More or less uncontrolled revenge, an uncontrolled reaction to

20     the killings that had taken place before it was a totally unnecessary,

21     uncalled for reaction.

22        Q.   You're saying -- I'm sorry, it's still not clear.  We need to

23     make this clear.  The killings at the hospital were an uncontrolled

24     reaction to killings that had taken place before; is that what you're

25     saying?

Page 1104

 1        A.   Yes.

 2        Q.   Now, those killings were carried out by whom according to the

 3     information that you were given at that meeting and possibly before?

 4        A.   These killings or this uncalled for incident at the health centre

 5     was carried out by, I assume, members of the Special Police or some

 6     members of the Special Police who were stationed there.

 7        Q.   Well, that's what you were told, wasn't it, because if we look at

 8     the document, at the -- in the second paragraph, Lieutenant-Colonel

 9     Peulic is providing you with detailed information about yesterday, that's

10     what the minutes say and say some members of the CSB special unit and

11     other individuals had behaved in and authorised manner.

12             So you were getting on this occasion, no question about it if

13     these minutes are right, Mr. Djekanovic, detailed information from

14     Lieutenant-Colonel Peulic.

15        A.   Yes.  I got more information from Dr. Gajanin rather than Colonel

16     Peulic.  I think Colonel Peulic wasn't there.

17        Q.   Wasn't where?  Oh, I see, at the killings, sorry, yes.  All

18     right, if we go down, we can see that Mr. Tepic informs the Crisis Staff

19     and says that it was his impression that many members of the special unit

20     were acting without authorisation but no one dared to criticise them

21     because of the threats they made.

22             Apart from the killings, what else were the special unit doing?

23        A.   You already mentioned that part.  As far as the matters that I

24     can speak about, as far as the military part of the matter is concerned,

25     the soldiers did have a very, very good professional job and had they not

Page 1105

 1     done it like that, the number of victims in Kotor Varos would have been

 2     much higher, and in the event that they had not --

 3        Q.   Stop, please.  I'm asking you what it was that Savo Tepic was

 4     complaining to you and the other members of the Crisis Staff was being

 5     done by the special unit acting without authorisation.

 6        A.   In extra combat activities, certain members of the Special

 7     Police, as well as members of other armed units, other armed personnel,

 8     were involved in taking or stealing items from abandoned homes.  They

 9     would also steal abandoned cars and take them to Banja Luka.  And a major

10     part of the aspect of our dissatisfaction, first of all, related to this

11     kind of behaviour by these individuals.

12        Q.   And what were they actually doing at the police station to your

13     certain knowledge, Mr. Djekanovic?

14        A.   I didn't understand you.

15        Q.   There were prisoners at the police station, weren't there?

16     Non-Serb --

17        A.   Yes.  There were.  There was a certain number of persons detained

18     at the police station.

19        Q.   And what was happening to those people?

20        A.   This is not a question for me.  I wasn't at the police station.

21     I know what I had heard, just like you know what you heard, that

22     sometimes there was some improper conduct and beatings, but people who

23     were detained at the police station or those for whom authorised persons

24     recommended measures that they should be -- of detention, they would be

25     in the position to say what happened to them, because in the police

Page 1106

 1     station itself there was no space for detention.  So there were no

 2     detained persons there.  I mean, there were some who would spend the

 3     night there or something, a certain number of people.

 4        Q.   You talked about the beatings.  You knew yourself about the

 5     beatings, didn't you?  You didn't have to be told by Mr. Tepic.

 6        A.   How do you mean I knew about them?  That is why there were Crisis

 7     Staff meetings where we were all informed about particular areas of

 8     activity.  I was not at the police station, so I did not know what was

 9     happening, and it was not my job to know what was happening at the police

10     station.

11        Q.   Did anybody report to you, not just at the Crisis Staff meetings

12     but elsewhere, that they could hear the beatings?

13        A.   I did not receive a report in writing, but we just got

14     information at the Crisis Staff meetings.

15        Q.   And what was that information that you were getting about the

16     beatings?

17        A.   I got information just like the other members of the Crisis Staff

18     did, that a number of people were detained, that there had been beatings

19     by individuals, and I mean, you can see that I didn't receive anything

20     else in particular about that.

21        Q.   Did you yourself hear, as you passed the SJB, any noise?

22        A.   It's too suggestive.  No, I didn't hear that.

23        Q.   Did anybody else tell you that they had heard noises coming from

24     the police station of the sounds of people being beaten?

25        A.   I repeat, I received information at the Crisis Staff meeting.  I

Page 1107

 1     don't recall anybody else telling me that.

 2        Q.   All right.  I'm not going to pursue that.  You yourself are

 3     recorded as speaking to Mr. Dubocanin about everything going on at the

 4     health centre, and that you had been assured by Mr. Dubocanin it would be

 5     prevented.  Well, what did you say to Mr. Dubocanin about the killings at

 6     the health centre?

 7        A.   I told him that such conduct in any event is not a good thing.

 8     It's impermissible, and it's not good either for the medical centre or

 9     for the Serbian people or for the Kotor Varos municipality and that

10     wilful behaviour by individuals should be prevented.

11        Q.   So you didn't suggest to him that his unit was guilty of murder?

12        A.   If I did speak with him about the conduct of members of his unit,

13     then the conclusion is that we spoke about the members of his unit.  We

14     didn't talk about these things being committed by some others who were

15     outside of their -- or outside of his control.

16        Q.   You've just told us that you would report -- it was reported to

17     you that members of the Banja Luka special unit led by Mr. Dubocanin, or

18     he was in charge of them in Kotor Varos, had committed murders outside

19     the health centre.  Did you say to him anything about the fact that this

20     was murder?

21        A.   The question is being repeated.  I already said that this was

22     impermissible, that things should not be done in this way and must not be

23     done in this way.

24        Q.   Okay.  You also apparently said that all these questions had to

25     be cleared up and information provided on the behaviour of the members of

Page 1108

 1     the special unit at the meeting with Stojan Zupljanin, the chief of the

 2     SCB -- sorry, the CSB, scheduled for tomorrow.

 3             Now, you had a meeting, did you, with Mr. Zupljanin?

 4        A.   I don't recall details, whether on the following day I held or

 5     there was held a -- I did have a couple of meetings with Zupljanin.  They

 6     were not overall official meetings.  You can see from the report that we

 7     had entrusted the head of the police station, but I don't recall that on

 8     the following day a meeting with Stojan Zupljanin was held.

 9        Q.   Well, you did, however, have a meeting, didn't you, with Stojan

10     Zupljanin, and you said more than one meeting, but after these killings?

11        A.   After those killings I did have meetings with Stojan Zupljanin.

12     How many times, when, what the dates were I don't remember, but there

13     weren't many such meetings.

14        Q.   All right.  What were you saying to Stojan Zupljanin at these

15     meetings?

16        A.   I conveyed to him the positions of the Crisis Staff about our

17     remarks and information, about the conduct of individuals within or as

18     part of the special unit.

19        Q.   Right.  And what did you want him to do?

20        A.   We wanted him for the unit to be organisationally and

21     structurally constantly under control, that it should not relax and it

22     should not be permitted for individuals to wilfully do the things that we

23     had referred to earlier.

24        Q.   And how many meetings -- I'm sorry.  And what was his response to

25     that?

Page 1109

 1        A.   In any case, the event was that he would do everything that was

 2     in his power --

 3        Q.   I'm sorry --

 4        A.   -- to prevent these people from behaving in the way that they

 5     did.

 6        Q.   Well, who -- who did this -- who was in command of this special

 7     unit?

 8        A.   At the beginning of yesterday's hearing I said that I don't know

 9     exactly who it was.  According to my information, it was Slobodan

10     Dubocanin.  I don't know if it was somebody else, if they changed.  I

11     don't know what the structure was and who was at the head of that unit.

12     I said yesterday that I had information that it was Slobodan Dubocanin

13     though.

14        Q.   You say that his response was he would do everything that was in

15     his power to prevent these people behaving in the way that they did.

16     What did you understand he could do?

17        A.   I understood that he would prevent that, people wilfully leaving

18     the camp or the base and going to search other people's homes without

19     need to take all of those things and take them to Banja Luka.  I

20     particularly asked that we mustn't react uncontrollably in the event that

21     we had certain losses.  We had no right to react in such a way towards

22     other people.

23        Q.   I'm sorry.  Searching other peoples homes and things.  What about

24     the killings?  Didn't you mention those to him?

25        A.   I mentioned later that at the end I did refer to the killings, of

Page 1110

 1     course.  I did mention the killings.

 2        Q.   I'm sorry, Mr. Djekanovic.  What did you want him to do about the

 3     fact that members of this unit had deliberately and cold-bloodedly killed

 4     a number of people outside the health centre?

 5        A.   The fact is that people were killed, and the fact is that we

 6     asked that this should not happen again, that this must not happen again,

 7     must not happen again especially in the compound around the medical

 8     centre.  The fact is that we asked that this stop.  Our authority on

 9     initiating an investigation or possible criminal reports at the point in

10     time when all of that was functioning in a pretty disjointed manner, when

11     all the institutions were not carrying out their functions, it was not

12     within our jurisdiction to submit criminal reports, but actually now I am

13     aware of the fact that anyone can submit criminal charges or a criminal

14     report if they are able to.

15        Q.   Yes.  I just want to ask you one thing about your answer --

16        A.   Submit them to someone.

17        Q.   Sorry.  You say this must not happen again, especially in the

18     compound around the medical centre.  Do you mean it was all right if it

19     happened elsewhere?

20        A.   Well, you are drawing that conclusion.  I am of the opinion that

21     this is something that should not happen anywhere.  There was a war.  I

22     cannot influence who is going to be killed in the war, but I did believe

23     all other killings, especially after a person had been detained, should

24     not take place.

25        Q.   All right.  Can we very quickly just look at one other matter on

Page 1111

 1     this set of minutes.  It's at page 2 in both B/C/S and English.

 2             Under item 3:

 3              "Savo raised the question of detainees of whom there are about

 4     73 ..."

 5             Was that 73 people in the police station, in the SJB?

 6        A.   No, this was not in the SJB.  This was in detention that was

 7     behind the prison building.

 8        Q.   "... and what should be done with them.  He was told it was a

 9     matter for the police to investigate."

10             So it was being left to the police, was it, to decide what to do

11     with these prisoners?

12        A.   It's true that on the basis of a text written the way it is you

13     can draw conclusions that you need to draw, but my view was that those

14     people had to be fed.  They had to be guarded.  Security had to be

15     provided for that prison.  As for what had to be done with them, that was

16     not our decision and there was no decision about whether somebody would

17     be released or sent to a different prison or what you're implying.  The

18     activities were to provide food for the prisoner, someone to guard them.

19     All of these things were a source of problems to provide.

20             MS. KORNER:  Your Honours, may ask that that be admitted as an

21     exhibit.

22             JUDGE HALL:  Admitted and marked.

23             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit P81, Your Honours.

24             MS. KORNER:  All right.

25        Q.   Can we move on, please, very quickly, just to see what happened

Page 1112

 1     to the Special Police in Kotor Varos.

 2             The next document, please, is, yes, 65 ter 708.

 3             This is called -- it's a publication called the "Bulletin" of the

 4     Crisis Staff, dated the 26th of June.  Was this a document that was

 5     issued for the public?

 6        A.   Yes.  A bulletin was published for a certain period of time in

 7     order to inform people in the field, because any other form of

 8     communication, because of shortages of electricity, TV, and television,

 9     did not exist, and radio.  We would issue bulletins from time to time.  I

10     don't know how it exactly went from what issue to what issue and from

11     which date to which date.

12        Q.   Right.  I just want to deal with two parts of this:  In the first

13     paragraph you talk about 15 days of war, 35 men being wounded, all

14     noncritical.

15             "These figures show and remind us that we are in a war that was

16     started to bring about the extermination of the Serbian people from these

17     parts ... we are in a war with an enemy that took the oath of 'Besa' in a

18     holy war, a jihad."

19               We looked at the order of the 19th of December which said you

20     should have propaganda activities.  Would this sort of paragraph be

21     classed as propaganda in your view?

22        A.   If one speaks about the number of losses and that some people

23     went missing, then that cannot be classified as propaganda.  It was a

24     fact that there were warring parties opening fire at each other.

25     Everyone knew that.  That cannot be propaganda.

Page 1113

 1             As for the conclusion, well, that depends on the person.  You can

 2     draw a conclusion yourself.

 3        Q.   I'm asking you.  I'm asking you, sir.  You're person who arranged

 4     for the issue of this document.  Do you consider this to be propaganda?

 5     Simply yes or no.

 6        A.   I see the first paragraph as a way of informing.  Hence, the

 7     answer is no.

 8        Q.   All right.  And in the second paragraph:

 9             "The enemy is leaderless and in disarray, experiencing heavy

10     losses.  Their twin strongholds of Hrvacani and Bilice have been

11     destroyed.  We currently control most of the municipality's territory

12     except for the area to the left of the river Vrbanja from Vecici to

13     Ravne."

14             Is that accurate?

15        A.   I don't know what we controlled on this date of the 26th of June.

16     In any case, I think Bilice was completely taken over much later, and I

17     don't know exactly which of these locations fell under our control at

18     what point in time.  We did control a lot of the field but even under

19     such circumstances and in those areas and along those roads there were

20     killings daily.

21        Q.   All right.  Your Honours, that's all I ask about that document.

22     May that please be exhibited?

23             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit P82, Your Honours.

24             MS. KORNER:  All right.  Next can we move, please, to -- it's --

25             JUDGE HALL:  We alert counsel that we will be taking the break at

Page 1114

 1     12.30.

 2             MS. KORNER:  Yes.  Your Honour, I can deal with this last

 3     document then.  It's -- it's P -- oh, it's already been exhibited.  Thank

 4     you.  P46.

 5        Q.   Under item 2:

 6              "All those willing to move out of Kotor Varos are to make a

 7     statement at the lower court leaving their immovable property to the

 8     social political community."

 9             And a bit further down.

10             "Ljuboje Gavric is to take part in the Crisis Staff and take

11     responsibility for organising population resettlement."

12             People -- non-Serbs were being moved out, weren't they, of Kotor

13     Varos in a fairly large-scale fashion?  That's right, isn't it,

14     Mr. Djekanovic?  That's why --

15        A.   Yes, there were people being moved out of the territory of Kotor

16     Varos municipality in different periods of time, in different stages, and

17     for different reasons.

18        Q.   But by the end of 1992, there were hardly any Muslims or Croats

19     left, were there?

20        A.   No.  There was a larger group of Croats from Kotor Varos who

21     moved out even after the signing of the Dayton Accords in 1995.  Some

22     large Muslim villages in the area of the municipality remained almost

23     completely populated throughout 1992.  People were moving out.  There

24     were villages which became completely empty, but it is also correct that

25     there were villages that remained practically intact.  To repeat, there

Page 1115

 1     were many Croats who left after the Dayton Accords.  I don't know on

 2     whose orders or whose invitation but it came about after the signing of

 3     the accords.  We have proof of that.  We have arguments.

 4        Q.   Could you tell us, please, which villages remained -- leaving

 5     aside Vecici, which was a special case, which villages in Kotor Varos and

 6     I'll have the map up, remained populated heavily by Muslims or Croats

 7     after 1992?

 8        A.   Siprage, the entire local commune there for the most part.  Many

 9     Muslims in Garici, Dzube, Maslovare, some in Kotor Varos.

10             MR. ZECEVIC:  Can the witness be shown a map so we can follow --

11             MS. KORNER:  Yes.  It's up on -- oh, sorry.  It's P65.

12             MR. ZECEVIC:  Thank you.

13             MS. KORNER:  P65?  Okay.  Perhaps we can blow it up slightly.

14     Thank you.

15        Q.   Now, which ones do you say, Siprage?

16        A.   This part here.

17             MR. ZECEVIC:  Maybe the witness can be given the pencil.  He

18     can ...

19             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Yes.

20             MS. KORNER:  I don't know.  Yes, fine.  Give him one.

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation]  Muslims remained in this part

22     here.  There were some Muslims remaining here.

23             There were many Muslims who remained in the town.  Croats

24     remained in Sibovi and Zabrdje up until the Dayton Accords and

25     afterwards.

Page 1116

 1        Q.   Okay.  So apart from those, so we've got --

 2             THE INTERPRETER:  Microphone, please.

 3             MS. KORNER:  Sorry.

 4        Q.   We've got one village at Garici, one around Siprage, and one

 5     around -- I can't read it because you've marked it, but anyhow, near

 6     Zabrdje --

 7        A.   Sibovi and Zabrdje, the Croatian population.

 8        Q.   As a matter of interest, why when Cirkino Brdo, Hrvacani,

 9     Hanifici, and those were all the subject of military operations and the

10     people were in fact expelled, why was that one village allowed to

11     continue?  Garici.

12        A.   No one was expelling entire villages.  Anyone who did not put up

13     military resistance who did not stake up arms or partake in the

14     functioning of units could -- was allowed to stay.  Towards the end of

15     1992 or even before that, we had Muslim members amongst the police.

16     Towards the end of 1992 in the Municipal Assembly we already had Muslim

17     employees.  In TO units, even among those in command, we had Muslim

18     officers.

19        Q.   Name them, please.

20             JUDGE HALL:  Is this a convenient point, Ms. Korner?

21             MS. KORNER:  Can we just see this and then it would be, Your

22     Honour.

23        Q.   Can you name any Muslim officers in the TO, please, in 1992 who

24     were in a senior -- in a command position?

25        A.   Alagic I believe his last name was from Vrbanjci.  He belonged to

Page 1117

 1     the staff of the TO.  He remained with it until the end and worked in the

 2     rear units.  For a while he even commanded them.  In the police Sejdo

 3     Tatar remained there who was in command, I believe.  In addition to him

 4     there were two or three other policemen.  In the Municipal Assembly, I

 5     made it possible for Mesud Imamovic to come back then Zahinovic who

 6     returned from the unit in the field.  Later on we had a person working in

 7     the boiler room and working on the maintenance of the building.  I think

 8     his name was Rasim.  I was the one who hired him that year.

 9        Q.   Thank you.  Can you tell us the officer -- the police officer you

10     named?  You say he was in command.  What rank?

11        A.   Sejdo Tatar.  I am not familiar with police ranks.  I know that

12     he was a capable policeman.  He was an athlete, Judoka.  I think he

13     was -- his name was Sejdo.

14        Q.   You said he was in command.  So what was he in command of?

15        A.   Well, police doesn't have an extensive command structure.  I

16     don't know whether he was an assistant commander or something of the

17     sort.  In any case, I know that he worked with those people, cooperated

18     with them.  They didn't have command personnel per se.

19        Q.   All right.

20             MS. KORNER:  Thank you very much, Your Honour.

21             JUDGE HALL:  Twenty minutes.

22                           [The witness stands down]

23                           --- Recess taken at 12.34 p.m.

24                           --- On resuming at 1.03 p.m.

25             MR. ZECEVIC:  Your Honours, if I may.  I'm sorry, but there is a

Page 1118

 1     procedural matter that popped up in relation to disclosure for the next

 2     week for the witness that appears on the videolink.  So I believe it's a

 3     matter of some urgency, and maybe I suggest that we should either now or

 4     that we reserve 15 minutes at the end to address this.  I can -- I can

 5     briefly inform the Trial Chamber if it pleases the Court.

 6             Yesterday we received the disclosure of batch 86.  The batch 86

 7     of disclosure contains 32 documents of Rule 68 material for Mr. Basara,

 8     the witness which is on a videolink on Monday.

 9             We have a deadline tomorrow at noon to provide the court officer

10     with hard copy of the documents we intend to use with Mr. Basara.

11     Unfortunately due to this late disclosure we are unable to even review

12     that, and not to -- not to, I don't know, decide.  Of course we will be

13     able to review it by tomorrow and then we have to decide which documents

14     are we going to use for the cross-examination of Basara.

15             Now, we want to ask the Court either to prolong this deadline and

16     that somehow we deal with this situation for the future that, there is --

17     there is a ruling, for example, that the Office of the Prosecutor is

18     required to provide us with the Rule 68 material at least a week before

19     the witness appears in court.

20             I appreciate the problems, the late searches and all that, but

21     still, this is putting us in a very problematic situation.  Thank you.

22             JUDGE HARHOFF:  You will appreciate the difficulties that the

23     obligation under Rule 68 is an ongoing obligation, so it will be

24     impossible to set any time limit for that purpose.

25             MR. ZECEVIC:  Your Honour, I understand it's an ongoing

Page 1119

 1     obligation, but we have this witness, which is supposed to appear next

 2     week.  Of course these documents have been in the possession of the

 3     Prosecution for some time, obviously.  Therefore, if the search has been

 4     done on a timely -- in a timely manner, which means at least 15 days

 5     before the witness appears in court, we would have been given these

 6     documents on time.

 7             Now we received it only yesterday.  I don't think that's proper

 8     despite the Rule 68 article and the jurisprudence of this Tribunal.  This

 9     is not something which just appeared at the very late stage.  This is

10     something which is in the database of the Prosecution for some time.

11     Thank you.

12             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mrs. Korner, can you explain why it was filed so

13     late?

14             MS. KORNER:  It's not in a database that the Prosecution access

15     same Rule 68.  The -- as I've said on a number of occasions, we've

16     explained to Your Honours we had to reorganise our witness list.  The

17     searches were originally set out in the order in which we intended to

18     call our witnesses.  We moved Basara up.  The searches arrived towards

19     the end of September.  They were done yesterday, and it's turned up

20     not -- I don't think it would make much difference.  Not 32, actually,

21     it's 21, but that's splitting hairs, I accept.

22             And for the majority, the oddity is that there are documents

23     implicating Basara in the crimes in Sanski Most.  So, therefore, in one

24     sense they're not Rule 68 at all except that we're calling him as a

25     witness, and that's why we decided they should be called Rule 68.  But as

Page 1120

 1     I say, they're all fairly short documents.  There are 21 of them, and

 2     we're just doing our job as efficiently as we.  It may not sound like it,

 3     but the searches from ISU turned up literally hundreds of documents that

 4     in some way related to him.  I know because I was doing them on Sunday.

 5             JUDGE HARHOFF:  But there is a difference between documents that

 6     relate to a witness and exculpatory documents.

 7             MS. KORNER:  Yes, but we've got to -- what happens, Your Honour,

 8     in case you don't know, we ask the ISU to do a search on the name Branko

 9     Basara.  They then do the search, provide us with all these documents

10     which -- some of which when we look at them will be Rule 68, many of

11     which are in B/C/S and we can't get translated -- we have to get somebody

12     to read.  We get everything that mentions the name Branko Basara,

13     literally everything, and the same with all the other witnesses, because

14     that's what the search is supposed to do.

15             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Yes.

16             MS. KORNER:  So with the best will in the world, Your Honours,

17     and I'm sorry it happened in this way and it shouldn't normally but

18     because of the change in the witnesses, the searches for witnesses who

19     are coming very soon are only just turning up, and we are doing our level

20     best to make sure the Defence get them.

21             As I say, in this case it's not Rule 68 in the way that Your

22     Honours might imagine.

23             JUDGE HARHOFF:  So you're saying that these documents are not

24     exculpatory?

25             MS. KORNER:  They go -- he is being called as a witness by the

Page 1121

 1     Prosecution in the same way as this witness is being called.  He was in

 2     command of the 6th Krajina Brigade which carried out the crimes in Sanski

 3     Most.  He's being called to deal with those crimes, and he was

 4     interviewed in the same way as this witness was as a suspect.  So,

 5     therefore, what we're turning up -- but because he's our witness and

 6     because the Defence may want to undermine his credibility completely by

 7     saying, "You are, in fact, a criminal who committed these crimes," we

 8     have been giving them all the documents that relate to the crimes he

 9     committed.

10             Now, if that's what the Defence want to do they're entitled to

11     that, and that's why we've seen it as Rule 68.  So it's not Rule 68 in

12     the same way as with other witnesses.

13                           [Trial Chamber confers]

14             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mr. Zecevic, we are a bit at a loss in

15     understanding what exactly you're asking for.

16             MR. ZECEVIC:  Your Honours, we are asking for two things:  First

17     of all, we are asking to deal with this immediate matter because we have

18     a deadline for tomorrow at noon to provide the court officer with the

19     hard copy of all the documents that we intend to -- to use at the

20     cross-examination of the witness which is appearing over the videolink

21     because the e-court doesn't work there.  So that is the number-one

22     problem.  That is the acute problem.  And the second problem is that we

23     need to -- we need to somehow deal with this situation.

24             Now, in all honesty, I am getting more concerned now than I was

25     before I made the submission, because now I see that there might be some

Page 1122

 1     documents which are under Rule 66(B) which have not been disclosed to us.

 2             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Let's be very practical and settle this issue

 3     quickly so that we can continue with the witness.

 4             May I ask you, Mr. Zecevic, when do you -- when would you be able

 5     to disclose the list of documents that you -- to the -- to the Registry?

 6             MR. ZECEVIC:  Well, probably by tomorrow evening.

 7             JUDGE HARHOFF:  At what time?

 8             MR. ZECEVIC:  But we have the afternoon.  I would say 7.00.

 9             JUDGE HARHOFF:  7.00?

10             MR. ZECEVIC:  Yes.

11             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Is that possible?

12                           [Trial Chamber and senior legal officer confer]

13             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mr. Zecevic, the problem, as I understand it, is

14     that because it's a videolink, the documents have to be retrieved

15     physically and brought to -- to Belgrade.  Is there any chance --

16             MR. ZECEVIC:  I know.  That's why I'm bringing it up.

17             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Is there any chance you could make it by, say,

18     4.00?

19             MR. ZECEVIC:  Your Honours, we're sitting in court until almost

20     quarter to 2.00, so I'll do my best.  We're trying to do our best, but

21     I'm not -- we cannot promise.

22                           [Trial Chamber confers]

23             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Ms. Registrar, when do you leave The Hague -- or

24     what does the Registry leave The Hague?

25                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

Page 1123

 1             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mr. Zecevic, we're now currently trying to figure

 2     out if you can provide the list of documents by 6.00 tomorrow afternoon.

 3     Then we're trying to find out if it is possible for the Registry to

 4     identify the documents when they -- and bring them with them physically

 5     to Belgrade when they leave Saturday morning.  So we'll get back to that.

 6             Mr. Pantelic, I hope that it is quick.

 7             MR. PANTELIC:  Yes.  Just for the record, Your Honour, what would

 8     be discriminating, what would be discriminating for this particular

 9     witness is obviously a line of defence of our client, so that should be

10     considered as Rule 68.  And in addition, the -- I would like to remind

11     the obligation on OTP on the basis of Rule 66(B) that we have right to

12     inspect all documents in their custody which are material for our

13     defence.  Just for the record, Your Honour.  Thank you.

14             MR. ZECEVIC:  I'm sorry, just -- I got -- I got a chance from my

15     assistant's back office.  They tell me that a number of documents has not

16     been translated and that might be also a problem, because it is -- as far

17     as I understand, the documents are in Serbian, so then we will have to

18     deal with that somehow.

19             I am just putting the Trial Chamber on notice about that.  Thank

20     you.

21             MS. KORNER:  Well, Your Honour, on that we don't have an

22     obligation to translate Rule 68, but he's right, they are.  Most of them,

23     I think.

24             MR. ZECEVIC:  I wasn't suggesting anything of the kind, that it

25     was the obligation of the OTP, I'm just saying as a fact.  Thank you.

Page 1124

 1             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Let's bring the witness in.

 2                           [The witness takes the stand]

 3             MS. KORNER:  Your Honours, I should have asked for that map that

 4     he marked to be in some way exhibited, I think.

 5             THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibit P83, Your Honours.

 6             MS. KORNER:  Thank you.

 7        Q.   In fact, I want to stay on maps, please, for a moment,

 8     Mr. Djekanovic.  During this period, between June and, let's say, the end

 9     of July 1992, were you actually living in the town of Kotor Varos?

10        A.   Yes.

11        Q.   I'm going to ask for the same map to be put up that you marked

12     before, which is P66.  And can you just indicate, please, again with the

13     aid of a pencil or whatever that thing is in red, where you were living.

14        A.   [Marks]

15        Q.   So that's just behind the Catholic church; is that right?

16        A.   A little bit above the Catholic church.  The last building has

17     several parts, and some 5 to 600 metres from there is the Catholic

18     church.

19        Q.   Right.  And was Mr. Tepic also living in that area?

20        A.   Tepic was living in Kotor Varos, but I can't recall exactly where

21     he lived, if you can believe me.  It could have been close to my

22     mother-in-law.  I think he rented a flat there.  I don't know exactly

23     where.  I think certainly he would have had to live there.

24        Q.   Don't worry.  All right.  How far away from where you were living

25     and where you have marked the SJB were you actually living?  I mean, how

Page 1125

 1     far was where you were living from the SJB?

 2        A.   The road to the station, I think, is about a thousand metres

 3     long, a hundred metres more or less, perhaps, but about one kilometre.

 4        Q.   I'm sorry, you were living a kilometre away from the SJB?  Surely

 5     not.  You've told us the municipal building was only 800 metres from the

 6     SJB, and that's considerably further.  You were in a matter of yards,

 7     weren't you, of the SJB?  I can't translate yards into metres, but a few

 8     metres from the SJB where you were living, weren't you?

 9        A.   No.  That is your conclusion.  I've said, and I pointed out the

10     place where I lived.  Where I worked was at the municipal building in

11     Kotor Varos, and I marked that locality.  I never lived in any area close

12     to the police station.

13        Q.   But, I'm sorry, I thought you just marked that blue thing behind

14     the Catholic church.  Is that where you were living?

15        A.   Well, that's what I was telling you.  That's where I was living.

16     Next to the Catholic church there was a settlement, a residential area,

17     and I lived in the building that was farthest from the Catholic church.

18        Q.   Yes.  But the SJB, where you marked it on that map, is very close

19     indeed, isn't it?

20        A.   That's not very far because it's not a big town, but I said that

21     the street or the road between where I lived and the station would have

22     been about 800 to 1.000 metres, a kilometre.  I can't tell you exactly

23     and precisely, but approximately thereabouts.

24        Q.   All right.  Well, we'll hear other evidence about this anyhow,

25     but are you sure you didn't yourself personally hear the screams of

Page 1126

 1     people being beaten in the SJB?

 2        A.   No.

 3        Q.   I'm going to then, please, move very, very quickly, I hope,

 4     through the remaining meetings.

 5             Did I ask for the last meetings to be exhibited?  I think it was

 6     29th of -- yes.  It was the 29th of June, Your Honours.  Can I have

 7     that -- that is exhibited, P46.

 8             Very quickly can we look at the 2nd of July, 65 ter 713.  Oh,

 9     yes, and could we exhibit, I'm so sorry, exhibit that map as marked.  Oh,

10     it's already exhibited.  It's not.

11             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Not with the new marking.  If you want that to

12     be --

13             MS. KORNER:  A separate exhibit.  All right.  Yes, please.

14             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit P84, Your Honours.

15             MS. KORNER:  All right.

16                           [Trial Chamber confers]

17             JUDGE HALL:  Sorry.  Please proceed.

18             MS. KORNER:  Thank you, Your Honour.

19        Q.   I think I asked for the minutes, the 2nd July, 65 ter 713 to be

20     put up.

21             In item 3, please.

22             Someone set fire to the Catholic church, didn't they?

23        A.   Yes, someone did set fire to it.

24        Q.   Presumably you must have seen it yourself as you were living

25     right next to it.

Page 1127

 1        A.   Well, I didn't see it in that sense.  Actually, I was informed

 2     that it had been set on fire, and I went there together with members of

 3     civilian protection, and we tried to put out the flames.  Unfortunately,

 4     we were not successful.  So I did see it burning.  The interior was

 5     highly flammable.  We tried, I and other -- and members of the civilian

 6     protection, to put it out, but unfortunately it was impossible.  But I

 7     didn't see it from where I lived.  I actually came from my office to the

 8     spot.

 9        Q.   Just dealing with destruction of religious institutions in Kotor

10     Varos, nearly every single mosque when the whole municipality was

11     destroyed, wasn't it, during 1992?

12        A.   Yes.

13        Q.   And the same with Catholic churches?

14        A.   No.  The Catholic church in Vrbanjci Donji was intact.  Perhaps a

15     mirror -- a window or so was broken, but that would be about it.  Then

16     there was the Catholic church in Zabrdje.  That, too, was intact

17     throughout.

18        Q.   All right.  And then again under item 3:

19             "Considering the situation in the SJB and the behaviour of the

20     special unit members, Ljuban Ecim and Stojan Zupljanin are to be called

21     for interview."

22             So even after the meeting on the 26th of June where the murders

23     had taken place, on the 2nd of July Special Police are still there.

24        A.   Yes, the Special Police was still there.

25        Q.   And did you have a meeting with Ljuban Ecim -- or an interview,

Page 1128

 1     sorry, and Stojan Zupljanin?

 2        A.   Not at that time with Ljuban, especially not with Ljuban.  The

 3     conversation with Stojan came later, and we'll probably touch upon that.

 4        Q.   Well, okay.  Let's deal with it now, because we're rapidly

 5     running out of time.  Let's have your -- what conversation did you have

 6     with Stojan Zupljanin?

 7        A.   Well, I've already told you we were privately friends, and on

 8     that day when we actually had this meeting there was some kind of

 9     military operation where our forces were successful, so that a good

10     number of people from the command of the unit actually participated in

11     this celebration.  However, the situation changed suddenly, and some

12     people were taken prisoner.  Some people were arrested.  The driver of

13     the ambulance was wounded.  Some people were taken prisoner, and there

14     was panic.  Panic set in in the town itself and also in the ranks of the

15     unit.  That is when I went with Mr. Peulic to this location which was

16     over 20 kilometres away from Kotor Varos, and Commander Peulic and some

17     other commanders were there, among them Stojan Zupljanin.

18             This is when I went to object to them, to protest, and to ask

19     that the command and control should be at a higher level and so forth,

20     that it should be raised.  That was the substance of the conversation.

21             MR. PANTELIC:  Just correction to transcript.  It's page 74, line

22     22.  Witness did not say that they were privately friends.  He said that

23     they were on kind of private occasion, unofficial occasion, when they

24     met.  And also, he didn't say that on -- it was line -- it's page 75,

25     line 5, in transcript it says Mr. Peulic, but I think that witness said

Page 1129

 1     that it was Mr. Pejic who was police expected.  Maybe my colleague can

 2     clarify that or simply witness can confirm.

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation]  I went to that locality with the

 4     police inspector Mr. Pejic, and indeed this was a kind of private event.

 5     So I never had an official meeting with this man, but we took advantage

 6     of this -- the private meeting that we had, unofficial meeting that we

 7     had to relay our concerns regarding the organisation and so on, and the

 8     premature release and so forth.

 9             MS. KORNER:

10        Q.   Okay.  Well, two questions, first of all.  What concerns on this

11     occasion did you express privately to Mr. Zupljanin?

12        A.   Well, this wasn't a private conversation.  There were other

13     people there present.  We talked about the general situation and the

14     problems that arose, the fact that the men were getting a bit

15     disorganised and less disciplined, and also we discussed the problems

16     that had occurred on the previous days, especially the problems relating

17     to abandoned houses and villages, and that was about it.

18        Q.   So again you didn't mention killings or beatings to him?

19        A.   I said that I -- mention was made of everything that was

20     happening, and there was no special emphasis made on that.  Of course, we

21     did probably mention those things as well, among others.

22        Q.   All right.  And secondly, why -- why have a private conversation

23     with him rather than putting in an official complaint or even going to

24     Zupljanin's superiors?

25        A.   We communicated officially through the chief of the station,

Page 1130

 1     Mr. Tepic.  From the minutes, the earlier minutes, it was clearly said

 2     that the Crisis Staff could not interfere with military or police

 3     matters, and we could only express our opinion or dissatisfaction, but we

 4     could not actually tell them what to do or how to do it.  In other words,

 5     in -- on several occasions in the minutes of the meetings it was said

 6     that this was mentioned and that Mr. Savo Tepic would advise him of it

 7     and so on.

 8        Q.   All right.  And whilst we're dealing with meetings with -- with

 9     officials, did you ever have any meetings with General Talic about the

10     military?

11        A.   Yes, I had many meetings with Mr. Talic.

12        Q.   In respect of what?  What were you complaining about to

13     General Talic?

14        A.   Well, at -- for a while there was the problem with the personnel

15     in Kotor Varos who were not getting logistical support.  Then on other

16     occasions and later on on these occasions where we visited, we had

17     occasion to take a gift to these people or maybe take some supplies if we

18     managed to get some boots or uniforms, pieces of clothing for these

19     people, or we would go and talk simply to encourage each other, to boost

20     each other's morale.

21        Q.   Stop.  So you are saying you were taking gifts or clothing or

22     whatever and boots to General Talic?

23        A.   No, not to General Talic but to the units that he was in command

24     of.

25        Q.   All right.  Did you ever make any complaints about what troops

Page 1131

 1     under his overall command in the Krajina Corps were doing in Kotor Varos?

 2     And that's simply yes or no, please.

 3        A.   Yes.

 4        Q.   All right.  And what was it you were complaining to General Talic

 5     that his troops were doing in Kotor Varos?

 6        A.   Well, there was a general disarray, lack of organisation,

 7     overlapping of authorities.  Frequently it was not clear who was in

 8     command of what unit.  We had a Light Brigade in Kotor Varos, as there

 9     were in other towns, and there were combat operations in Kotor Varos and

10     yet this Light Brigade was for a very long time without a commander and

11     it was not within the system of the Republika Srpska Army.  It was

12     without a commander for a very long time, up until the end of June or

13     maybe even through July.  Sometimes --

14             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Witness, were you complaining about all this?

15             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation]  Yes, we were complaining, and we

16     asked them to resolve these issues.

17             MS. KORNER:

18        Q.   Right.  Okay.  Can we move, then, please, to the next document --

19             MS. KORNER:  Oh, yes.  Could I have the last one exhibited,

20     please.  That's 65 ter 713.

21             THE REGISTRAR:  As P85, Your Honours.

22             MS. KORNER:

23        Q.   Can you look, please, at the 4th of July meeting.

24             MS. KORNER:  That hasn't been given a 65 ter number, Your Honour,

25     a proper one, so it's 10109.  And I'm just going to ask that to be marked

Page 1132

 1     for identification.  Thank you.

 2        Q.   Very quickly, item 3.  No, it's different.  It's different.  No.

 3     It's completely different.  All right.  Can I just look at the top page.

 4     Does it say the 4th of July at 1730?  No.  It's the 15th of August.  I

 5     thought that wasn't right.

 6             MS. KORNER:  Okay.  I don't want to -- I'll come back to that,

 7     Your Honour, if I may, later.  Can we move, then -- I hope this one -- to

 8     the next one, 65 ter 715, please.

 9             There's a complete -- sorry, Your Honour.  No, didn't want that

10     one.  It's my fault.

11             7th of July, 717, please.  No, that will do.  That's fine.  717

12     will do, thank you.

13        Q.   Again, sir, just very quickly.  This is a second -- another

14     bulletin that you issued, is it, of the Crisis Staff activities, but this

15     time on the 7th of July.

16        A.   That's correct, but I believe it's issue number 4.  That is the

17     fourth, not the second bulletin.

18        Q.   I just want --

19             MS. KORNER:  I'm not going to go through that because of timing.

20     Could I just have that exhibited, please?

21             JUDGE HARHOFF:  What for, Mrs. Korner?

22             MS. KORNER:  If you want me to go through it I'll explain.

23             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Yes.

24             MS. KORNER:  It's full of stuff, but it's just the timing.

25             JUDGE HARHOFF:  I realise the timing but you are as much as in

Page 1133

 1     control of it.  We are hesitant to admit documents that we have no idea

 2     about what they say or what they're purported to bring, so please specify

 3     and --

 4             MS. KORNER:

 5        Q.   I will, does this -- if we look under fight -- the heading

 6     "Fighting Becoming Fiercer," do we see these words because you quarreled

 7     with my words about takeover:

 8             "The takeover of power and attempt to introduce order and rule of

 9     law into enterprises agencies ... encountered fierce opposition from

10     forces representing the Croat-Muslim coalition ..."

11             Do you confirm that that's what it says, "the takeover of power."

12     Yes?  Is that what it says?

13        A.   Yes, I can see that.

14        Q.   Yes.  Does it also say that "In addition to active and reserve

15     policemen, the following units participate in this broad scope operation

16     to confiscate arms, special units of the Banja Luka CSB, Serbian

17     Territorial Defence, and units of the 122nd Light Infantry Brigade"?

18        A.   Well, obviously that's what it says there.

19        Q.   And was that accurate?  Is that right?

20        A.   In operations to collect weapons, all units that were in the

21     field were involved in this in their areas of responsibility.

22        Q.   And in the second paragraph under that first heading "Fighting

23     Becoming Fiercer," do we see:

24             "Still the hardest battles are to come.  The fiercest extremists

25     and fanatics have got away to be extremely well-fortified and --" it

Page 1134

 1     doesn't make much sense in English, but anyhow, "defended villages of

 2     Vecici, Sokoline, Ravne, and some others.  Although their jihad is

 3     destined to be these parts as our dreams of a Muslim municipality in

 4     which Serbs would once again be servants and plebeians, this is not the

 5     time to relax because as we've already stated the hardest battles are to

 6     come."

 7             Did you authorise such language to be put into these documents

 8     which were being distributed to the public?

 9        A.   The content of the bulletins was never analysed at the Crisis

10     Staff.  There was a man who was in charge of drafting, preparing the

11     bulletin, and printing it off using a very primitive printing device, but

12     we did not discuss the contents thereof at the Crisis Staff.

13        Q.   But once you'd seen the first one that used this kind of

14     inflammatory language, talking about jihad, did you take any steps to

15     say, This is not language that is going to have an effect of peaceful

16     co-existence, for example?  Did you say anything like that?

17        A.   I don't know who, if anyone, was ever able to prove that there

18     was no jihad in the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina, including our

19     own municipality, and I should add that there were armed forces and

20     that -- they used, and using such a strong term was quite appropriate,

21     because everyone was using them, all sides at the time.

22        Q.   Yes.

23             JUDGE HALL:  Do you renew your application to have that

24     exhibited?

25             MS. KORNER:  I do, Your Honour.

Page 1135

 1             JUDGE HALL:  Yes, admitted and marked.

 2             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit P86, Your Honours.

 3             JUDGE HALL:  Is it that time, Ms. Korner.

 4             MS. KORNER:  Yes.  Your Honours, we asked Ms. Featherstone if she

 5     could speak to you about whether we could sit tomorrow to see if we could

 6     finish the second witness, and I think it may be possible.

 7                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

 8             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mrs. Korner, it looks as if, in fact, the entire

 9     afternoon tomorrow might be taken up by this.  So we would have to sit

10     literally all day, from 9.00 in the morning until 6.00 or maybe 7.00 in

11     the evening.

12             MS. KORNER:  I don't -- no.  This witness, no.  I mean, I

13     honestly -- I know it doesn't sound it, but I only have about another

14     four or five meetings to show him, and I understand -- I don't know

15     whether Mr. Zecevic is able to assist, but I understand that he may be

16     having shorter cross-examination.  My application was in respect of the

17     following witness, to try and deal with him.

18             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Yes, but our concern is that if we take for

19     granted the time indications that the Defence counsels have given, then

20     effectively we will be using all morning with this witness.

21             MS. KORNER:  Yes, that's right.

22             JUDGE HARHOFF:  And then probably most of the afternoon session

23     tomorrow afternoon for the next witness, which would bring us in the end

24     to spend all day in court, and I think that there is an issue, at least

25     with the accused, for them to sit the whole day.

Page 1136

 1             MS. KORNER:  Because I thought that's rather like the extended

 2     sittings that you've organised for the next week.

 3             JUDGE HARHOFF:  If we had been talking about adding perhaps one

 4     extra session of 90 minutes, then we could have discussed it, but it

 5     looks more realistic to me that this wouldn't do it.  We will have to use

 6     at least two if not all three session of tomorrow.

 7                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 8             JUDGE HARHOFF:  The Presiding Judge says that it appears to be no

 9     as an answer.

10             JUDGE HALL:  Yes, Mr. Zecevic.

11             MR. ZECEVIC:  I thought we were rising, Your Honours.

12             JUDGE HALL:  There is a procedural matter with which I must deal.

13             Sir, I must remind you, as I did again yesterday when we

14     adjourned, that your evidence is still ongoing, and therefore I repeat

15     the admonition that you cannot speak to the lawyers from either side, nor

16     can you discuss your testimony with anybody -- your testimony -- in your

17     conversation with anybody else you can't discuss your testimony before

18     the Chamber.

19             So we resume at 9.00 tomorrow morning in this Chamber.

20                           --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.46 p.m.,

21                           to be reconvened on Friday, the 9th of October,

22                           2009, at 9.00 a.m.