Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 4846

 1                           Wednesday, 16 December 2009

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           --- Upon commencing at 9.10 a.m.

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

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

 7     the Prosecutor versus Mico Stanisic and Stojan Zupljanin.  Thank you,

 8     Your Honours.

 9             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.  Good morning to all.  May I have the

10     appearances, please.

11             MR. HANNIS:  Good morning, Your Honours.  For the Prosecution

12     Thomas Hannis and Crispian Smith.

13             MR. ZECEVIC:  Good morning, Your Honours.  Slobodan Zecevic,

14     Slobodan Cvijetic, Eugene O'Sullivan, and Tatjana Savic appearing for

15     Stanisic Defence.  Our expert will be joining us after the first break.

16     Thank you very much.

17             MR. PANTELIC:  Good morning, Your Honours for Zupljanin Defence

18     Igor Pantelic.

19             JUDGE HALL:  Could the usher escort the witness to the stand,

20     please.

21                           [The witness takes the stand]

22                           WITNESS:  CHRISTIAN NIELSEN [Resumed]

23             JUDGE HALL:  Good morning, Dr. Nielsen.  I remind you that you're

24     still on your oath.

25             Mr. Zecevic, you may continue your cross-examination.  Thank you.

Page 4847

 1             MR. ZECEVIC:  Thank you very much, Your Honours.

 2                           Cross-examination by Mr. Zecevic:  [Continued]

 3        Q.   [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Nielsen.

 4        A.   Good morning, Mr. Zecevic.

 5        Q.   Mr. Nielsen, you will recall yesterday we talked about the

 6     situation in the Bosnia and Herzegovina MUP in the time period covered by

 7     the indictment and before the division of the MUP.  In paragraphs 49 to

 8     52, you refer to a document.  This is a document of the Bosnia and

 9     Herzegovina MUP.  It's probably a state security service document, and it

10     is 65 ter document 31 from December 1991.  Do you remember that you

11     referred to this document in these paragraphs?

12        A.   Yes, I do.

13        Q.   Mr. Nielsen, isn't it a fact that the document, this alleged

14     report by the state security service about the security situation in

15     December 1991 does not refer anywhere to the existence of the Patriotic

16     League or the Green Berets as an armed wing of the Party for Democratic

17     Action?

18        A.   Well, I haven't reviewed the document recently.  I note that it's

19     a document of several pages, so I cannot a priori agree with that.  That

20     may well be the case.  I would, however, not call the document -- or not

21     describe the document as an alleged report by the state security service.

22     It is a report by the state security service, and I can see by the ERN

23     number on the report that it's a report that I personally recovered in

24     the offices of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Republika Srpska in

25     2002, and I therefore have no doubt to -- no reason to doubt the

Page 4848

 1     authenticity of the document.

 2        Q.   I don't have any reason to doubt the authenticity of the

 3     document, and it's possibly a matter of the interpretation.  I tried to

 4     suggest to you that I am doubting the objectivity of that document and

 5     the content but not its authenticity.

 6             I don't really want to show you the document now.  I don't want

 7     to waste time, and I am just referring to it for the sake of the

 8     reference.  That's why I gave you the number.  But tell me, are you aware

 9     that the Patriotic League and the Green Berets existed already in 1991 as

10     the armed forces of the Party for Democratic Action?

11        A.   I am aware of documents from 1991 that refer to groups called the

12     Patriotic League and the Green Berets.

13        Q.   Mr. Nielsen, are you aware that as early as June 1991, the SDA

14     formed a council for national defence of the SDA?  Did you ever see such

15     a document?

16        A.   I'm not aware of that fact.  I am not an expert on the internal

17     structure or workings of the Party for Democratic Action.  Excuse me,

18     Party of Democratic Action is the correct term.

19        Q.   Very well.  If you're not an expert for the internal workings and

20     structure of the Party of Democratic Action, then I would like to draw

21     your attention to your footnote 33 in your report in relation to

22     paragraph 20 of your report.  And there you say in footnote 33 that there

23     were rumours that Muslims were being trained in Croatia and that they

24     were taking part in actions against Serbs in Croatia, and then you say

25     that those -- it was proved that the rumours were false, untrue, and it

Page 4849

 1     was established that the Muslim police officers were present in Croatia

 2     as part of routine training, but nonetheless, the rumours served a

 3     propagandistic, were a tool in the propaganda strategy of the SDS.  Do

 4     you see that?

 5        A.   Yes, I do.

 6        Q.   Isn't it correct, Mr. Nielsen, that the assertion that the Party

 7     of Democratic Action was sending policemen of Muslim ethnicity for

 8     training to Croatia?

 9        A.   That is possible, and I do not exclude that possibility.

10        Q.   Mr. Nielsen, this is the Ministry of the Interior.  You are an

11     expert, as you say, for the Ministry of the Interior, and it would not be

12     unusual for you if one of the parties in the state was sending some

13     members of its forces for training to another state?

14        A.   Well, to some degree it occurs to me that there is a question of

15     what constitutes another state as you put it at this time, but, yes, I'm

16     certainly aware that there were allegations that the Muslims or Bosnian

17     Muslim officials in the SRBiH MUP were sending personnel of Bosnian

18     Muslim ethnicity to Croatia for training.  That's why I mentioned that in

19     footnote 33.  And I'm also aware that there were simultaneous allegations

20     that Croatian -- ethnic Croatian personnel were going to Croatia to

21     receive training, and I'm also aware that there were allegations

22     simultaneously that Bosnian Serb personnel in SRBiH MUP were receiving

23     training in Serbia at that point in time.

24        Q.   Sir, I asked you very clearly, I think, but you are giving me an

25     answer that does not correspond to my question.  I asked you about the

Page 4850

 1     party, not about the leadership in the Bosnia and Herzegovina MUP of

 2     Muslim ethnicity.

 3             Please look at the document 1D01-0410.  This is in your binder

 4     that we prepared for you.  This is tab 6 in your binder, actually.

 5     1D01-0410.

 6             That is not the document, 1D01-0410.  I apologise.  It's an

 7     error.  Just one minute, Your Honours.

 8             Not to waste any time, let us now look at 1D --

 9             THE INTERPRETER:  Could the counsel please be asked to repeat the

10     number.

11             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mr. Zecevic.

12             MR. ZECEVIC:  Yes.

13             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Would you be good enough to repeat the number,

14     because the interpreters didn't get it.

15             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] I apologise.  1D00-4681, but I

16     think that it is also P424.

17        Q.   This is your tab number 7, Mr. Nielsen.  Mr. Nielsen, this is an

18     SDA Sarajevo document, Marsala Tita 7-a/IV is the address.  Now that

19     we're on this topic, are you aware that that was the SDA address?  You

20     went through so many documents.  Was this the address of the SDA in

21     Sarajevo in 1991 and 1992?

22        A.   That is possible.  I don't know what their address was at the

23     time.

24        Q.   As you can see, the document is dated 8th of July, 1991.  The

25     democratic -- Party of Democratic Action, the signature of the secretary,

Page 4851

 1     the stamp, and it is titled "List of Candidates for Training as Special

 2     Forces in the Republic of Croatia MUP," and then there is a stamp also at

 3     the bottom with the date.

 4             On the next page and the following pages, up to page 14, it's in

 5     the e-court, we have a total of 463 members of the special forces who

 6     went for training to the MUP in the Republic of Croatia.  If you look

 7     through the document, they -- the names of the people are of people who

 8     come throughout the area of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Fojnica, Sarajevo,

 9     Vlasenica, Gorazde, Nevesinje.

10             The age of the people on the list is of people who are fit for

11     duty, able-bodied men.

12             And then on the last page, which he is page 14, it says:

13             "Inclusive with number 463, you will then get a continuation of

14     this list in seven days."

15             Do you see this document?

16        A.   Yes, I do.

17        Q.   Have you seen this document before?

18        A.   I don't believe I have, no.

19        Q.   Mr. Nielsen, you told us that you went to Bosnia and Herzegovina

20     on several occasions to obtain documents which in your opinion were

21     important in order to be able to write your report; is that correct?

22        A.   It is.

23        Q.   You were aware of the fact that there was an allegation and a

24     serious concern among the Serbs and the leadership of the MUP among the

25     Serbian population in 1991 that the Party of Democratic Action was

Page 4852

 1     secretly sending some young men from the reserve police forces for

 2     training to the Croatian MUP.  You did know about that, didn't you, and

 3     that's why it's there in your report, isn't it?

 4        A.   That's correct.

 5        Q.   And you concluded in your report that those rumours proved to be

 6     untrue, and this is what is stated in your footnote 33.  Now when I show

 7     you this document, do you still stand by your assertion that these

 8     rumours proved to be false?

 9        A.   Well, I would point out that the statement that I make in

10     paragraph 33 relates to the particular document written by

11     Vojislav Pecanac on the 25th of July, but certainly viewing the document

12     that you are showing me now, I don't have any problem concluding, seeing

13     this document for the first time, that there was certainly -- there were

14     several a number of ethnic Muslims from Bosnia and Herzegovina undergoing

15     training on the territory of the Republic of Croatia for -- that is

16     Special Police training, as you state.

17        Q.   Thank you, Mr. Nielsen.  I am interested, if you -- to know if

18     you would agree with me that then this was not done by the Ministry of

19     the Interior at all but that this was done by the Party of Democratic

20     Action, which was making its own party army; isn't that right?

21        A.   Well, it seems to me that we're conflating a couple of points

22     here.  As I told you, I'm not an expert on the SDA or its doings during

23     the period from 1990 to 1992, and when I pointed that out, you informed

24     me that I should have been aware of such things based on my knowledge as

25     a MUP expert.  You're now telling me that this, in fact, has nothing to

Page 4853

 1     do with the Ministry of Internal Affairs about but, rather, has to do

 2     with the Party of Democratic Action.

 3             As I've stated earlier, I think it's very important that we all

 4     realise that for the period from the multi-party elections, and we agreed

 5     on this yesterday, from 1990, November 1990, until 1992, the lines

 6     between parties, all three parties, the SDS, the SDA, the HDZ, and the

 7     officials --

 8        Q.   [Overlapping speakers] Mr. Nielsen, I have to interrupt you.

 9        A.   -- [overlapping speakers] increasingly vague.

10        Q.   Sir, I would kindly ask you to focus on my question and to give

11     me short answers.  I'm going to do my best to put my questions in such a

12     way that you can reply with a yes or no.

13             I asked you about your assertion in your report in footnote 33

14     that there was -- there were rumours that in 1991 that the Party of

15     Democratic Action was sending members of the MUP for training to Bosnia

16     and Herzegovina, to training to the MUP in Croatia secretly.  You assert

17     in your report that these rumours proved to be false, unfounded, and you

18     are telling me that you did not see this document.  That means that you

19     did not even want to check these rumours, but you just wrote in your

20     report that the rumours were false.  Isn't that right?

21             MR. HANNIS:  Objection.

22             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] This is your assertion.

23             MR. HANNIS:  That's argumentative and that misstates his earlier

24     question.  His earlier question was, "I'm interested if you -- to know if

25     you would agree with me that then this was not done by the Ministry of

Page 4854

 1     the Interior at all but that this was done by the Party of Democratic

 2     Action which was making its own party army.  Isn't that right?"

 3             Well, it's a compound question for one thing.  Was it done by the

 4     Ministry of the Interior or the Party of Democratic Action and also was

 5     the Party of Democratic Action making its own party army?  Those are --

 6     those are at least two separate questions.

 7             JUDGE HALL:  Mr. Zecevic, it would perhaps be helpful to the

 8     witness and to the Chamber if you were to, as it were, step back and

 9     eliminate the argument from your question and put the questions in a way

10     that the witness could intelligently answer, could helpfully answer.

11     Thank you.

12             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

13        Q.   Mr. Nielsen, I will show you document 1D00-4826.  This is

14     document number 9 in your binder.

15             You see, Mr. Nielsen, this is from the same period, the 11th of

16     July, 1991.  It's an entire book of documents, if I can put it that way,

17     of the SDA.  It says here "Instructions for candidate," and then the name

18     of the candidate.  There is a number, et cetera.  It is addressed to the

19     Ministry of the Interior of the Republic of Croatia, and it says in the

20     text:

21             "In keeping with the joint agreement of authorised

22     representatives of the MUP of the Socialist Republic of

23     Bosnia-Herzegovina and the MUP of the Republic of Croatia and

24     instructions for employment of entry-level candidates at the education

25     centre of the Republic of Croatia MUP, the Party of Democratic

Page 4855

 1     Action - Sarajevo, recommends the above candidate to attend a course at

 2     your centre.

 3             "Yours faithfully.

 4             "Handwritten for Hasan Cengic, SDA Secretary."

 5             And then there's the signature and stamp.  There are more than

 6     100 basically identical documents here.

 7             Now I'm putting a question to you, a very brief and simple

 8     question.  Do you stand by what you said in footnote 33 that these

 9     rumours about the SDA sending candidates for training to the MUP of

10     Croatia were false and that that was used for propagandist purposes by

11     the Serb Democratic Party?  Yes or no?

12        A.   I already revised that conclusion earlier in the answer to your

13     previous about the document, but I would point that I don't mention the

14     SDA in particular in that footnote.

15        Q.   Well, that is precisely why we had this previous exchange of

16     views, and then Mr. Hannis objected, because you keep on trying to avoid

17     the SDA, and I am showing you documents that bear the letterhead of the

18     SDA, and the documents say that the SDA recommends the above-mentioned

19     candidate, et cetera.  That is -- how should I put this?  That is our

20     only point of contention at this point in time.

21        A.   Well, I certainly agree with you.

22        Q.   Thank you.  Thank you, sir.  Thank you, Mr. Nielsen.

23             JUDGE HALL:  If -- if I may, Mr. Zecevic.

24             Dr. Nielsen, for my own perhaps very simple mind, and no doubt

25     this is something which Mr. Hannis can return to in re-examination, your

Page 4856

 1     last-but-one answer when Mr. Zecevic asked you for a yes or no and your

 2     answer was, I already revised that answer in the question to your

 3     previous document, but I note that I don't mention the SDA in particular

 4     in that footnote.

 5             The -- may I ask, as Mr. Zecevic did, for a yes or no answer to

 6     his question?  As I said, the explanations could come later.  Perhaps, as

 7     I said, it's my own inability to understand complex matters.  Do you need

 8     to -- would you need to repeat -- me to read the question back to you?

 9             THE WITNESS:  No, Your Honour.  Thank you.  I'm perhaps a bit

10     loquacious, and yes, I agree with Mr. Zecevic, and the short answer to

11     his question was yes.

12             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.

13             Yes, Mr. Zecevic.

14             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you very much, Your Honour.

15        Q.   Mr. Nielsen, you know that Mr. Alija Delimustafic, minister of

16     the interior of Bosnia-Herzegovina, mobilised the reserve police force in

17     June 1991.  Are you aware of that?

18        A.   As I state in paragraph 21 of my report, and there was a

19     discussion ongoing between Mr. Delimustafic and Mr. Zupljanin as -- in

20     July 1991 in which Mr. Zupljanin was urgently requesting mobilisation and

21     at that point Delimustafic refused to approve Mr. Zupljanin's repeated

22     requests to mobilise, if we're talking about July 1991.  Oh, June you're

23     asking.

24        Q.   Sir, I read your report.  It is a fact that Mr. Zupljanin,

25     because of the situation that was in the border area that was the

Page 4857

 1     Republic of Croatia, I mean, that entire area had serious security

 2     problems, and therefore, what was required was replenishment, more

 3     personnel.  However, I'm asking you about the general decision on the

 4     mobilisation of the reserve police force in the entire territory of

 5     Bosnia-Herzegovina in 1991 by Minister Alija Delimustafic.  Perhaps that

 6     was later in September 1991.

 7             You are referring to a document of Mr. Radovan Karadzic.  If I

 8     remember correctly in your report, you refer to that.

 9        A.   My memory calls me to recollect that the Delimustafic ordered

10     mobilisation took place as you are suggesting probably sometime around

11     September after this discussion, because he was resisting mobilisation

12     during the summer of 1991.

13        Q.   I'll show you the document, 1D01-0915.

14             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Before we leave the document which is currently

15     on the screen something just caught my attention in the entry that is

16     shown on the monitor, because --

17             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Please go ahead.

18             JUDGE HARHOFF:  -- it says:

19             "In keeping with the joint agreement of authorised

20     representatives of the MUP," which I understand to be the Croatian MUP on

21     the one hand and the BiH MUP on the other, the Party of Democratic Action

22     hereby recommends a certain person to attend a course.

23             I wonder if we could elicit from the witness the nature of that

24     joint agreement to which the document refers.  I mean, was there a joint

25     agreement between the Croatians and the BiH at the time that would allow

Page 4858

 1     political parties to submit candidates for training?

 2             That sounds peculiar to me, but maybe if we can ask the witness

 3     about it.

 4             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.  Thank you

 5     for your suggestion.  Of course I'm going to put that question.

 6        Q.   Mr. Nielsen, you heard the question of His Honour Judge Harhoff.

 7     In your report I did not find any references to the existence of some

 8     agreement between the representatives of the MUP of the Socialist

 9     Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the MUP of the Republic of

10     Croatia.  Do you know about the existence of that kind of an agreement?

11        A.   I'm not aware that such agreement -- that such an agreement

12     existed, but it is correct that Mr. Hasan Cengic does seem to be

13     referring to such an agreement having existed or being in existence.

14        Q.   Mr. Nielsen, if there was an agreement between the Ministry of

15     the Interior of Bosnia-Herzegovina and the Ministry of the Interior of

16     the Republic of Croatia, in your view, since you are an expert for

17     Ministries of the Interior, wouldn't the only logical and normal thing --

18             MR. HANNIS:  Objection.  He's been proposed as an expert on the

19     Ministry of the Interior for the RS MUP, not for the Republic of Croatia.

20             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Mr. Hannis, I assume that

21     Mr. Nielsen has special knowledge that refers to internal affairs, what

22     Ministries of the Interior do in a general sense and that that makes it

23     possible for him to be an expert for the Ministry of the Interior of

24     Republika Srpska.  I wanted to put a very general question which is fully

25     logical.  That is something that he should be aware of.

Page 4859

 1             MR. HANNIS:  Your Honours, I only note the Defence has been

 2     challenging from the beginning Mr. Nielsen as an expert on the RS

 3     ministry, but now he wants to qualify him as an expert on the Republic of

 4     Croatia.  Which is it?

 5             JUDGE HALL:  It strikes me, Mr. Hannis, that the -- your -- your

 6     objection is, with respect, technically correct having regard to the

 7     basis on which this witness is proposed, but I see no difficulty with

 8     Mr. Zecevic's question if what he is in fact asking the witness is based

 9     on his admitted area of expertise, whether by analogy or -- or by

10     comparison.  He could -- yes, Mr. Zecevic.

11             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

12        Q.   Sir, if there's an agreement between two Ministries of the

13     Interior, in your view do the ministries then communicate between

14     themselves or through state organs, or do they do that through some

15     political parties and party secretaries?

16        A.   To the best of my knowledge based on the 1990 Law on Internal

17     Affairs that was valid in Bosnia and Herzegovina at that time and not

18     being familiar with the relevant law that was in force at the time in

19     Croatia, that law in Bosnia and Herzegovina foresaw the ability for

20     ministries to communicate through state organs, ministry to ministry.

21     However, again after November 1990, the line between party activity and

22     MUP activity is extremely blurry.

23        Q.   Mr. Nielsen, I am putting it to you that there is no logic, and

24     it's not based on the law either, if there's a -- an agreement between

25     ministries that some political party should send candidates for training

Page 4860

 1     to another ministry.

 2        A.   It's entirely possible, and I'm predisposed to agree with you

 3     that that was the de jure situation.  I'm indicating based on my expert

 4     knowledge of the situation that unfortunately the de facto situation was

 5     quite different.

 6        Q.   I know, but, Mr. Nielsen, yet again we go back to your report and

 7     the conclusion you accepted and revised a few moments ago.  If that was

 8     the de facto situation, then how come you didn't know about it when you

 9     wrote your report?

10        A.   I think I made it very clear that I revised my conclusion based

11     on the document that you showed me today.

12        Q.   But we've agreed on that.  Now I'm asking you about the time when

13     you wrote the report.

14             As you said a moment ago, if that was the de facto situation,

15     then I'm interested in the following:  How come you, as a person who read

16     so many documents and who did such a lot of research, in view of the

17     facts that are referred to in your report, how come you did not come

18     across the basic information that that was what the situation was, in

19     fact?

20        A.   Well, if I had come across the document that you proffered this

21     morning at an earlier stage, I probably would not have -- or definitely

22     would not have put that conclusion in that footnote.

23        Q.   Again, I'm going to tell you what I am putting to you.  You did

24     not find it because this entire operation of sending people for training

25     to Bosnia-Herzegovina [as interpreted] by the SDA was kept secret?

Page 4861

 1             MR. HANNIS:  Your Honours, I have to object to the question.  I

 2     think that mischaracterises what the document itself says.  The SDA is

 3     proposing candidates.  Now, that's being sent to the Republic of Croatia,

 4     to the ministry of Croatia.  He hasn't established yet, from what I've

 5     heard, that the SDA sent the candidates.  These are candidates nominated

 6     by the SDA pursuant to an agreement that's referred to in this document

 7     between the MUP of Croatia and the MUP of SRBiH.

 8             MR. PANTELIC:  And I do apologise to my colleague Mr. Zecevic and

 9     to the Chamber.  I think the -- it was a misspelling of Mr. Zecevic, I

10     think.  It's page 15, line 22.  Instead of Bosnia-Herzegovina it should

11     say Croatia, training to Croatia instead of Bosnia-Herzegovina by SDA.

12     Thank you.

13             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you, Mr. Pantelic.

14             MR. HANNIS:  I'm sorry.  Your Honours, I realise it's a

15     procedural matter.  I know Judge Harhoff left a short while ago.  I don't

16     know.  In my past experience, I think you may need to make a finding

17     pursuant to Rule 15 that it's in the interests of justice for the

18     remaining two Judges to continue to sit without Judge Harhoff.  I just

19     bring that to your attention for the sake of the record.

20             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.

21             MR. HANNIS:  I don't want it to be a matter of appeal later on.

22             JUDGE HALL:  Yes.  Thank you, Mr. Hannis.  The --

23                           [Trial Chamber confers]

24             JUDGE HALL:  I thank Mr. Hannis for that intervention, and the --

25     I note for the record that the Chamber is continuing to sit under the

Page 4862

 1     provisions of Rule 15 bis in the absence of Judge Harhoff.  Thank you.

 2             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

 3             JUDGE HALL:  Mr. Zecevic.

 4             MR. ZECEVIC:  Yes.

 5             JUDGE HALL:  I know it's been a couple of minutes, but could I

 6     hear your response to Mr. Hannis's objection to your question.

 7             MR. ZECEVIC:  Just bear with me, Your Honour.

 8             [Interpretation] Your Honour.  Your Honour, I shall withdraw this

 9     question.  I accept Mr. Hannis's objection.  In this way, I tried to cut

10     the time of the cross-examination, as it were, but obviously I will have

11     to show this witness all the documents involved so that we would have a

12     clear situation.

13             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.

14             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

15             JUDGE HALL:  And it is noted for the record that the Chamber is

16     again fully constituted.  Thank you.

17             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, first of all, I would

18     like to suggest that 1D01-0915, the document I showed to the witness, be

19     marked for identification.

20             JUDGE HALL:  So marked.

21             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Just a moment, please, Your Honour.

22             THE REGISTRAR:  Yes, Your Honour.  Document 010915 shall be

23     marked as Exhibit 1D121 marked for identification.  Thank you, Your

24     Honours.

25             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Could the witness be shown

Page 4863

 1     1D01-1147.

 2        Q.   Sir, that is your document in tab 6.  Sir, you see this document?

 3     It is dated the 11th of July, 1991.  This is what it says:

 4             "To the Executive Board of the SDA, to the president."

 5             And it says:

 6             "Instruction for sending candidates to the training centre of the

 7     Ministry of the Interior of Croatia."

 8             And then in the text says that they are enclosing a copy of the

 9     instruction on the method of hiring candidates for police officers,

10     beginners in the Ministry of the Interior of the Republic of Croatia with

11     your obligation to introduce the candidates to it.  And also, they say

12     here that every candidate has to bring along a referral from the party.

13     That's the document we saw a few moments ago, 1D00-4826.  That's the one

14     that you looked at a few moments ago.  That is the referral provided by

15     the party.  And then there is a reference here to the address of the

16     training centre of the MUP of the Republic of Croatia and also the

17     deadline, the time by which the candidates are supposed to show up at

18     that locality.  Do you see that?

19        A.   Sir, I would point out that the document you provided to me in

20     tab 6 does not correspond to the document which you are discussing that I

21     do see on the screen, but, yes, I do see the document on the screen.

22        Q.   I do apologise.  It must be some kind of a mistake, but do you

23     see it on the screen?  Do you see what I've read out to you?  You do see

24     it, right, from the document?

25        A.   Yes, I do, sir.

Page 4864

 1        Q.   So, this -- this is the instruction that is provided by the -- to

 2     the Executive Board of the SDA, and it explains what the instructions

 3     are -- or, rather, what documents are needed, what documents are needed

 4     by each and every candidate, and the key document is a referral from the

 5     party; right?

 6        A.   Yes, that is correct.  That is what the document says.

 7        Q.   Thank you.

 8             MR. ZECEVIC:  [Interpretation] I would like to tender this

 9     document, please.  Could it be admitted into evidence if there are no

10     objections?

11             MR. HANNIS:  No objection.

12             JUDGE HALL:  Admitted and marked.

13             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, 1D01-1147 is admitted as

14     Exhibit 1D122.  Thank you, Your Honours.

15             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation]

16        Q.   I'm going to show you the referral again.  It is 1D00-4826.  You

17     saw it a few moments ago, and I omitted to tender it.  So we have this

18     document now on our monitors, and it pertains to the document I mentioned

19     just now, that is, 1D00-4826, the one that is going to appear on our

20     screens right now.  That's your tab 9, I believe.

21             You see that this document is called "Referral for candidate,"

22     and it is in accordance with the document that we looked at a moment ago,

23     and every candidate has to bring such a document along when going to the

24     Ministry of the Interior of the Republic of Croatia; right?

25        A.   I agree with your conclusion.

Page 4865

 1        Q.   Thank you.

 2             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] I would like to suggest -- or,

 3     rather, I would like to tender 1D00-4826.

 4             MR. HANNIS:  No objection.

 5             JUDGE HALL:  Admitted and marked.

 6             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, document 1D00-4826 shall be given

 7     Exhibit 1D123.  Thank you, Your Honours.

 8             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation]

 9        Q.   After that, I showed you document 1D00-4681.  That's a list of

10     candidates, and I would like to ask that that document be admitted into

11     evidence as well.  That is a list of candidates for specialised training.

12     Remember that I showed you that document when I asked you about the

13     address of the SDA?

14        A.   Yes, I do.

15             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] I would like to tender this

16     document as well.

17             JUDGE HARHOFF:  And you mentioned yourself, Mr. Zecevic, that

18     this was P424, already admitted?

19             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Oh, I do beg your pardon, Your

20     Honour.  I'm sorry.  We have a bit of a problem with our list of

21     documents indeed.  That is right.

22        Q.   Sir, I would like to show you document 1D00-4697.  Rather,

23     1D00-4739.  I'm sorry.  That is your document in tab 10 according to my

24     list.  Ministry of the Interior, the 31st of July, 1991.  It says:

25             "Personnel Department of the MUP.

Page 4866

 1             "Subject:  List of attendees of the 6th course for policemen in

 2     training who abandon the course or left the course."

 3             And then we have a list of 62 persons, obviously of Muslim

 4     ethnicity.

 5             Do you see the document?

 6        A.   Yes, I see that document.

 7        Q.   From this document we can see that some of the attendees left

 8     this course and the MUP of the Republic of Croatia was now informing that

 9     some of them had given back their equipment and provides the exact date

10     when they left or signed out.  The signature is by the head of the

11     school -- actually, it's signed for the chief inspector, Josip Strmotic.

12        A.   Yes, I see.  That is what the document says.

13             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I would like to

14     tender this document if there are no objections.

15             JUDGE HALL:  Admitted and marked.

16             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, document number 1D00-4739 shall be

17     given Exhibit 1D124.  Thank you, Your Honours.

18             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation].

19        Q.   I would now like to show you 1D00-4704.  This is in your tab 11.

20             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Can we also see the English

21     version, please?

22        Q.   This is a large document.  It's dated the 8th of August, and the

23     heading states:

24             "MUP of the Republic of Croatia.  List of attendees of the 6th

25     course for rookie policemen."

Page 4867

 1             And then there is an alphabetic list of the attendees by the

 2     battalions.  The total number is 285.  Perhaps there could be more.  And

 3     it seems that for the most part the attendees are of Muslim ethnicity.

 4     We can see that from the document.  For example, from page -- actually,

 5     the last ten pages of the document lists mostly persons of Muslim

 6     ethnicity.

 7        A.   I'm waiting for your question.

 8        Q.   Well, I was saying -- I was saying the last ten pages are mostly

 9     Muslims, aren't they, on the list, Muslim by ethnicity for the most part?

10        A.   That appears to be the case.  I would note that most of the last

11     pages are actually lists of people who left the course.

12        Q.   Who did not leave the course you mean.  It says:

13             "The list of attendees of the 6th course for rookie policemen who

14     did not leave the course on the 16th of August, 1991."

15        A.   Yes, you're correct.  That was, sorry, my mistake, and I would

16     point out that the entire document, I would agree with you, is

17     predominantly Muslims, and the rest are no Croats and there is no Serbs

18     on the list.

19        Q.   Thank you very much.

20             MR. ZECEVIC:  [Interpretation]  If there is no objection, I would

21     like to tender this document.

22             MR. HANNIS:  Well, I -- I do have -- I'm sorry.

23             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Zecevic, is it your understanding or -- that

24     all these people, the 285 people, are coming from Bosnia-Herzegovina?

25             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I did not manage to

Page 4868

 1     do that analysis to compare that with the lists that we have from the

 2     SDA, but I absolutely do intend to conduct this analysis and to prepare

 3     that for our defence case and also for our closing statement.  It is our

 4     position that most of those who were Muslims came from the territory of

 5     Bosnia and Herzegovina and not from Croatia.  I do not rule out the

 6     possibility that there are some Croats who also came from Bosnia and

 7     Herzegovina, but the ethnic Croats by some sort of logic would not get

 8     there via the Party of Democratic Action, which is a Muslim party, but

 9     they would be getting there by means of the Croatian Democratic Union

10     community.  So in any case, we are going to make this analysis and

11     compare the names of these persons so that we would then be able to

12     provide you with a more detailed overview of who was actually sent by the

13     SDA for training to the MUP of Croatia.

14             JUDGE DELVOIE:  So it's correct to say that you can't tell just

15     from this document who comes from where.  This document does not give

16     that information.

17             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] The document only states their

18     ethnicity.  It does not say where they are actually from.  It only states

19     their ethnicity.  But if we analyse that together with the other tendered

20     documents, then we can establish where they came from and if they were

21     sent there by the SDA or upon instructions of the SDA, and this is why I

22     he would like to have this document admitted.

23             MR. HANNIS:  Your Honours, I would initially request that this

24     only be marked for identification at this point.  I don't think there's

25     been an adequate nexus to show that it's probative to some point in

Page 4869

 1     issue.  And if I may, I go back.  This all relates to footnote 33 in

 2     Mr. Nielsen's report on page 14 of the English where he made reference

 3     to:

 4             "In June 1991, rumours circulated that Muslims were training in

 5     Croatia and also participating in combat actions against Serbs in

 6     Croatia.  These rumours were proven always was it was clarified that

 7     Muslim police officers were present in Croatia as part of routine

 8     training."

 9             Now, Mr. Nielsen has made a concession that he was partly

10     mistaken about that in light of the document he was shown, but I didn't

11     raise this when 1D122 was admitted, but 1D22 is the document that's dated

12     11 July 1991.  It's the instruction for sending candidates to the

13     training centre of the Ministry of Interior of Croatia, and the first

14     paragraph says:

15             "Herewith enclosed we are sending you a copy of the instruction

16     on the method for hiring of candidates for police officers, beginners in

17     the Ministry of the Interior of the Republic of Croatia."

18             Now, if that's a correct translation, then this seems to be

19     talking about some Muslim officers who are going to Croatia to be trained

20     as beginners in the Ministry of Interior for Croatia.  If that's the

21     case, I don't see how that's relevant to the argument about Muslims from

22     Bosnia training in Croatia and then trying to become part of the police

23     force in Bosnia, if that's the argument being made.

24             JUDGE HALL:  What I thought was happening, and Counsel will

25     correct me if I've got it wrong, is that the -- having regard to and

Page 4870

 1     bearing in mind the status of the witness as an expert, is that

 2     Mr. Zecevic was laying -- seeking to lay the foundation for such of his

 3     case as would challenge the conclusions at which the expert had arrived,

 4     and I share Mr. Hannis's reservation about adding paper, because of

 5     course at the end of the day it's the Chamber which is going to have to

 6     wade through this.  But I thought that Mr. Zecevic should be permitted of

 7     set of this foundation.

 8             Is that what you're about, Mr. Zecevic?

 9             MR. ZECEVIC:  That is correct, Your Honour.

10             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Can I then put the direct question?  Is it for

11     the purpose of testing the credibility and the expertise of the witness,

12     or is it for the purpose of showing that the Bosnian Muslims were siding

13     up with the Croats and tendering their common police officers for

14     training in Croatia so that they could be ready for combat against the

15     Serbs?

16             I mean, where are you going with this?

17             MR. ZECEVIC:  Your Honour, one of the aims was to test the

18     credibility of the witness.  The witness changed his conclusion in his

19     report already, so that part is over.

20             Now, we tried to establish the situation which led to the

21     partition of the MUP in March 1992, and we say that by -- by this

22     involvement of the SDA into sending their members to MUP of Republic

23     Croatia -- Republic of Croatia to undergo the police training, they were

24     creating their own police force and their own army behind the back of the

25     Serbs in the Ministry of -- of Interior of Bosnia and Herzegovina.  And

Page 4871

 1     we -- I believe we have already established that the Serbian -- that the

 2     Serbian officials in the ministry of Bosnia-Herzegovina and other Serbian

 3     party leaders were protesting on a number of occasions because of -- of

 4     these wrong-doings as they saw it in the -- at the time, and that is

 5     basically what Mr. Nielsen confirms in his -- his report.

 6             I don't know if I have satisfied Your Honours with the -- with my

 7     answer.

 8             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Well, partly and partly not, because I think

 9     you're reading something into the testimony of this witness that I have

10     not picked up, namely that this was a clandestine operation that was

11     going on behind the back of the Serbs.  You may recall a while ago I

12     raised the issue of this agreement that apparently had been concluded

13     between the Croatian MUP and the Bosnian MUP, which surprisingly would

14     allow the political parties to send candidates rather than the competent

15     police authorities in both countries or both parts of what was then

16     Yugoslavia.  So that is one thing that -- that to me contradicts your

17     assertion that the witness has testified that this was all going on

18     behind the backs of the Serbs.

19             And secondly, I think the witness, but you may take it up with

20     him again, I think the witness at one point said that also the Serbian

21     political party was sending Serb police officers from Bosnia to training

22     in Serbia.

23             MR. ZECEVIC:  Your Honours, I believe it would be more

24     appropriate if the witness was excused while we are making these

25     explanations, at least from the point of view of Defence, but be it as

Page 4872

 1     may be, it -- Your Honours, the problem we see here is that allegedly

 2     there is an agreement between the Ministry of Interior of Bosnia and

 3     Herzegovina and Ministry of Interior of Republic of Croatia, whereby the

 4     witness who went to 200 or so thousand pages could not find this

 5     agreement.  So therefore whether this was an oral agreement or any other

 6     kind of agreement, there is no record of that.

 7             The witness confirms that there were allegations, and in his

 8     report he says these allegations were false.  Now, we have established

 9     that these allegation were is obviously not false, and I think --

10             MR. HANNIS:  Not all of them.  About Muslims engaging in combat

11     in Croatia against the Serbs?  That's one of -- part of the footnote.

12             MR. ZECEVIC:  Well, I will come to that also.

13             What we are saying is that the witness, based on these document,

14     confirmed that had he had these documents in his view he would confirm

15     that the SDA was sending candidates for the training in MUP of Republic

16     of Croatia.

17             Now, what -- what we are saying is that it is obviously something

18     very wrong with the situation where there is -- there is allegedly an

19     agreement which nobody has saw or which doesn't exist in any -- in any

20     documents between two ministries, and then none of the ministries is

21     communicating with each other, but the Party of Democratic Action is

22     sending candidates to the Ministry of Interior of Republic of Croatia,

23     and that is how we -- we claim with a certainty that this was done in

24     secrecy and behind the back of the Serbian members of --

25             JUDGE HALL:  Mr. Zecevic, in the interests of time, and we're

Page 4873

 1     about -- it's time for the break, let's not lose sight of the issue as to

 2     whether this document should be exhibited.  Do I understand the -- from

 3     what you said earlier, that you and -- we'll have to hear what Mr. Hannis

 4     has to say on the other side, that this something that really needs to --

 5     that we really need to devote time to when we return and, as you say,

 6     possibly in the absence of the witness, or is it a much -- assuming, of

 7     course, that Mr. Hannis stands by his objection.

 8             MR. ZECEVIC:  Well, Your Honours, what we can do is as the time

 9     for the break is now, we can -- probably Mr. Hannis and I can discuss

10     this issue and then report to you before the witness is brought to court.

11             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.

12             MR. ZECEVIC:  If we need to exchange some arguments, then the

13     witness can be --

14             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.

15             MR. ZECEVIC:  -- called.  Thank you very much.

16                           [The witness stood down]

17                           --- Recess taken at 10.26 a.m.

18                           --- On resuming at 10.53 a.m.

19             MR. ZECEVIC:  Your Honours, if I may report the result of our

20     communication, Mr. Hannis and mine.  There are three more documents which

21     are the lists of the -- of the participants of this training in Croatia,

22     and these are 1D00-4745, 1D01-0893, and 1D01-0929, and we have agreed,

23     because these documents are really just the lists of the -- of the names

24     and with the indication to which battalion they were attending the

25     course, that all these three documents be MFI'd, and we will then deal

Page 4874

 1     with it in the course of this trial later on.

 2             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Can I just ask the parties, is it a contested

 3     fact, and I'm looking to the Prosecution, do you contest or disagree

 4     about the fact that the SDA was sending Muslim police candidates for

 5     training in Croatia?  Is that something that we need to argue about?

 6             MR. HANNIS:  I don't disagree with that, but these particular

 7     documents, I don't know if we can tie these documents to that fact.  This

 8     may refer to some other group of Muslims that are training in the

 9     Republic of Croatia.  I haven't been able to satisfy myself looking at

10     these documents that they refer to the group that we have some evidence

11     of being named as candidates by the SDA to attend some training in the

12     Republic of Croatia with the Croatian MUP, but I don't know that these

13     are those guys.  That's why I've continued to have an objection up to

14     this point, and it seemed to me the best resolution was to have them

15     MFI'd for now, subsequently to be linked up perhaps later in our case or

16     in the Defence case.

17             JUDGE HALL:  So we'll mark them.

18             MR. ZECEVIC:  Thank you, Your Honours.

19             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, for the record, 1D00-4745 shall be

20     marked as Exhibit 1D125 marked for identification.  1D01-0893 shall be

21     marked as Exhibit 1D126 marked for identification.  And finally,

22     1D01-0929 shall be marked as Exhibit 1D127 marked for identification.

23     Thank you, Your Honours.

24             MR. ZECEVIC:  Thank you very much.  May the witness be brought

25     back?

Page 4875

 1                           [The witness takes the stand]

 2             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation]

 3        Q.   Mr. Nielsen, just a few more questions on this topic.

 4     Mr. Nielsen, isn't it true that the Ministry of the Interior of

 5     Bosnia-Herzegovina had its school for training?  It was called the

 6     secondary school of the Ministry of the Interior, and it was at Vraca in

 7     Sarajevo?

 8        A.   Yes, that's correct.

 9        Q.   And it was customary that members of the police and course

10     attendees from the MUP of Bosnia and Herzegovina went there for training;

11     right?

12        A.   Yes, that is correct.

13        Q.   Thank you.  Now, I would like to show you document 1D01-0932.  It

14     is your tab 15, and you will refer to it in your footnote 33.  That is a

15     document of the CSB Banja Luka, Official Note, signed by Mr. Pecanac,

16     Vojislav Pecanac.  It's dated the 25th of July, 1991, and it says here in

17     paragraph 2 that on the 25th of July, 1991, a certain Suad Music, born

18     on -- born in 1962, came to the Banja Luka CSB premises of his own

19     initiative, and he informed them that a certain Kunic Isak, known as Iso,

20     a member of the SDA is organising the taking of Muslims to training in

21     the Croatian MUP that was taking place in Zagreb, and he's saying that he

22     found out that the training was two months and that a salary was paid out

23     to attendees there, that it was financed by Arab Emirates, and if they

24     have any problems they should report to a certain Omer Basic in a mosque

25     in Zagreb.  You saw this document when you wrote your report, didn't you?

Page 4876

 1        A.   Yes, I did, and I cite it, as you note, in footnote 33.

 2        Q.   Inter alia, it says in paragraph 4 that this same Music who came

 3     to provide information to the CSB claims that in the heading of the

 4     questionnaire that has to be filled out when they go to the Zagreb MUP it

 5     says SDA and that it is signed by Hasan Cengic.

 6             Do you see that?

 7        A.   Yes, I do see that.

 8        Q.   That, of course, corresponds to the documents that you saw a few

 9     moments ago like the referral from -- for candidates.  They're all signed

10     by Hasan Cengic and it all says SDA in the heading; right?

11        A.   Yes.  It refers to the referrals for cadet training for police in

12     Croatia.  That's s correct, it does correspond.

13        Q.   Thank you.

14             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] If there are no objections I would

15     like to have this document admitted into evidence, please.

16             MR. HANNIS:  No objection.

17             JUDGE HALL:  Admitted and marked.

18             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, 1D01-0932 shall be marked as

19     Exhibit 1D128.  Thank you, Your Honours.

20             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation]

21        Q.   And let me show you one more document, 1D01-0935.  That is

22     document number 16 in your binder.  It is tab 16 in your set of

23     documents.

24             This is a document of the CSB Bratunac of the 16th of March,

25     1992.  It is Senad Hodzic, the chief of the public security station, who

Page 4877

 1     is writing this, that is to say that he is an ethnic Muslim.  He is

 2     writing to the chief of the CSB Tuzla in March.  The number is 362/92.

 3     And then he is talking about the order to step up the reserve police

 4     force, and then in paragraph 3 it says:

 5             "After we started conducting the required checks, we came to

 6     learn that there is a certain number of military conscripts of Muslim

 7     ethnicity who had stayed in Croatia within the training of the Croatian

 8     MUP.  We do not know on whose order or recommendation, but it is believed

 9     that Serb citizens do not have enough trust in such future members of the

10     reserve police force.  We would therefore like to know," et cetera, et

11     cetera.

12             He's actually asking for information for instructions as to what

13     to do with such military conscripts, and he says:

14             "In relation to this problem, we telephoned CSB Tuzla and the

15     MUP, and we have nevertheless decided to request in writing your opinion

16     with respect to taking on such military conscripts for war assignment."

17             Do you see this?

18        A.   I agree that you are reading accurately from the document, yes.

19        Q.   Yes.  Sir, you will agree with me that this document evidently

20     shows that the chief of the public security station from Bratunac, an

21     ethnic Muslim, his name is Senad Hodzic, in March 1992 he does not know

22     that what was organised was some kind of course for military conscripts

23     of Muslim ethnicity in the MUP of the Republic of Croatia.  Isn't that

24     obvious from this document?

25        A.   As you state, he's an ethnic Muslim, and, yes, he is claiming

Page 4878

 1     that he did not have any knowledge about this matter.  That is correct.

 2        Q.   He even says specifically, "We do not know on whose orders or

 3     recommendation."  That is what it says in this document; right?

 4        A.   Yes, I agree that is what it says in this document.

 5        Q.   Thank you.

 6             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] I would like to tender this

 7     document as well.

 8             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mr. Zecevic.

 9             MR. ZECEVIC:  Yes.

10             JUDGE HARHOFF:  I don't mind admitting the documents and I see

11     the relevance to the point that you are trying to make, but it also seems

12     to me that the witness doesn't know the document, and the only thing he

13     can do is to confirm that you have read out correctly from it.  Should we

14     MFI it?

15             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I asked the witness

16     for a conclusion regarding the document.  It was you, Your Honour, who

17     asked me to explain why it is that we claim that this was an operation

18     that was being carried out by the Party of Democratic Action, that was

19     being done behind the backs of Serb personnel in the MUP of

20     Bosnia-Herzegovina and in full secrecy, at that.

21             From this document we see that even the chiefs of public security

22     stations of Muslim ethnicity did not know about it.

23             So I read the document to the witness because I assumed that he

24     hadn't seen it before because he did not mention it in his report, and

25     the witness did agree with me that this document proves that the chief of

Page 4879

 1     the public security station, Senad Hodzic, in March 1992, is unaware of

 2     the existence of this kind of course for members of the police who are of

 3     Muslim ethnicity, and I absolutely believe that this corroborates, like

 4     the previous document, our position that this was not done on the basis

 5     of co-operation with the ministry but, rather, it was done secretly in

 6     co-operation with the SDA.  That is why I'm referring to this, and that

 7     is why I think it's relevant, of course.

 8             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mr. Zecevic, I didn't say it was not relevant.

 9     On the contrary, I think I expressed my agreement with you that it is

10     clearly something that goes to proof of the point that you are trying to

11     make.  The only hesitation I had is whether we could admit this document

12     through this witness, because apparently he doesn't know anything about

13     it.  He has never seen it before, and the only thing that he could

14     confirm was that you were reading out correctly from the document, which

15     is why I then said that we perhaps should MFI it.  I'm not against

16     admitting it and it's clearly relevant to your point, but there is a

17     system which we're trying to apply that directs us to admission

18     [overlapping speakers] witnesses.

19             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] I absolutely agree with you, Your

20     Honour, but this is an expert witness is bringing -- a witness who the

21     Prosecution is bringing in as an expert.  So from that point of view,

22     since he is an expert in police matters or the Ministry of the Interior

23     of Republika Srpska, and of course in part of his report he speaks of the

24     MUP of Bosnia-Herzegovina and the division of that MUP.  Then I thought

25     that since it was the OTP that disclosed this document to us, I thought

Page 4880

 1     that this was a good opportunity to introduce the document through this

 2     witness, although he hadn't seen it before.  He now has an opportunity to

 3     comment on it.

 4             The document has identical status to all the other documents that

 5     the witness refers to in his report.

 6             I thought that Mr. Hannis was on his feet in order to object if I

 7     managed to understand what he was doing.  However, I did not hear what

 8     the objection was, if any.

 9             Thank you.

10             MR. HANNIS:  I was going to object to its admission.  I agree

11     with you.  I think the appropriate treatment of this document at this

12     time is to MFI it.  All Mr. Nielsen said was, "You've read it correctly.

13     That is what it says."

14             Mr. Zecevic in his argument said, "From this document we see that

15     even the chiefs of public security stations ..."  We see one chief.  We

16     don't know when this guy became chief.  He said that he obtained

17     information that a certain number of Muslim military conscripts who have

18     spent time in Croatia on part of a training within the MUP of Croatia.

19     Well, apparently the information was available somewhere so to make the

20     argument that this shows that it was done in secrecy can't depend alone

21     on this document.

22             For that and other reasons, I think at this time the best course

23     would be to MFI this.

24             JUDGE HALL:  It will be marked for identification.

25             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.

Page 4881

 1             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, document 1D01-0935 shall be given

 2     Exhibit 1D129 marked for identification.  Thank you, Your Honours.

 3             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation]

 4        Q.   Mr. Nielsen, we discussed something a while ago, and I moved on

 5     to the question of mobilising the reserve force in September 1991, and

 6     then because of the questions put by the Trial Chamber, we returned to

 7     the question of sending SDA candidates to these courses.

 8             I shall remind you of what this was.  It was your footnotes,

 9     number 50 and 51, in your report, that is.

10             Since we've -- since we've already introduced document 01-010915,

11     an instruction provided by Mr. Alija Delimustafic, I'm interested in

12     1D01-0921.

13             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Could we please have it in e-court.

14        Q.   That is your tab 20 and your footnote 50.  1D01-0921.  That's the

15     document.

16             Do you see this document dated the 26th of September, 1991?  The

17     document was signed by assistant minister of the interior of Bosnia and

18     Herzegovina, Mr. Momcilo Mandic, and he submitted it to the Presidency of

19     the Socialist Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina, the government, the MUP,

20     and so on.

21             Do you see the document?  You commented upon it in footnote 50.

22        A.   Yes, I see the document.

23        Q.   Is it not true that Mr. Momcilo Mandic is providing his view and

24     comment on the decision of the Presidency about allowing the Ministry of

25     the Interior, on minister's orders, to engage additional police

Page 4882

 1     reservists from the contingent of undeployed military conscripts?  And he

 2     says on page 2 in the Serbian text, he says that the conclusion of the

 3     Presidency is such that in fact it makes it impossible to increase the

 4     reserve police force without any limits imposed.

 5             Do you remember this document?  Do you remember the comment?

 6        A.   Yes, I remember that comment.

 7        Q.   And that that is in contravention of regulations, because the

 8     Presidency can, by its own order, increase the number of reserve

 9     policemen only in accordance with the decision taken by the government of

10     Bosnia and Herzegovina.  Do you remember that?

11        A.   Yes, I remember that.

12        Q.   And since the last government decision that is there dates back

13     to 1987, and that's on the last page, therefore, Mr. Mandic proposes that

14     in keeping with this government decision of 1987, this decision -- or,

15     rather, this conclusion of the Presidency be adjusted to the letter of

16     the law and government decisions; right?

17        A.   Correct.

18        Q.   In that document Mr. Mandic also says that there are cases when

19     the police is being manned by volunteers without any preliminary checks.

20     Do you remember that from that document too?

21        A.   Yes, I remember that.

22        Q.   And that there is the possibility and well-founded fear that such

23     personnel would be impossible to control; right?  That is also on page 3

24     of this document.

25        A.   Yes, that is correct.

Page 4883

 1        Q.   Thank you.

 2             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] I would like to tender this

 3     document into evidence, please.

 4             MR. HANNIS:  No objection.

 5             JUDGE HALL:  Admitted and marked.

 6             THE REGISTRAR:  Document number 1D01-0921 shall be given

 7     Exhibit 1D130.  Thank you, Your Honours.

 8             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation]

 9        Q.   In footnote 51 you commented document 1D09 --

10             THE INTERPRETER:  Interpreter's note:  Could the number please be

11     repeated.

12             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation]

13        Q.   This is your tab number 18, I believe.

14             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Could you please --

15             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] I beg your pardon.  1D01-0913.

16        Q.   This is a letter written by President Karadzic in which he

17     instructs Municipal Boards of the political party to instruct persons of

18     Serb ethnicity to respond to the call-up for the reserve police force.

19     Do you remember having commented upon this document?

20        A.   Yes, I do comment upon that document in paragraph 29.

21        Q.   Mr. Karadzic expresses his anxiety here that if Serbs do not

22     respond to the mobilisation and call-up that there could be a Muslim

23     police and that that would be some kind of a basis for a civil war;

24     right?

25        A.   I absolutely agree with you.

Page 4884

 1        Q.   Thank you.

 2             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Could we please tender this

 3     document as well into evidence, please.  [In English] Pardon.  I'm sorry.

 4             JUDGE HALL:  Yes.  Admitted and marked for what it's worth.

 5             THE REGISTRAR:  Document number 01-0913 shall be marked as

 6     Exhibit 1D131.  Thank you, Your Honours.

 7             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 8        Q.   Mr. Nielsen, if we analyse the situation where we have the Muslim

 9     ethnic cadres being sent for training to the MUP of the Republic of

10     Croatia and we have the call-up of the police reserves, as Mr. Mandic

11     says, to an unclassified, unrestricted level, in your opinion, the

12     concern that the police or its reserved force would be turned to some

13     sort of armed force, to a military force, is really well grounded.  Is it

14     well grounded?

15        A.   I think that Mr. Karadzic cites some very relevant circumstances

16     for why there should be concern about mobilisation.  In that context I

17     would point out that it's interesting and relevant that he is, and the

18     SDS by extension, are now opposing the same kind of mobilisation that

19     they themselves were calling for, albeit on a different numerical basis,

20     in the summer of 1991, and I would also point out that as I stated

21     earlier today and yesterday this is an all-around deplorable situation in

22     which Muslims are being trained in Croatia, as you have shown me and

23     which I agree with you and in which as I, in fact, cite in footnote 33 in

24     the subsequent documents, Serbs are being trained with the knowledge of

25     Mr. Karadzic in Sremska Kamenica, in Serbia.

Page 4885

 1        Q.   Sir, I thought that we had agreed that the request by Serbs for

 2     the mobilisation of the reserve forces referred to specific parts of

 3     north-western Bosnia and Herzegovina due to security problems facing them

 4     because of the war in Croatia.  Isn't this correct, and did you not agree

 5     with that point?

 6        A.   I certainly agree with you, and that's what I meant, but perhaps

 7     unclearly, when I said that they meant to do so on a different numerical

 8     basis.

 9        Q.   Thank you.  Sir, can you please tell me if you know that the

10     Muslim side, other than this, was also acquiring weapons from the depots

11     of the MUP and from the HDZ?  Did you see documents indicating this?

12        A.   Could you be specific if -- by what you mean by the "Muslim

13     side"?  Are you referring to the Muslims in the SRBiH MUP?

14        Q.   I am thinking of the Party of Democratic Action as a party and

15     its members.

16        A.   It would certainly not surprise me given that Croats, Muslims,

17     and Serbs at this point in their respective political parties were

18     receiving weapons from sympathetic members of the MUP.

19        Q.   Have you seen documents where the Ministry of the Interior is

20     issuing any of the national parties weapons from its depots, weapons or

21     equipment for their use?

22        A.   I have certainly seen such documents from 1991 and retrospective

23     documents from 1992 and 1993 which refer to the issuing by the Ministry

24     of Internal Affairs to members of the Serbian Democratic Party, and it

25     would not at all surprise me if the same were the case for the Croat

Page 4886

 1     Democratic Union and the Party of Democratic Action.

 2        Q.   Very well.  Sir, can you please tell me, Mr. Nielsen, when you

 3     mentioned the members of the Serb peoples who allegedly went for training

 4     to Sremska Kamenica, did you have any particular document in mind when

 5     you said that?

 6        A.   Certainly, sir.

 7        Q.   Could you please tell me what that was?

 8        A.   Well, I based that observation on several documents.  The easiest

 9     one to refer to since we've been dealing for quite some time with was

10     footnote 33, are the -- I believe it's the second conversation between

11     Radovan Karadzic and unknown male in which he's informed by the unknown

12     male that Serbian cadres are being trained in Sremska Kamenica.

13        Q.   Perhaps I wasn't clear enough.  When I say document, I am

14     thinking of a written document.  I'm not thinking of any intercepts.  I'm

15     not thinking of articles from the newspaper, television reports, or

16     anything like that.

17             Did you ever see a document like the ones that I showed you about

18     the Party of Democratic Action which would confirm what you are claiming?

19        A.   Yes, I have seen other documents outside of the categories that

20     you have mentioned that show that members of the SDS-supported Serbian

21     defence forces, called the SOS, in the Banja Luka area underwent training

22     in Pancevo and also in Sremska Kamenica.  Both in Serbia.

23        Q.   All right.  But these are not MUP members, if I understood it

24     correctly, but members of the SDS.  Did I understand you correctly?

25        A.   These are persons who were paramilitary members and who later

Page 4887

 1     constituted a large portion of the CSB Banja Luka Special Police Unit.

 2     So in that sense I find it to be analogous to the allegations which I

 3     believe to be accurate that some Muslim or Croat paramilitaries later

 4     became Muslim or Croat police officers with SDS or HDZ report -- support.

 5        Q.   Mr. Nielsen, can you please tell me, Mr. Bruno Kvesic --

 6     Mr. Branko Kvesic and Mr. Bruno Stojic were members of the then

 7     leadership of the Ministry of the Interior of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

 8     That is correct, isn't it?

 9        A.   Correct.

10        Q.   Are you aware of the fact that from September 1991 they were

11     members of the Crisis Staff of the HDZ, the Bosnia and Herzegovina Crisis

12     Staff of the HDZ?

13        A.   I'm not aware of that fact, but it would not surprise me at all.

14        Q.   I'm going to show you a document.  This is document 1D110.  You

15     will see from the document that Jerko Doko was the defence minister of

16     Bosnia and Herzegovina and that he also was a member of that Crisis

17     Staff.

18             Do you have the document in your set of documents?

19        A.   Yes, sir.  I found it at tab 23.

20        Q.   Twenty-three.  Very well.  Can you please look -- I mean, you've

21     seen that Mr. Stojic, Kvesic, Jerko Doko are here.  Do you recognise

22     anybody else here from the Bosnia-Herzegovina MUP?  This is in the first

23     paragraph, just underneath the conclusions.

24        A.   I agree that Branko Kvesic and Bruno Stojic were both very

25     high-ranking members supported by the HDZ and who were full time

Page 4888

 1     employees of the MUP at the time.

 2        Q.   You will see on page 2 that the position of the Croatian

 3     Democratic Union from September 1991, in paragraph 2, is that it is just

 4     a question of time when war will break out in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and

 5     they are calling attention to the seriousness of the situation, and

 6     they're asking the Crisis Staff to direct their attention to the defence

 7     of the Croatian people.

 8             You haven't looked at this document before, have you?

 9        A.   No, I have not.  I'm quite certain it's been dealt with by my

10     colleague who dealt with the establishment of Bosnian Croat MUP.

11        Q.   To flesh out the situation even further before we come to the key

12     question of the division of the MUP, you are aware that a certain number

13     of Serbian policemen from the Sarajevo centre were first mistreated and

14     then they were finally forced to resign and place themselves at the

15     disposal of the Bosnia and Herzegovina MUP.  Are you aware of that?

16        A.   I'm aware of that incident and similarly ethnically motivated

17     incidents at police stations throughout Bosnia and Herzegovina during

18     that period, yes.

19        Q.   This is your footnote 95 and document 1D00-2736.  This is the

20     document to which you referred in your footnote 95, isn't it?

21        A.   Yes, sir.

22        Q.   On the last page of the document, this is page 5 in the e-court,

23     in the last paragraph it states that -- it's just above the signature.  I

24     apologise.  The last section of the text where there are the signatures

25     then of these employees of Serbian ethnicity.

Page 4889

 1             In the last paragraph it is stated that they are being placed at

 2     the disposal of the Sarajevo SUP until the definite resolution of their

 3     status.  As of that day, they are no longer performing their duties in

 4     the Stari Grad Security Centre.  Isn't that correct?

 5        A.   Yes, that is correct.

 6        Q.   Thank you.

 7             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] I have would like to tender this

 8     document, please.

 9             MR. HANNIS:  No objection.

10             JUDGE HALL:  Admitted and marked.

11             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that will be Exhibit 1D132.  Thank

12     you, Your Honours.

13             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation]

14        Q.   Mr. Nielsen, isn't it true, and I think that you also refer to

15     this in a couple of places in your report, that it was specifically the

16     Serbian personnel in the Bosnia and Herzegovina MUP who insisted on

17     professionalism and legality in the operation of the Bosnia and

18     Herzegovina MUP?

19        A.   I would agree that Serb personnel also, in addition to certain

20     members of Muslim and Croat ethnicity, issued calls for professionalism

21     and respect of legality during this period.

22        Q.   Isn't it true, and I think that you even mention that somewhere

23     in your report, that Mr. Karadzic criticised the members of the Ministry

24     of the Interior of Serb ethnicity precisely because they were overly

25     insisting on the respect for legality and professionalism?

Page 4890

 1        A.   That is correct, and as I state in paragraph 15, he also said

 2     that even if 90 per cent of the employees of SRBiH MUP were of Serb

 3     ethnicity, it wouldn't make much of a difference.  And he says that they

 4     followed the law and the regulations of MUP too much for their own good.

 5        Q.   Sir, isn't it true that at the Assembly session of the 24th of

 6     March when Mr. Stanisic was appointed minister - this was in 1992 - he

 7     also advocated professionalism in the work of the MUP?  This is also

 8     referred to in your report.  This is P198, page 7, paragraph 1 of the

 9     Serbian text and page 8, last paragraph of the English text, but I do not

10     wish to spend time, so I don't think it there's any need to show that to

11     the Trial Chamber.

12             Do you remember that?

13        A.   I remember that, but, sir, it occurs to me that in my response to

14     the previous question, I made an answer that is based solely -- on a

15     conclusion in my report that is supported solely by intercepts, so

16     perhaps I have to withdraw that conclusion if I can.

17        Q.   I absolutely agree that you can withdraw that conclusion if it

18     does refer to an intercept.  I'm not going to base anything on that

19     myself either.  I did ask you, though, to answer this question.  This

20     question does not refer to the intercept but refers to the minutes of the

21     Assembly session of the 24th of March, 1992.

22        A.   Yes, and I remember that, as I said.

23        Q.   Mr. Nielsen, in view of the fact that you are an historian by

24     training, I am surprised that these historical events which are of key

25     interest to us in this case - I'm thinking about the division of the

Page 4891

 1     Bosnia and Herzegovina MUP - you did not place them in the historical

 2     context and the events that were going on in that period.

 3        A.   Is that a question?

 4        Q.   Yes.

 5        A.   Well, in that case my response would be to remind the Court that

 6     the -- this report was prepared for the Krajisnik case, and it was my

 7     understanding for the Krajisnik case, and indeed also until very recently

 8     for this case, that the Court and all parties would have the ability to

 9     get that context to which you refer from the report of Patrick Treanor.

10        Q.   I'm not asking you about the context.  We know what the context

11     is, and as to whether Mr. Treanor will come or not, that is up to the

12     Prosecution, but I'm asking you, when you were working on your report,

13     why did you not place the events that you deal with in your report in a

14     historical context?

15             MR. HANNIS:  Objection, Your Honour.  I think he's answered the

16     question about why he didn't put that in his report.  It was because he

17     understood that that was going to be addressed by Mr. Treanor and

18     Mr. Treanor's related report.

19             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, from what I know, the

20     report by Mr. Treanor refers to the historical context and some other

21     facts.  Since the Prosecution will not be bringing Mr. Treanor to testify

22     and will not be exhibiting his expert report, they obviously consider

23     that context to be beyond dispute and that the -- that it is well known

24     to the Chamber.  So I'm interested in why does Nielsen not place in a

25     historical context the events he deals with in his report.  It's not a

Page 4892

 1     matter of whether he knows or does not know the historical context, but

 2     it's a question of the influence of the events that we're familiar with

 3     on his conclusions in his report.

 4             MR. HANNIS:  Mr. Nielsen has answered the question about why he

 5     didn't include it in his report, and Mr. Nielsen has no control over

 6     about what decisions the Prosecution made about whether or not

 7     Mr. Treanor will be called because of the limitations on the

 8     Prosecution's number of hours, number of witnesses, et cetera.

 9             JUDGE HALL:  Let's move on, Mr. Zecevic.

10             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

11        Q.   Mr. Nielsen, the day before you talked with Mr. Hannis about the

12     Cutileiro Plan, you do not mention the Cutileiro Plan in your report.  I

13     assume that the reason for it is the same one that you have just given us

14     for other contextual facts to which I was pointing.

15        A.   That is correct, although you may be familiar with the fact that

16     I was cross-examined about the Cutileiro Plan in Krajisnik.

17        Q.   All right.  If you were examined about the Cutileiro Plan in the

18     Krajisnik case, why then in the revision or addition that you did for the

19     Stanisic/Zupljanin case, i.e., this case, did you not include the facts

20     relating to the Cutileiro Plan in this report?

21        A.   For precisely the reason that I gave previously, namely my

22     understanding that other witnesses, in particular Mr. Treanor and perhaps

23     also Dr. Donia, would deal with that issue.

24        Q.   Your expert knowledge, then, you are placing in the context of

25     some kind of collective effort in order to affirm the Prosecutor's theory

Page 4893

 1     of the case.  Is that correct?

 2        A.   No, that is not correct.  The collective effort is indeed

 3     present.  That's the T in team, leadership research team, and that means

 4     that we collectively seek to break up very complex issues into

 5     analytically manageable chunks so that we have one person who is doing

 6     the Bosnian Serb leadership, one person doing the Crisis Staffs.  I'm the

 7     one who does the MUP, et cetera.

 8        Q.   Don't you think that in this way when you split it up into

 9     segments you are losing a key connection with the actual real events on

10     the ground and the reasons why some things actually happened?

11        A.   I do not agree, because I make it part of my job -- I should say,

12     I made it a part of my job to read, on a regular basis, the analytical

13     products produced by my colleague experts and in that way try to the

14     keep, to the best of my ability, the actual real events on the ground, as

15     you refer to them, in my mind as I performed my own analysis of MUP

16     documentation.  The alternative would be to have one absolutely massive

17     report dealing with everything from A to Z, and I don't think that's

18     feasible for any one person to undertake.

19        Q.   Mr. Nielsen, isn't it true, and I think you said that the day

20     before yesterday, that you looked at the Cutileiro Plan and the

21     documents, last week when you came to prepare for this testimony?  Yes or

22     no?

23        A.   Yes.

24        Q.   How is it possible that in your report you deal with the division

25     of the Bosnia and Herzegovina MUP without mentioning at any point in your

Page 4894

 1     report the Cutileiro Plan, which from September 1991 was based on the

 2     tripartite principle and the division of Bosnia and Herzegovina into

 3     three entities?

 4             MR. HANNIS:  Can we have a clarification about what Mr. Zecevic

 5     is referring to when he says the Cutileiro Plan?  Is there a particular

 6     document that he can hand to the witness and show him as being the

 7     Cutileiro Plan that he's referring to?

 8             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I do intend to show

 9     it to the witness.  I am just trying to lay the basis for further

10     questions and all the documents that I'm planning to show him in relation

11     to the Cutileiro Plan.  The only assertion here is that the Cutileiro

12     Plan existed from September 1991, and that is information that can be

13     found on Wikipedia on the internet.

14             MR. HANNIS:  If there's a document from September 1991 that is

15     called the Cutileiro Plan, I would like it to be shown to the witness so

16     he can understand and answer the question in context.

17             JUDGE HALL:  Perhaps, Mr. Zecevic, the witness should first be

18     asked about his familiarity with this.  I'm not sure that the -- any

19     purpose is served as to why -- I keep coming back to the fact that he is

20     proffered as an expert witness, that why the report which is before us --

21     we're dealing with what is in the report, not what is not in the report,

22     if you follow me.  That's the difficulty I have with the question, I

23     suppose, is Mr. Hannis's objection.

24             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, there are two or

25     three things here.  First, the witness claims that he knew about it, but

Page 4895

 1     he did not wish to comment on it because this is something that other

 2     experts from the Prosecution were commenting on since they were

 3     co-operating within the Prosecutor's office and it was known which expert

 4     was covering which part of the testimony during a trial.  This is the

 5     first thing.

 6             Second, we really must ask the witness this and on the basis of

 7     his positions we are telling him why we believe the division of the MUP

 8     occurred.  His position is that this was the desire or the will of the

 9     Serbian cadres from the Serbian Democratic Party, and we are asserting

10     the opposite.  So we have to put this to the witness, with all due

11     respect.

12             JUDGE HALL:  Except that the witness is not compelled to take on

13     board in terms of the opinions which he has formed, and which is what his

14     report is all about, the views of anybody else, including the views now

15     being articulated by counsel.  But I haven't lost sight of your

16     continuing to put your case, to lay the foundation for the eventual

17     Defence case.  It's only in the interests of time, Mr. Zecevic, that

18     the -- inviting the witness presently on the stand, to engage him in

19     these detailed exchanges about, in this case, the Cutileiro report is --

20     is it helpful?

21             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, we believe that that

22     part of the report of the witness is wrong, and we are putting questions

23     to him with that premise, and we are putting to him why we believe that

24     his report here is incorrect, but I see that Mr. Hannis is on his feet.

25             MR. HANNIS:  The essence of my objection, I guess, Your Honours,

Page 4896

 1     is a procedural one, in effect.  There's been a lot of talk in this case

 2     about the Cutileiro Plan or the Cutileiro agreement.  Those terms have

 3     been used in loose fashion, and frankly, I have to confess it's not clear

 4     to me, I've heard several -- I've heard witnesses say there was no

 5     agreement.  There was a conference.  There were principles for

 6     negotiations, but if there is an agreement, if there is a document called

 7     the Cutileiro Plan or the Cutileiro agreement and he wants to ask him a

 8     question about that, then he should show him that document.  So in

 9     fairness to the witness he sees what he's being asked about.  But if he's

10     just using his generic Cutileiro Plan or Cutileiro agreement term, the

11     witness may not understand what that is.  That's the essence of my

12     objection.

13             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

14             MR. PANTELIC:  Just for the record, Your Honour, the position -

15     while we're on the same topic, to help the Trial Chamber, to help to some

16     extent the witness - the position of Zupljanin Defence with regard to the

17     Cutileiro Plan is as follows:  Our case is based on the competence of the

18     entities of Bosnia and Herzegovina regarding certain -- certain aspect

19     of -- of government, including police.

20             Three parties in Bosnia-Herzegovina, before the, let's say,

21     adoption of draft of Cutileiro Plan, agreed that entities will form, have

22     control, and conduct their own police forces.  This is the beginning.

23     This is the gist of this problem.  And I'm almost hundred per cent, maybe

24     hundred ten per cent sure that distinguish Dr. Nielsen is aware about

25     that, that fact.

Page 4897

 1             So it's very narrow, Your Honours, use of principles and general

 2     framework for the future constitution of Bosnia-Herzegovina.

 3             At the end of the day, as I mentioned on many occasions, these

 4     principles were enshrined in Dayton peace accord, whereas today we also

 5     have a sort of divided police controlled by the entities in Bosnia.  And

 6     this is the sole and very limited issue with regard to the Cutileiro

 7     Plan.  This is position of Zupljanin Defence, and I will announce this

 8     line, these several questions, now, I will announce for Dr. Nielsen

 9     during my cross.  Thank you very much.

10             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you, Mr. Pantelic.

11             MR. ZECEVIC:  May I proceed, Your Honours?

12             JUDGE HALL:  Yes, Mr. Zecevic.

13             MR. ZECEVIC:  Thank you very much.

14        Q.   [Interpretation] Mr. Nielsen --

15             MR. HANNIS:  I'm sorry, Your Honours.  Have you ruled then that

16     he's not going to be required to show the document to the witness?

17             JUDGE HALL:  I thought the last thing he said is that he's going

18     to move on.

19             MR. HANNIS:  I think he's planning to move on and ask him about

20     the Cutileiro Plan without showing him a document.

21             MR. ZECEVIC:  Your Honours, I said that I'm going to show the

22     document to the witness.  That is exactly what I intend to do.

23             JUDGE HALL:  You have the document.

24             MR. ZECEVIC:  Yes, I do.  [Interpretation] Could we please have

25     1D00-2708.

Page 4898

 1        Q.   That is your tab 27.  Mr. Nielsen, the day before yesterday

 2     Mr. Hannis asked you about the Cutileiro Plan.  I thought that in that

 3     sense he and I agree that that is the popular name for the document of

 4     the European Union that is called "Principles of New Constitutional

 5     Arrangements for Bosnia-Herzegovina."  It is popularly known as the

 6     Cutileiro Plan because this plan -- or, rather, this attempt of making

 7     arrangements in Bosnia and Herzegovina on behalf of the European Union

 8     was spearheaded by Lord Carrington and the Foreign Minister of Portugal,

 9     Mr. Cutileiro.  However, since Lord Carrington had worked out some other

10     plans before that, in order to make a distinction between and among these

11     plans this document is known as the Cutileiro Plan.

12             I think that when Mr. Hannis put questions to you the day before

13     yesterday, he was actually asking you about the Cutileiro Plan.

14     Therefore, I do not understand the objection made by Mr. Hannis now.

15     However --

16             MR. HANNIS:  My objection is Mr. Zecevic started out by talking

17     about the Cutileiro Plan beginning in September 1991.  This document is

18     dated February 22nd, 1992.  It does not say Cutileiro Plan on it.

19     Mr. Zecevic has been trying to testify for you by saying this is

20     popularly known as the Cutileiro Plan, et cetera.  He's not a witness.

21     He needs to ask a question.  And if this is the Cutileiro Plan that he's

22     referring to, I'm satisfied and Mr. Nielsen can talk about it, but I want

23     to be sure that it wasn't some other document from September 1991 that

24     was entitled "Cutileiro Plan."

25             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation]

Page 4899

 1        Q.   Mr. Nielsen, let me ask you something.  Do you know that this

 2     plan of the European Union about the new constitutional arrangements for

 3     Bosnia-Herzegovina started in September 1991 under Lord Carrington and

 4     Mr. Cutileiro?  Yes or no?

 5        A.   No, I'm not exactly familiar with when it started.

 6        Q.   Okay.  This document that you see now is a document that is

 7     called "Statement on Principles for New Constitutional Arrangements for

 8     Bosnia and Herzegovina."  It is dated the 22nd of February, 1992.

 9             Have you seen this document before?

10        A.   Yes, sir, and I comment on it in direct examination, I believe.

11        Q.   I don't think it was this document.  I'll show you the document

12     that you commented on somewhat later.  This document is dated the 22nd of

13     February.  I think that your comments had to do with the document dated

14     the 18th of March, if I remember correctly.

15        A.   Yes, I think you're correct.

16        Q.   The document dated the 22nd of February, just like the document

17     that you commented upon dated the 18th of March, envisaged as basic

18     postulates the independence of Bosnia-Herzegovina that will consist of

19     three entities, three constituent units; right?

20        A.   That is precisely what point 1 under heading (A) states, yes.

21        Q.   Then in this document under (D), and I think the situation is the

22     same in the document that you commented upon dated the 18th of March, the

23     rights and responsibilities of each entity are listed; inter alia, it

24     says that laws will be passed and that different questions will be

25     regulated, police included; right?  Do you see that?  (D)2.  The

Page 4900

 1     one-but-last line?

 2        A.   Yes, this statement of principles does indeed contemplate that

 3     the entities, three of them, would run the police within an independent

 4     but unitary Bosnia-Herzegovina.

 5        Q.   What do you mean unitary Bosnia-Herzegovina?

 6        A.   Well, what I mean is that there continues to be a central state

 7     and a central assembly and government as is set out in the points under

 8     point (C).  That's what I mean.

 9        Q.   Let us just clarify this.  This draft statement of principles for

10     a new Bosnia and Herzegovina, et cetera, it envisages an independent

11     Bosnia and Herzegovina consisting of three entities in the form of some

12     federal state with the central government in Sarajevo and central

13     ministries in Sarajevo.  Isn't that right -- or, rather, isn't that your

14     understanding of this document?

15        A.   I think that is a quite correct understanding and is reflected in

16     the document before us, yes.

17        Q.   Thank you.  I would like to have this document admitted into

18     evidence, please, if there are no objections.

19             MR. HANNIS:  No objection.

20             JUDGE HALL:  Admitted and marked.

21             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, document 1D00-2708 shall be

22     admitted as Exhibit 1D00133.  Thank you, Your Honours.

23             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation]

24        Q.   I would like to show you document 1D01-0936 shall, please.  Tab

25     28.  I'm being told that it is the right time for the break?

Page 4901

 1             JUDGE HALL:  Yes, I was about to bring to your attention

 2     [overlapping speakers] at that point.

 3             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

 4                           [The witness stood down]

 5                           --- Recess taken at 12.05 p.m.

 6                           --- On resuming at 12.42 p.m.

 7             JUDGE HALL:  While the witness is being escorted back in, we

 8     regret any inconvenience caused to counsel and the accused by our delay

 9     in taking the bench, but we were engaged in an urgent administrative

10     matter relative to this trial.  And while I'm interrupting the

11     proceedings by way of explanation, when we resume tomorrow morning, we

12     will be sitting under the provisions of Rule 15 bis for the first session

13     and possibly the second.  There is a commitment which I made before --

14     when the time was set for the afternoon, but I fully expect to be here

15     for the third session.  It remains to be seen whether I'm here for the

16     second session.  Thank you.

17                           [The witness takes the stand]

18             MR. ZECEVIC:  May I continue, Your Honour?

19             JUDGE HALL:  Yes, Mr. Zecevic.

20             MR. ZECEVIC:  Thank you very much.

21        Q.   [Interpretation] Mr. Nielsen, just one question in relation to

22     the previous document that we introduced as 1D133.  That is the statement

23     on principles for new constitutional arrangements for Bosnia-Herzegovina.

24             It may be assumed, right, that this document was created on the

25     basis of some previously agreed views among the parties concerned; right?

Page 4902

 1        A.   I believe that it is accurate to state, although I'm not an

 2     expert on international negotiations on the status of Bosnia-Herzegovina,

 3     that this document came to exist in the context of ongoing negotiations

 4     among the parties concerned.

 5        Q.   Thank you.  Yesterday, Mr. Hannis showed you 65 ter number 26 --

 6     2767.

 7             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Could we please have that document

 8     called up.

 9        Q.   Tab 30 in your set.  It is more or less identical to the number

10     that we looked at just now; however, this one is dated the 18th of March.

11     As opposed to the previous document, on the last page, and that is page 3

12     in e-court, confirms that agreement was reached among the leaders of the

13     following parties:  SDA, SDS, and HDZ, in the fifth round of negotiations

14     on future agreements for Bosnia-Herzegovina under the auspices of the

15     peace conference of the European Community.

16             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] I do apologise.  Is there a problem

17     with the document?  We need the last page in the English version, please.

18     The third page.  I said that.  Page 3.  Yes, that's it.

19        Q.   Mr. Nielsen, do you see this?  The day before yesterday, you

20     commented upon this with Mr. Hannis, and on page 4721, you established

21     that in your view this was not an agreement but a set of principles as a

22     basis for further talks.  Do you remember having said that?

23        A.   Yes, and it clearly says in capital letters:  "This paper is the

24     basis of further negotiations."

25        Q.   At any rate, Mr. Nielsen, on page 4732, you confirm that this

Page 4903

 1     document is an agreed framework for the future arrangements in

 2     Bosnia-Herzegovina; right?

 3        A.   Yes, and I recall stating that -- that notwithstanding the

 4     representatives of the SDA, in particular Mr. Izetbegovic, later revoked

 5     his signature and agreement.

 6        Q.   Sir, if I understood you correctly, you will agree with me that

 7     the signature on this document proves that the parties are prepared to

 8     observe the provisions of that document.

 9        A.   Well, the document in front of us does not have anyone's

10     signature on it, but, that -- yes, that is what would be the case if it

11     were signed or ...

12             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mr. Zecevic, is the 18th March version just a

13     draft of the previous one we had?  No, sorry, the previous one was 22nd

14     February.  That was a draft and this is the final version, is that it?

15     Thanks.

16             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Exactly, Judge Harhoff.  This

17     document of the 18th of March was signed by the representatives of all

18     three parties in Bosnia-Herzegovina.

19        Q.   Mr. Nielsen, when it is stated in a document that these are

20     agreed facts and that the document is a basis for further negotiations,

21     you will agree with me that these further negotiations pertain to some

22     new additional questions that need to be clarified through further

23     negotiations, not these that have already been signed.  That is why this

24     is called a statement on principles; right?

25        A.   My interpretation of the words "basis of further negotiations" is

Page 4904

 1     that theoretically it is possible that such further negotiations could

 2     include both making more precise the points in this statement of

 3     principles, but also suggesting that some of them might be changed, and I

 4     would again point to the fact that Mr. Izetbegovic revoked his signature

 5     from this document.

 6        Q.   Mr. Nielsen, you have a very special characteristic.  Namely, you

 7     draw conclusions on certain legal matters, and you give explanations with

 8     regard to matters that do not belong to your field of expertise, and in

 9     other situations when questions are put to you by counsel, you say that

10     you're not a lawyer and that you cannot give your own comments; isn't

11     that right?

12             MR. HANNIS:  Your Honours, that's argumentative.

13             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] I do apologise.  I do apologise.  I

14     will withdraw that question.

15        Q.   Tell me, Mr. Nielsen, do you have an education in the field of

16     law?

17        A.   I have taken courses at Columbia University in international law,

18     but I do not hold a law degree, no.

19        Q.   Was that public international law or private, or was it criminal

20     law?  What field was it?

21        A.   I took courses in what you would call public international law

22     and specifically in the field of international criminal law and

23     international humanitarian law.

24        Q.   And on that basis you think that you have sufficient expertise to

25     be able to comment upon such agreements?  Yes or no?

Page 4905

 1             MR. HANNIS:  Objection.  That's argumentative as well.

 2             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation]

 3        Q.   Do you think, Mr. Nielsen, that on the basis of that course of

 4     yours at the University of Columbia you have sufficient knowledge to

 5     comment upon such agreements like the statement --

 6             JUDGE HALL:  I thought, Mr. Zecevic, that you had taken

 7     Mr. Hannis's hint.

 8             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Obviously I hadn't.  I thought that

 9     this question was perfectly proper, Your Honour.  I was asking the

10     witness on which basis or, rather, whether he believes that on the basis

11     of that course in international public law and international humanitarian

12     law he is in a position to comment on these agreements.

13             JUDGE HALL:  Well, is that a question that the witness can

14     seriously be expected to answer?  He has been tendered as an expert

15     witness by the Prosecution.  The Chamber has accepted him as an expert

16     witness.  Now, in terms of his professional training and experience, you

17     can test him on that, but a question that begins with "Do you think,"

18     strikes me as one that is bound to fail.

19             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] I understand, Your Honour.

20        Q.   Tell me, sir, do you know what the Brussels agreement pertains to

21     in the context of this statement on principles of the future arrangements

22     for Bosnia-Herzegovina?

23        A.   I'm aware that a further round of talks, I believe it was called

24     the sixth round of talks, took place in Brussels at the end of March

25     1992, as far as I recall, and I can only speculate that it -- that the

Page 4906

 1     "Brussels agreement" might refer to that.

 2        Q.   Are you familiar with the term "the Sarajevo agreement" in that

 3     context?

 4        A.   Yes, I am familiar with that term, and I believe that, if I'm not

 5     mistaken that, might well have been a local, that is to say Bosnian, term

 6     that referred to the same sixth round of negotiations, but that's again

 7     based on my general knowledge of the situation at that time.

 8             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I would like to tender

 9     this document.  The day before yesterday it was used by Mr. Hannis,

10     65 ter 2767.  I don't know.  I don't know.  I mean, I think that

11     Mr. Hannis did not tender it.  I don't know whether he intended to tender

12     it along with this expert report, so I'm just seeking clarification

13     before I tender it myself.

14             MR. HANNIS:  No, it's not a document listed in his expert report,

15     and I didn't tender it yesterday.  I have no objection to it being

16     admitted.

17             JUDGE HALL:  Admitted and marked.

18             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, 65 ter 02767 shall be admitted as

19     Exhibit 1D134.  Thank you, Your Honours.

20             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation]

21        Q.   Mr. Nielsen, in response to Mr. Hannis's question, you spoke

22     about 65 ter document 38.  Those are minutes from the meeting held in

23     Banja Luka on the 11th of February, 1992.  In your binder it is document

24     38.  Sorry, 45.  The page is 4725.

25             If I may say so, you said in rather picturesque terms that this

Page 4907

 1     meeting is actually a birth certificate for the Serbian MUP.  Do you

 2     remember saying that?

 3        A.   I believe you are incorrect in saying that, because the document

 4     that I referred to as the birth certificate for the Serbian MUP was the

 5     dispatch sent by Momcilo Mandic on 31st of March, 1992, and not the 11

 6     February meeting.

 7        Q.   Thank you for that clarification.  Mr. Nielsen, this document

 8     dated the 11th of February, 1992, from Banja Luka is a document where

 9     certain Serbian staff members of the MUP of Bosnia-Herzegovina held a

10     meeting; right?  Just Serb personnel.

11        A.   Correct.

12        Q.   I'm sure that you have looked at this document more than once.

13     At least that's how I understood you.  And you would agree with me that

14     it mostly consists from remarks and the views of those present from the

15     Bosnia and Herzegovina MUP about the facts that we talked about earlier,

16     you and I here during the session today in the courtroom; isn't that

17     correct?

18        A.   Yes.

19        Q.   These same problems that we dealt with in detail this morning

20     were also troubling the persons attending this meeting.  What I'm

21     particularly interested in, and you did go through the document with

22     Mr. Hannis and you commented on certain parts of it, what I'm interested

23     in is page 2.  I think it's the same page in the Serbian and the English.

24             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] In the e-court it's page 2, second

25     paragraph from the top.

Page 4908

 1             I'm sorry.  I apologise.  It seems to me that it's actually on

 2     page 1 in the English version, this comment from Mico Stanisic's speech.

 3        Q.   While we're waiting for the document to appear - it's one

 4     paragraph but last - in -- what Mico Stanisic is noted to have said, and

 5     it begins:

 6              "A list of minimal outstanding demands should be assembled at

 7     this meeting and submitted to Minister Alija Delimustafic, with a

 8     reasonable deadline for their resolution."

 9             Mr. Nielsen do you considering that this meeting in Banja Luka on

10     the 11th of February, between these members of the Bosnia-Herzegovina MUP

11     was held in secret or not?

12        A.   I do not know.

13        Q.   In view of what Mr. Mico Stanisic says here that a list of

14     outstanding demands should be assembled at this meeting and submitted to

15     Minister Alija Delimustafic, that would indicate that there is no

16     intention to keep this meeting secret; is that right?

17        A.   Not necessarily.  You and I could meet secretly and agree to

18     provide information to a third party.  So I don't think the fact that

19     they agreed -- that they agreed to provide information to Delimustafic

20     from the point of pure logic tells us whether it was a confidential or

21     covert meeting or not.  I have no view on whether it was.

22        Q.   In the documents that you looked through while you were preparing

23     your report, did you establish that the Bosnia and Herzegovina MUP, or at

24     least the leadership of the Bosnia-Herzegovina MUP, were familiar or

25     informed about the formation of the MUP of Republika Srpska?

Page 4909

 1        A.   I think there are some indications in the documentation that I

 2     have reviewed that they were aware that Serbian personnel in SRBiH MUP

 3     were organising themselves.  I note that many of those documents that

 4     refer to such activity refer to such activity as troubling and possibly

 5     illegal, but I do think that there was an awareness within SRBiH MUP that

 6     such activity was ongoing.

 7        Q.   Sir, I think that at several points in your report you mention

 8     the media, which referred to the establishment of the MUP of Republika

 9     Srpska; isn't that right?

10        A.   There were reports in the media.  I don't know which point in

11     time you're precisely referring to, but there were certainly rumours in

12     the media prior to April 1992 that indicated that the Serbs in SRBiH MUP

13     were involved in possibly establishing their own Ministry of Internal

14     Affairs.

15        Q.   Isn't it a fact, Mr. Nielsen, that Republika Srpska was formed on

16     the 9th of January, 1992?

17        A.   That is a fact.

18        Q.   Wouldn't it be logical to expect that a republic that is

19     established would establish its own organs?

20        A.   Well, it depends what kind of republic we're talking about and

21     what the general political context is.

22        Q.   Mr. Nielsen, I mean, please, if a republic is formed regardless

23     of the context or regardless of the kind of republic that is involved, it

24     still has to have its organs, does it not?

25        A.   If -- if the people who are doing that are to achieve their

Page 4910

 1     ambitions, yes, it does.

 2        Q.   I mean if the representatives of a people decide to create a

 3     state and adopt such a decision at the Assembly, then it can be assumed,

 4     surely, that such a state would need to function, too, would it not?

 5        A.   Yes, within the context of their own plans it indeed does.

 6        Q.   I think that -- I think -- I think that there is no need to put

 7     the question to you anymore.  This is so evident.  Just one more question

 8     about this document.

 9             On page 8 of the Serbian version, and I think it's on page 7 of

10     the English version, last item numbered 19.  65 -- I apologise.

11             Item 19 which states:

12             "Ensure maximum media coverage of our work and the decisions made

13     about the Serbian MUP."

14             Do you see that?  This is one of the conclusions.

15        A.   Yes, I agree with you.

16        Q.   You would agree with me, then, that the people who attended this

17     meeting wanted to inform the public information media about the formation

18     of this republic for the purposes of having this state that was created

19     on the 9th of January, 1992, to function.

20             THE INTERPRETER:  Could the counsel please repeat his last

21     sentence.  Thank you.

22             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mr. Zecevic, the -- the interpreters didn't catch

23     your last sentence, so if you would be good enough to repeat it.

24             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] I would like to tender this

25     document.  It's document 65 ter 38.  Thank you.

Page 4911

 1             MR. HANNIS:  No objection.

 2             JUDGE HALL:  Admitted and marked.

 3             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, document 65 ter 38 shall be given

 4     Exhibit 1D135.  Thank you.

 5             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] On page 64, line 22, I did not see

 6     the witness's answer in the transcript.

 7        Q.   Mr. Nielsen, I asked you if you would agree with me that the

 8     people who attended this meeting wanted to inform the public via the

 9     media about the forming of this ministry in the republic precisely

10     because they wanted to show that the state that was created on the 9th of

11     January, 1992, was functioning, and your answer that you gave was not

12     recorded in the transcript.  Could you please repeat it now?

13        A.   I agree with you.

14        Q.   Thank you very much.  Mr. Nielsen, now we're coming to that

15     document.  This is a dispatch signed by assistant minister of the

16     interior Mr. Momcilo Mandic on the 31st of March, 1992, and it's number

17     022482.  And it was sent to practically all the addresses of the Bosnia

18     and Herzegovina MUP; isn't that right?  Do you recall this document?

19             This is P353, and in your tab it is document -- just a moment,

20     please.  Forty-eight.  P353, 65 ter 62.

21             You commented on this document with Mr. Hannis the day before;

22     isn't that correct?

23        A.   Correct.

24        Q.   I wanted to ask you to look at the upper left-hand corner where

25     you can see the date.  It's a telefax marking where the date is the 31st

Page 4912

 1     of March, 1992.  And the time is 13.58 hours.  There is the number -- the

 2     telephone number 071 276865.  It says MUP, Sarajevo, Bosnia and

 3     Herzegovina, and then it was probably sent to radio Sarajevo.  Do you see

 4     that?

 5        A.   Yes, and I agree with your reading of the document on that point.

 6             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Could you please now show the

 7     witness document 65 ter 1301.

 8        Q.   Sir, that is -- this is a dispatch signed by the minister of the

 9     interior, Alija Delimustafic, in reaction to the previous document, P353,

10     which was signed by his assistant, Mr. Momcilo Mandic.  Do you see this

11     document, Mr. Nielsen?

12        A.   I don't appear to have that reaction dispatch.  I'm familiar with

13     it, but I don't appear to have it in the binder here in front of me.  At

14     least if it's if chronological order.

15        Q.   I'm not able to find it in the text, but in any case, you have it

16     just like everybody else, on your monitor.  I'm sure that you have looked

17     at this document before.

18        A.   The dispatch on the monitor is still the one of Momcilo Mandic

19     and not the one of Alija Delimustafic.  Oh, now I see it.  Yes, sir.  I

20     agree, yes.  Yeah.

21        Q.   Sir, this is a document in which Alija Delimustafic speaks about

22     the destructive effect of the dispatch on the unity of the MUP, the

23     dispatch written by Momcilo Mandic, and then he says that he is not in a

24     position to reflect on the regulations that it refers to because they are

25     not known to the professional services or by the leading staff whose name

Page 4913

 1     is being mentioned in the dispatch, and then he asks that it should not

 2     be permitted that anybody splinters off from the rest of their MUP

 3     colleagues and so on and so forth.  This is on page 2 in the English.

 4        A.   Yes, sir, I see that.

 5        Q.   This part that I drew your attention to begins with -- begins,

 6     actually, in the second paragraph of this document for the purposes of

 7     the English translation.

 8             Sir, on the first page of the document, and we see that in the

 9     B/C/S version, but if -- can we look at it in the English as well, you

10     can see that the date when the document was sent is also the 31st of

11     March.  The document was sent at 13.59 hours.  It also has the telefax

12     number at the top, also the mark that it was sent by the Bosnia and

13     Herzegovina Sarajevo MUP, and it can be seen that again it was sent to

14     Radio Sarajevo.

15             This means that between Momcilo Mandic's dispatch, which is

16     P353 - and he is the assistant minister of the interior - and the

17     reaction of the minister of the interior, Mr. Alija Delimustafic, there

18     is only a one-minute difference in the -- between the time that the first

19     and the second one was sent.  Can we agree on that on the basis of

20     looking at these two documents?

21        A.   I agree that there was a one-minute difference between the time

22     when the first and second was sent to Radio Sarajevo, but I do not

23     necessarily agree that there was a one-minute difference between the time

24     when Mandic wrote his dispatch and Delimustafic wrote his dispatch.

25        Q.   I agree with you.  This is a fair conclusion.  Keeping in mind

Page 4914

 1     what we said a little bit earlier about the conclusions of the 11th of

 2     February and the obvious need, I would say, for this dispatch by

 3     Momcilo Mandic to be published as early as possible, you could assume

 4     that Momcilo Mandic's intention was, first of all, to inform the public

 5     and the media about his dispatch, wouldn't you say?

 6        A.   I suggest in my report that there are some very good reasons why

 7     Mr. Mandic was in a hurry to issue this dispatch on that given day.  I

 8     deal with that at length.  I agree that, certainly, he is trying to

 9     inform the public about it, and certainly Delimustafic is trying to do

10     the same about his contrary opinion.

11        Q.   Thank you.

12             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Can we have this 65 ter document

13     1301 tendered if there are no objections from Mr. Hannis.

14             MR. HANNIS:  No objections.

15             JUDGE HALL:  Admitted and marked.

16             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, 65 ter 01301, shall be admitted as

17     1D136.  Thank you, Your Honours.

18             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] For the transcript, this is

19     document 65 ter 1301.

20        Q.   Mr. Nielsen, from the document that we have just looked at, one

21     could conclude that Mr. Alija Delimustafic was opposed and disagreed with

22     the division of the MUP from the dispatch of Mr. Momcilo Mandic.

23        A.   I agree with you.

24        Q.   One would expect from the minister to represent the position of

25     the ministry, wouldn't one?

Page 4915

 1        A.   Yes, and of the government of which he was a member.

 2        Q.   While you were preparing for the report and reviewing the

 3     documents, did you perhaps have a chance to look at any document on the

 4     basis of which you could conclude that the division of the MUP and the

 5     dispatch by Momcilo Mandic of March 31st, 1991, was completely in keeping

 6     with the position of the ministry of Bosnia and Herzegovina?

 7        A.   No, I have not a chance -- had a chance to look at any such

 8     document on the basis of which I could reach that conclusion.

 9             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Could we please show the witness

10     1D78 [as interpreted].

11             THE REGISTRAR:  Excuse me, Counsel.  I do not have this document

12     in e-court.  Can I have the 65 ter number, please?  Thank you.

13             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] I am being warned that there is a

14     mistake of some sort in the e-court, and so now we are going to call the

15     document by its 65 ter number, 2768.  And even though it does say in the

16     transcript that it was admitted as one document, 1D178, we will not waste

17     time on that now.

18        Q.   Sir --

19             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, I have this document in e-court as

20     P00411.32.

21             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] In any case, if I understand

22     correctly, the document is in e-court and we will clarify this later.

23        Q.   Mr. Nielsen, the document's letterhead says "The Ministry of the

24     Interior of the Socialist Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina."  The date

25     is the 1st of April, 1992.  It's addressed to the ministers of the

Page 4916

 1     interior, Mico Stanisic and Alija Delimustafic, the MUP administrations

 2     at the headquarters, and then it is also sent to all the other addresses

 3     at the -- of the Ministry of the Interior of Bosnia and Herzegovina.  A

 4     copy was also sent to the federal SUP in Belgrade.  Do you see that?

 5        A.   Yes, and I would point out that I cite a version of this document

 6     in my report.

 7        Q.   You mean the document that was sent to all the public security

 8     stations by one of the CSBs.  Is that what you're thinking of?

 9        A.   Yes.  If memory serves, this dispatch was forwarded to other

10     subordinate units within MUP.

11        Q.   I will show you that.  This is a document which states in a:

12             "The reorganisation of the organs for internal affairs and their

13     respective security services already taken place further to the Sarajevo

14     agreement on possible future organisation of Bosnia-Herzegovina, which

15     was endorsed in general terms at the Brussels talks yesterday.  In that

16     respect, as you have already been advised, and in accordance with the

17     constitution of the republic," and so on.

18             And then it says -- we're talking about paragraph 2 now on the

19     same page:

20             "The following members of the current advisory board of the MUP

21     discuss this matter on the 1st of April, 1992:  Vitomir Zepinic, deputy

22     minister; Branko Kvesic, under-secretary for the state security service."

23     We saw that he was an HDZ candidate.  "Jusuf Pusina, assistant minister

24     for police."  I hope that you would agree with me that he's a cadre of

25     the SDA.  Bruno Stojic.  We saw that he was assistant minister for

Page 4917

 1     financial matters but was in the HDZ.  Momcilo Mandic, assistant minister

 2     for crime prevention; Akif Sabic, assistant minister also; and Avdo

 3     Hebib, who is ministerial advisor for internal affairs; and Mico

 4     Stanisic, who is the minister the interior of the republic of the Serbian

 5     nation of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

 6             As you can see, the dispatch by Momcilo Mandic, followed by the

 7     dispatch by Alija Delimustafic, were sent one after the other at an

 8     interval of a minute to all of these addresses.

 9             On the 1st of April, the MUP collegium had a meeting in which it

10     discussed this matter.  Would you agree with me?

11        A.   Do I agree with you that they had a meeting in which they

12     discussed this matter?  Is that the question?

13        Q.   Yes.

14        A.   I agree that on the basis of this document it appears that they

15     had a meeting concerning the issues that are discussed in this dispatch.

16     I think it's important to note that Mr. Delimustafic is notable by his

17     absence at this meeting.

18        Q.   I agree that Minister Delimustafic did not attend the meeting,

19     but all his assistant ministers were there; right?  Or at least a vast

20     majority of them.

21        A.   Certainly a lot of them were present, yes.

22        Q.   On page 2 it says, on page 2 of the English text, and it's all

23     one page in the Serbian text, it says that Mico Stanisic familiarised the

24     collegium with some aspects of the functioning of the security

25     [indiscernible] specifying the reasons why the existing MUP did not

Page 4918

 1     function properly and so on and so forth.  Then he says the professional

 2     collegium, realistically reviewing the situation and wanting to avoid

 3     conditions for possible further deterioration of the otherwise complex

 4     situation, took the view that without any excesses the MUP should be

 5     transformed peacefully and without any excesses - both in headquarters

 6     and the field - the facilities and equipment in the SJB and SDB in the

 7     territory of the republic must not be ceased by any single nation

 8     unilaterally, that the employees must not unilaterally be dismissed only

 9     because their national and political affiliations, and that employees are

10     not to be coerced, et cetera.

11             Also, due attention has been paid to the functioning of the

12     financing of the newly established Ministry of the Interior of the

13     republic of the Serb Nation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, which shall not be

14     below the existing level.  Some personnel matters have been considered as

15     well.

16             Mr. Nielsen, this document shows that the professional collegium

17     of the minister knew and realised that the MUP of the Bosnia and

18     Herzegovina was being subdivided into two, and in the last subparagraph

19     that I referred to they were even looking at the possibilities for

20     financing the MUP of the Republika Srpska.  And it also says here that it

21     will not be below the existing level.  That's the position of the

22     collegium; right?  Do you agree with me?

23        A.   I agree with you that that is to a large extent what this

24     document says.  I think it's again worth noting that this steering

25     council or collegium of the ministry is meeting in the absence of the

Page 4919

 1     minister himself, and I think it's also significant to note that per the

 2     ongoing negotiations that we were discussing earlier today, the very

 3     first sentence refers to the possible future state organisation of Bosnia

 4     and Herzegovina, that it's apparently contingent upon further

 5     negotiations.

 6        Q.   Mr. Nielsen, we discussed these negotiations, so we're not going

 7     to go back to that.  I asked you specifically whether you agree with me

 8     that this is what is being stated in this document.  Yes or no?

 9             MR. HANNIS:  Your Honour, the document speaks for itself.

10             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Well, I do agree, but that is why I

11     intend to put a question to the witness once he gives me an answer to

12     this question.

13             JUDGE HALL:  Well, can't you just proceed to put your question

14     as -- I mean, we can all read what the document says.  Put the question.

15             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation]

16        Q.   Sir, did you have this document in your possession when you were

17     writing this report?

18        A.   Yes, and as I note, I cite a version of it in my report, the one

19     that was forwarded, which is a verbatim forwarding of this dispatch.

20        Q.   Wait a minute.  You are trying to tell me that you had the

21     original in mind but you did not cite it in your report, if I understand

22     you correctly?  You refer to a copy of that decision that one of the CSBs

23     forwarded further in the field.  Is that what you're trying to say?

24        A.   What I am trying to say is that I cited another original document

25     which quotes, in full, this particular document because reflecting, as

Page 4920

 1     you yourself put it, the final sentence of this document, the point was

 2     to acquaint all members of MUP, both in the field and in the ministry

 3     itself, with the document.

 4        Q.   What document do you mean, Mr. Nielsen?  Could you give me a

 5     reference?  The one that you're citing in your report, that is.

 6        A.   Well, I have to say that it's going to be very difficult for me

 7     to find it immediately, but I can certainly -- I'm happy to inform you

 8     first thing in the morning.

 9        Q.   Yes, precisely.  That's what I wanted to suggest since we have

10     two or three minutes left before we conclude.

11             Let me ask you one more thing.  So we'll continue discussing this

12     document.  This document was exhibited as a Defence document, but the

13     65 ter -- but the OTP brought it up at the 65 ter meeting as well.  You

14     said you got documentation concerning the Cutileiro Plan from the OTP.

15     What about this document?  It was not -- it was not made available to

16     you?  You did not discuss it during your preparations?  Yes or no?

17        A.   I became aware of this document because it's cited in my esteemed

18     colleague Bajagic's report, and I noted that I was citing a different

19     version of the same document or a very, very similar document with the

20     same content in my own report.

21        Q.   I'm not sure I understand what you mean.  What report of

22     Mr. Bajagic you're referring to?

23        A.   I'm referring to his expert report in the Borovcanin case with

24     which I'm familiar.  He cites it in there.

25        Q.   Tell me, this document, in essence, does it not confirm my

Page 4921

 1     thesis, the one that I've been putting to you here; namely, that the

 2     division of the MUP of Bosnia-Herzegovina is the result of a trilateral

 3     agreement reached among the representatives of the SDA, the SDS, and the

 4     HDZ -- or, rather, the Muslim, Croat, and Serb peoples in

 5     Bosnia-Herzegovina?

 6        A.   If one only reads this document in isolation, then I can see how

 7     you would reach that conclusion.  However, taking all the documents which

 8     I have been able to review in toto, I do not concur with your conclusion.

 9        Q.   Very well.

10             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I believe that this

11     would be a good moment to break off, and then we can continue with

12     Mr. Nielsen tomorrow.

13             Thank you, Mr. Nielsen.

14             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you, Mr. Zecevic, and -- and Dr. Nielsen, of

15     course I remind you that you're still on your oath, and the usual --

16     sorry, the usually cautions apply, of course.

17             THE WITNESS:  Thank you, Your Honour.

18             JUDGE HALL:  So you're now released -- you're now excused, sorry.

19                           [The witness stands down]

20             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mr. Zecevic, Registrar informs us that you've

21     used three hours and five minutes of your time, so ...

22             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.  We are

23     trying to do our best in order to finish as early as possible.  However,

24     we haven't been doing brilliantly regrettably.  Thank you.

25             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Just for the Registrar, the Registrar now informs

Page 4922

 1     us that there was a mistake in the information that I just gave you.  In

 2     fact, you have used five hours and ten minutes, I understand.  So you've

 3     got about four hours left.

 4             MR. ZECEVIC:  Again, Your Honours, as I said, we are trying our

 5     best, but we might be required to ask for some, with the -- with the --

 6     to some more time to deal with this witness.  As you can see, it's

 7     fairly -- fairly important to -- with the matters that we deal with him.

 8     We would appreciate that from the Trial Chamber.

 9             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Thanks.  I just wanted to give you a head's up as

10     to how far along --

11             MR. ZECEVIC:  Thank you very much.  I appreciate that very much,

12     Your Honours.

13             MR. HANNIS:  I understand, and I'll try to limit my objections

14     and keep them short in hopes that we can finish at least the

15     cross-examination by the Stanisic Defence team before the winter recess.

16     Thank you.

17             JUDGE HALL:  Tomorrow, 9.00, in this Chamber.

18                           --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.45 p.m.,

19                           to be reconvened on Thursday, the 17th day

20                           of December, 2009, at 9.00 a.m.