1 Wednesday, 24 February 2010
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.07 a.m.
5 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. This is the case
6 IT-08-91-T. The Prosecutor versus Mico Stanisic and Stojan Zupljanin.
7 JUDGE HALL
8 Good morning to everyone. May we have the appearances for today,
10 MS. KORNER: Good morning, Your Honours. Joanna Korner assisted
11 by Jasmina Bosnjakovic for the Prosecution.
12 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Good morning, Your Honour.
13 Appearing for Mr. Stanisic, Slobodan Cvijetic, Eugene O'Sullivan, and
14 Tatjana Savic.
15 MR. PANTELIC: Good morning, Your Honours. For Zupljanin Defence
16 appearing, Igor Pantelic and Dragan Krgovic.
17 JUDGE HALL
18 stand by the usher, we would wish to alert the parties that, for reasons
19 which I needn't go into, when we take the adjournment today, will resume
20 at 2.15 not 10.00 tomorrow morning. Not -- 9.00 tomorrow morning, I
21 should have said. We would be swapping places with the Gotovina trial
22 which was scheduled to resume in the afternoon, and they are taking the
23 morning slot.
24 [The witness takes the stand]
25 JUDGE HALL
1 Mr. Cvijetic to continue -- to resume his cross-examination, I remind you
2 you are still on your oath.
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
4 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] May I begin, Your Honour?
5 JUDGE HALL
6 WITNESS: DRAGO BOROVCANIN [Resumed]
7 [Witness answered through interpreter]
8 Cross-examination by Mr. Cvijetic: [Continued]
9 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Borovcanin.
10 A. Good morning to everyone.
11 Q. Before we begin, I'd like to take you back to a document that
12 Ms. Korner showed you.
13 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Could we call up 65 ter 2398.
14 Q. Mr. Borovcanin, in your binder it's tab 38. Have you got it?
15 A. Just a moment. Yes.
16 Q. Now we have to wait for the Trial Chamber to see it.
17 Yesterday you discussed the first page of this document with
18 Ms. Korner regarding the engagement of policemen from Bratunac and
19 Skelani stations in combat operations, and you dwelled on the penultimate
20 paragraph which concerns the engagement of police in the so-called
21 mopping up. Do you remember the questions the Trial Chamber and the
22 Prosecutor asked you about that?
23 A. Yes, I do.
24 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Can we now move to page 3 in B/C/S
25 and Tatjana will maybe help us find the reference in English. It's
1 page 3 in English too.
2 Q. There's this paragraph which begins with the words "at the
3 station of Skelani a special unit was formed under the command of
4 Dusko Mandic." So when you arrived at Skelani, you found one of those
5 ad hoc "special units" including about 20 personnel, and you said, in
6 fact, the document says the unit was engaged under the local military
7 command in mopping up.
8 You will agree that this sentence clarifies what you said
9 yesterday, even in these operations, this unit was resubordinated to the
10 military command and followed their orders?
11 A. Yes, the military were always on the ground, and it was not
12 possible to work in circumvention of the military command.
13 Q. This was a case of mopping up the remaining enemy forces?
14 A. That's what I said yesterday.
15 Q. And in the next paragraph, you as an inspector point out that
16 this special unit has no legal grounds for its existence, and in keeping
17 with the minister's orders, it has to be disbanded and placed at the
18 disposal of the Army of Republika Srpska, and part of its men should be
19 used to reinforce that police detachment pursuant to the law?
20 A. That's correct.
21 Q. What struck me in this report is on the previous page, page 2.
22 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] And it's page 22 in English.
23 Q. This is the large paragraph which begins with the words, "from
24 the moment it was established, the police station was engulfed in a
25 series of problems." And you will notice your own comment in that
1 paragraph. You say:
2 "Pursuant to a decision of the minister of the interior,
3 Bogdan Stevanovic was appointed commanding officer, and Milos Vasiljevic
4 was appointed his deputy. At the same time, local municipal bodies,
5 without the approval of the ministry, appointed Slavoljub Simic commander
6 and Ostoja Bozic his deputy."
7 Mr. Borovcanin, what was going on? The minister appointed the
8 commander and deputy and the local authorities simultaneously appointed
9 two of their men to the same posts. How did you resolve this problem
11 A. Well, this duality could not last on the ground, and if we had
12 left things as they were and left the local appointees in their place,
13 then the ministry would have lost its authority. For that reason, I
14 insisted during my visit that the minister's orders be followed and a
15 discussion was held with these men who were appointed by the local
17 Q. In this case, you succeeded in handling things this way, but you
18 will agree there were other cases where the local authorities offered
19 much more resistance?
20 A. Certainly. I don't want to sound immodest, but in talking to
21 people and presenting my arguments, I succeeded in convincing people that
22 this was not a good way to work, and things were resolved that way. In
23 some other places, we were not recognised as an authority at all. They
24 understood us as something decorative, people who were just passing
25 through, and they couldn't wait to see our backs.
1 Q. I have another example for that, we'll come back to that later.
2 Here on the -- in the last paragraph we have another comment you made in
3 the paragraph that begins with the words:
4 "Of all the employees in the Skelani Public Security Station,
5 only four employees have letters of appointment from the
6 Ministry of the Interior. The rest of the employees were appointed
7 pursuant to a decision issued by the self-proclaimed commander of the
8 Territorial Defence and now the Serbian army."
9 This sort of confirms what you just said, a local commander in
10 Skelani took it upon himself to fill major posts in the Skelani Police
12 A. That's correct. On that occasion, we reviewed things and we
13 wanted to see letters of appointments, and we found out that only four
14 policemen had appropriate decisions, formal decisions. And the late
15 Marko Milanovic issued decisions for the rest of the personnel.
16 Q. The reason I wanted to deal with this issue is that it concerns
17 the mechanism for enforcing the decisions of the ministry in situations
18 when the local communities appointed their own commanders and deputy
19 commanders, and that was aggravated by the fact that local authorities
20 were providing the financing. You will agree that it was difficult to
21 defend the ministry's authority in such situations?
22 A. It certainly was. In yesterday's evidence, I said, and I heard
23 that myself on my field missions, the local authorities would say, If we
24 pay for it, then we appoint these people. And they indeed did. They
25 provided the uniforms, the equipment, and everything. But that was not a
1 good way to work. That's no way to establish an institution.
2 Q. We have already said that the mechanism of enforcing decisions is
3 important, and one important factor therein is financing. The financing
4 has to come from the budget through the ministry and then you have a
5 better discipline?
6 A. Yes, that's the main principle in the functioning of any
7 government in the world, it has to be financed from the centre.
8 Q. Now, in keeping with our general discussion about the various
9 lines of work of the ministry and the problems to which the minister had
10 to react, I want to show you 1D99. It's your tab 11.
11 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Did I say 1D99? That's the
13 Q. Mr. Borovcanin, this document is already exhibited, so we won't
14 dwell on it long. It's an order from President Karadzic written in
15 longhand whereby he orders Minister Stanisic to assemble 60 members of
16 what he refers to as specially trained policemen and to resubordinate
17 them to the military command of the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps. These men
18 should go to the front line in Nedjarici I chose this order to put to you
19 because these policemen who left on these orders come originally from the
20 area you controlled.
21 I want to ask you if the absence of these 60 policemen affected
22 the continued ability of your police force to carry out their regular
23 police work?
24 A. I'm sorry, I'm looking at the typing on the screen in order not
25 to start my answer too early. Certainly their absence was very strongly
1 felt. It's not a small number of people. And now you reminded me of
2 something else. Whenever men were absent on the front line, that would
3 give a lot of leeway to the criminals, the local criminals, to increase
4 their activities.
5 Q. Thank you. You gave me a cue for my next document.
6 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] May I call for 1D100.
7 Q. It's your tab 12. Have you found it?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. What you just said to the Trial Chamber is almost the same thing
10 that Mr. Stanisic said addressing directly the Presidency. He says, We
11 have executed your order and provided 60 employees of the MUP. And in
12 the next paragraph he says, These men are not special policemen; they
13 were not trained for special operations. And then read the last
14 paragraph. He proposes that they be replaced by regular army troops so
15 that they could continue with their regular police work. And in
16 paragraph 2 he says why. The roads Hresa, Pale, Vogosca, and other roads
17 are no longer covered but the police.
18 A. I can only confirm. These roads had become very unsafe and very
19 risky for regular passengers, for the police, for army troops, for
20 anyone, because they were constantly under sniper fire.
21 Q. I have shown these two documents just to corroborate what you
22 said, namely, that the minister pursued these problems and tried to
23 resolve them. Now, I'll show you 65 ter 261. It's a document that we
24 have not exhibited so far. It's your tab 13.
25 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Sorry, it has been exhibited, and
1 it's 1D49. That's it.
2 Q. Have you looked through it? You see in the first paragraph the
3 minister orders that all active-duty police officers be withdrawn from
4 the front line while the reserve policemen be placed on war-time
5 assignments at the disposal of the Army of Republika Srpska. We have a
6 different term here, not resubordination. They are to be taken off the
7 police roster and placed at the disposal of the army. So, in
8 October 1992, the minister suggests a final solution to this problem. In
9 paragraph 2, he even suggests a ratio in which the forces should remain.
10 He says, The rest of the reserve police force are to be made available
11 for war-time assignment to the Army of Republika Srpska. And the tone is
12 that of an ultimatum and even angry, I would say. And he says to all the
13 heads of the centres, You must inform all military commands that it is
14 not your duty to send policemen to the front line.
15 Does this sound to you as if Minister Stanisic had finally lost
16 his patience and he is offering reserve policemen to the army, while
17 insisting that the active-duty policemen remain on the police force?
18 Have you heard about the position he had taken in your work?
19 A. Certainly I am aware of this. But I have to add how this
20 dispatch came to be sent. In the centre where I worked, we heard a lot
21 of criticism from the Army of Republika Srpska over what they thought was
22 insufficient police engagement on front lines, so this antagonism was
23 something continuous. On the other hand, we were criticised by the local
24 authorities: Why are you not doing more to suppress crime? So we were
25 under fire from both sides. And that's why I believe the minister made
1 this rather dramatic move.
2 I mentioned this yesterday, talking about the ratio between the
3 active-duty and reserve personnel. Before the war, it was clear 1:3 or
4 1:5 in certain stations, and the minister here decided that it should be
5 1:2, not less.
6 Q. So for each active-duty policemen, for each regular policemen,
7 two reserve policemen would go or five if they were already there?
8 A. It depended on the place, but not less than 1:2 was to be the
10 Q. I'm coming to my next topic. We'll see how the minister dealt
11 with other problems. We'll no longer deal with the engagement of police
12 in military operations.
13 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Let's see 1D58.
14 JUDGE DELVOIE: If I may, I have a question in the second point
15 in this document. It is said that this is in regard to the newly
16 suggested systematisation. This is the second time I hear that term and
17 I don't know what it means. Could the witness explain what is the
18 systematisation about?
19 THE WITNESS: [No interpretation]
20 JUDGE HARHOFF: There was no interpretation, sir. Could you
21 please repeat your answer.
22 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation]
23 Q. Could you please repeat.
24 A. Yes. Every institution including the Ministry of the Interior
25 had rules on internal organisation and the systematisation of posts
1 containing job descriptions. And based on that, manpower levels were
2 regulated. There were also rules as to what the proportion should be in
3 relation to active-duty policemen. And that's probably what the ministry
4 was referring to when he said it should be 1:2 at the most.
5 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, do you need any
6 further clarification?
7 Okay. 1D58, we'll look at that now.
8 Q. It's 14 in your binder.
9 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
11 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation]
12 Q. It's an order issued by the minister, and yesterday we discussed
13 removing from the police persons who were involved in criminal
14 proceedings or had committed a crime. So this is an order which the
15 minister kept repeating, and he kept insisting on it at every collegium
16 meeting; is that correct?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. This is the original text. It was later copied and retyped. So,
19 as a professional, will you tell me is it completely clear to you?
20 A. There's no doubt about it; it's completely clear.
21 Q. Then please confirm whether my interpretation is correct or not.
22 Policemen, while they are authorised officials and wearing uniforms, are
23 not military conscripts; is that correct?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. However, if their employment in the police force ends for
1 whatever reason and if they are of the appropriate age, that same moment
2 they become liable to military service, and they have to report to the
3 proper authorities at the municipality for defence; is that correct?
4 A. Yes, that's what the Law on All People's Defence said.
5 Q. The Ministry of the Interior was duty-bound, when terminating the
6 employment of a police officer, to immediately deliver his personnel file
7 to the military authority so that he would be given his war task?
8 A. Yes, that's correct. His file had to be passed on to the
9 military post or the military command.
10 Q. All right. However, that disciplinary responsibility or criminal
11 responsibility had nothing do with the fact that they were becoming
12 liable for military service; the judicial proceedings, if any, that had
13 been instituted would continue; is that correct?
14 A. Yes, that's correct. If a crime had been committed,
15 automatically a policeman would be suspended. His official ID and his
16 weapons would be confiscated, especially if the crime was serious,
17 something like murder or serious theft. That would be one line of
18 action; disciplinary proceedings.
19 Secondly, reports would be filed, criminal reports, with the
20 court that had jurisdiction. So that would be done if he had committed a
21 crime when not be resubordinated to the military. However, if he had
22 committed a crime while he was resubordinated to the military, that would
23 be dealt with by military security. So there was no doubt about that.
24 But disciplinary proceedings in the police station would go ahead anyway,
25 and this could not be prejudged. We would have to wait for the end of
1 the proceedings in order to determine whether he could continue to be a
2 policeman or not. So as lawyers, you will understand that no ad hoc
3 decisions could be made but we had to wait for the proceedings to be
5 Q. Yes, I just wanted us to discuss in principle the fact that
6 putting someone at the disposal of the military authorities had no
7 influence on either disciplinary or criminal proceedings against a
8 person; is that correct?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. And we will demonstrate that using a practical example.
11 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Could we now have 1D176, please.
12 Q. It's number 15 in your binder, Mr. Borovcanin.
13 This is one of a series of orders issued after a meeting in
14 Belgrade, and it's quite complex because in this order, the minister
15 deals with almost all of the problems you and I discussed yesterday in
16 the form of an order.
17 In item 1, he was establishing the optimum number of members of
18 security services, and we've already spoken about that. In item 2, he
19 repeats the order we have just commented on and which you said he
20 repeated over and over again. In item 3, he orders that any surplus of
21 available individuals should be placed at the disposal of the
22 Army of the Republika Srpska. In number 4, all special units formed
23 during the war in areas of Security Services Centres and so on are to be
24 immediately disbanded. And this is the order you carried out on the
1 And the minister says that the detachment, a real special
2 detachment should be set up and that anyone who is interested could apply
3 for it.
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Further, in item 5, he says that this detachment should have its
6 forward posts. And then at number 7 on the next page --
7 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Could we move on to the next page.
8 Q. He deals with eliminating paramilitary formations. Let's just
9 wait for the second page to come up. Yes. Paramilitary formations. In
10 item 8, he orders strict compliance with the law and legality in the work
11 of the ministry. In item 9, he deals with the duty to inform the
12 ministry of the events, and so on and so forth.
13 Later on, we will see some exhibits that will show what the
14 response to these orders was on the ground, but the reason I'm showing
15 this document is, you know about this order, about disbanding special
16 units, you knew about it when you went to Milici and other places, is
17 that correct?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. So you knew about this order?
20 A. Yes, of course. As soon as we received this order, we started
21 implementing it.
22 Q. I will now mention a number of orders which I will not bring up
23 on the screen because the Court has seen them more than once. Just tell
24 us whether you know about these orders. For example, 1D56 in which the
25 minister says that any unauthorised collection centres or camps should be
1 reported --
2 MS. KORNER: I'm really sorry, Mr. Cvijetic, but that won't do.
3 We'll have to see the document. We have no idea otherwise, at least I
4 have no idea, whether you are quoting accurately or what you're quoting
6 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Yes, let's have 1D56 on the
7 screen, please.
8 Q. Mr. Borovcanin, it's a short order. You can read it. So the
9 minister is drawing attention to compliance with international
10 legislation, and I think that at all these meetings you yourself insisted
11 on this, and as an experienced policeman you knew about this obligation;
12 is that correct?
13 A. Yes. It was my priority at working meetings to tell everyone
14 that whoever was imprisoned had to be urgently reported to the
15 International Committee of the Red Cross and that these people should be
16 provided with clothing, medicines, and so on. I kept parroting this at
17 whatever police station I visited.
18 Q. And in the second part, the minister deals with these so-called
19 wild or unauthorised camps and prisons and says that any such camps
20 should be reported to the ministry; is that correct? You probably knew
21 about this order?
22 A. Yes, of course I knew about it. It's so important that one can't
23 possibly forget it.
24 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] And now let's look at 1D55.
25 Q. It's number 17 in your binder, I do apologise. Open it in your
1 binder; it will be easier for you.
2 Yesterday you and I talked about these detentions, and here the
3 minister prescribes the conditions that had to be met for people to be
4 detained for up to three days; is that correct.
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. In item 2, the minister says that the security of collection
7 centres shall be the direct responsibility of the Serbian army, and if
8 they do not have enough men for these duties, he is again offering
9 members of the reserve police force to be placed at the army's disposal
10 for these tasks. So you see that there is continuity in all these
11 efforts for people to be taken from the police roster and put at the
12 disposal of the army?
13 A. Well, of course. I'm trying to understand that the army was
14 always short of men, but we were even more short of men. And the
15 minister wanted to put reserve officers at their disposal in order for us
16 to deal with this problem finally, because we had nothing to do with the
18 Q. Yesterday I read out to you some discussions from the meeting in
19 Belgrade, and Mr. Dobro Planojevic joined in the discussion as did
20 Mr. Lovro [as interpreted] Tusevljak. They spoke about documenting war
22 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Could we have 1D84 brought up on
23 the screen, please. It's number 19 in your binder.
24 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
25 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation]
1 Q. Let's just say for the benefit of the Court that Mr. Planojevic
2 signed his name as assistant minister for the prevention and detection of
3 crime. So please look at the document. And somewhere around the middle
4 he says that special attention it to be paid to uncovering perpetrators
5 of war crimes, to documenting the criminal activities, and so on and so
6 forth. You see this part?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. And towards the end he says:
9 "As you will run into numerous obstacles in combatting crime in
10 war time, and will on occasion be unable to take adequate measures, in
11 such cases, record all information in Official Notes for subsequent
12 taking of measures, that is, criminal Prosecution."
13 So let's dwell on this for a minute.
14 Regardless of the difficulties, regardless of the fact that the
15 suspect may not be available, that the accused have left the area, it was
16 your duty do everything that fell under your line of work in these
17 circumstances, and then you would wait for a situation to arise when it
18 was possible to prosecute?
19 A. Yes. There would be many cases of unknown perpetrators to begin
21 Q. Tell us what you mean.
22 A. Well, for example, it would not be possible to carry on a proper
23 on-site investigation due to combat activities, for example, but that
24 would not relieve police officers of their responsibility to carry on an
25 investigation as soon as it was possible.
1 Q. Mr. Borovcanin, yesterday I asked you whether you knew of a
2 single instance where this procedure was not carried out and where a
3 crime was not recorded.
4 A. That's right. I'm not aware of any instance where a crime was
5 not dealt with officially.
6 Q. And before I put more documents to you, I'll show you 1D63.
7 JUDGE DELVOIE: Mr. Cvijetic, can I ask the witness whose
8 assistant minister this is, this Mr. Planojevic is, is assistant to whom?
10 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] The MUP of --
11 JUDGE DELVOIE: It's signed assistant minister for prevention and
12 detection of crime. Is that the in Ministry of Interior or in the
13 Ministry of Justice?
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The Ministry of the Interior.
15 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, if I can assist, I think you'll find
16 his name on the chart. If it's not there, it should be.
17 JUDGE DELVOIE: Okay. It's Ministry of the Interior.
18 MS. KORNER: Yes.
19 JUDGE DELVOIE: Thank you.
20 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] I apologise, my microphone was not
21 switched on, but we'll clarify this.
22 I asked for document 1D63 to be brought up.
23 Q. It's number 21 in your binder, so please open it. All the
24 centres received a letter in which it says that after the meeting in
25 Belgrade of the 11th of July, acting on the conclusions reached at that
1 meeting, work should be carried out on documenting war crimes and
2 genocide. And it says here in paragraph number 2 that this refers to all
3 persons, regardless of who the perpetrators were, Muslims, Croats, Serbs,
4 or others. So crimes against anyone would have to be documented, and
5 also the victims would have to be identified and recorded. So a form was
6 sent out, it was called RZ, I think it stands for "war crime," most
7 probably, "ratni zlocin." And let me just ask you, did you have occasion
8 to see a form of this kind?
9 A. I know about it, but I didn't really fill one in myself because
10 it's the duty of the criminal service.
11 Q. But you knew about the existence of the form?
12 A. Yes, I did.
13 Q. Well, let's look at the column that says nationality or ethnicity
14 and religion, and this is an open question, so to say, any ethnicity and
15 any religion can be entered here?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. So you know of this document but you yourself did not use it in
18 your work?
19 A. Well, to avoid any dilemmas, we had collegium meetings where we
20 were all informed of all of this, but everybody then had his own line of
22 Q. Yes, we understand this, so I think we can move on.
23 Now, we have a specific instance where a lot of what we have just
24 been dealing with theoretically is involved; crime prevention, struggles
25 with the local authorities, disciplinary and criminal proceedings.
1 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] So let's have 1D98 on the screen
2 because this illustrates all of these points at the same time.
3 Q. Mr. Borovcanin, it's number 24 in your binder. You see, the
4 prime minister Mr. Djeric is sending directly to Mr. Cedo Kljajic,
5 under-secretary for public security; right?
6 A. Yes, that's what he was in 1992.
7 Q. He demands that major criminal scandals in Republika Srpska be
8 investigated, including the scandal involving the factory TAS, the
9 Sarajevo car factory in Vogosca, et cetera. You know about these?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Then we won't dwell on it. We'll just see how the minister
13 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] 1D62, please.
14 Q. Your tab 25. The government sent this out on the 25th May; and
15 on the next day, the 26th, the minister is sending a form for creating
16 statistics on crime incidents. And what we see filled in is just an
17 example how to use this form. Look at page 2 of this document.
18 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] I don't know if we have the right
19 page in English. Maybe page 3 in English.
20 Q. In item 2, in B/C/S it's Roman numerals, the minister says under
21 number 5:
22 "Describe particularly serious cases of crimes committed: Public
23 security stations of Vogosca, car theft from the TAS factory, and Ilidza
24 have a special obligation to provide these accounts."
25 Do you know that this followed precisely based on the reports
1 from your inspectors?
2 A. Of course I am aware of that. I can give you more detail if you
3 need me to.
4 Q. We'll do it by opening documents that deal with these scandals
5 and see how it was dealt with.
6 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] 65 ter 1398.
7 Q. Your tab 26. Let me just see who authored this. It's your
8 centre, and the inspectors from your centre sent this report both to the
9 head of the centre and the minister. It's a progress report on the
10 execution of the minister's document orders.
11 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Can we see the last page in both
13 Q. [No interpretation]
14 A. [No interpretation]
15 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter apologises. The microphone wasn't
17 It says, in addition, Borislav Maksimovic, he, at that time, was
18 chief of the public security station of Vogosca.
19 The answer is, Yes.
20 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation]
21 Q. On the last page, the chief of the public security station
22 Vogosca says that almost every one of his police officers had stolen a
23 Golf, a Volkswagon Golf vehicle, which is obvious; but they would return
24 them if anyone ever asked them to do so. And the reason why I'm showing
25 you this document is, it says here:
1 The opinion prevails among the police officers, including this
2 chief, that the staffing policies in that security station can only be
3 laid down by the SJB chief and his own personnel, and no one from the MUP
4 or the municipality may install people in his service. In addition, it
5 was said at the meeting that we were now unwanted and unneeded and should
6 have come before. And so we returned on the 12th of July, 1992.
7 This brings us back to the problems with local authorities and
8 people who were appointed by the local authorities; is that right?
9 A. That's right. That's a problem that was very pronounced in
10 Vogosca, more, perhaps, than in other stations. And Zvornik also had
11 very grave problems of this nature.
12 Q. We'll follow that through the documents to see how this
13 settlement of accounts between the ministry and the defiant police
14 station unfolded.
15 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] I am sorry, Your Honours, this is
16 the first document that I'm showing and hasn't been exhibited.
17 It's 65 ter 1398. No, it has been exhibited I'm being told. It's 1D106.
18 JUDGE DELVOIE: Mr. Cvijetic, there is another one though, if I'm
19 not wrong, that is 65 ter 536, tab order 18, which is not exhibited yet.
20 You showed it to the witness; do you intend to make it an exhibit?
21 65 ter 536. Tab 18. Does it have an exhibit number?
22 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Let me find it. That has not been
23 shown. I did not show it to the witness.
24 JUDGE DELVOIE: Sorry about that. My mistake.
25 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation]
1 Q. So let's move to the next document, 65 ter 3094. It's your
2 number 25. Mr. Borovcanin, a new inspection team is going to Vogosca
3 four days later. They review the situation to see how it was possible to
4 steal such a great number of cars. They lined up the chief,
5 Borislav Maksimovic, and the president of the Executive Board of Vogosca,
6 and the government's commissioner in charge of that area, as well as the
7 commander of the factory's security detail and the commander's deputy.
8 You can confirm from the document that a detailed inquiry had been made.
9 First of all, have you seen this document before?
10 A. Yes, I remember when my colleagues went there because it was a
11 very big deal at the time. And there was another inspection team after
12 them. I'll tell you about it later, if necessary.
13 Q. What drew my attention was the third paragraph, line 3, when a
14 number of abuses were noted, and then it says the document -- the related
15 documentation is with Tintor and his secretary, while most of the
16 vehicles were given for use on the basis of orders written on scraps of
18 Do you know about this?
19 A. Of course I do. One of those people is Mr. Tintor, mentioned
20 here. But there are others, and I can elaborate.
21 Q. Tell us who Tintor was.
22 A. Well, he was up there in the government; I don't know which exact
23 post. But I know he was an influential man, and he had his say in
25 Q. Will it help if I tell you that he was the chairman of the
1 Crisis Staff?
2 A. Yes, yes, now you mention it, I remember.
3 Q. And finally, your inspectors suggest measures to stop any more
4 cars from being just driven away. You know about this document?
5 A. Yes.
6 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] We have checked, this document is
7 not yet an exhibit, and we would like to tender it. 65 ter 3094.
8 JUDGE HALL
9 THE REGISTRAR: That would be document 1D182, Your Honours.
10 MS. KORNER: I think that needs to be checked, Your Honours,
11 because I'm pretty certain I showed this document to Mr. Djeric,
12 absolutely, and I think it was marked for identification then.
13 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
14 JUDGE HALL
15 the correction.
16 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Well, maybe that relates to the
17 next document. Can we have 1D93.
18 Q. Your tab 28, Mr. Borovcanin. We still have to wait for the
19 English. Oh, it's up.
20 Mr. Borovcanin, you mentioned seeing the documents produced by
21 the third inspection team that had intervened. We see that the ministry
22 is now directly involved through its administration for the suppression
23 of crime. And on page 2 we see who signed it, and it's Mr. Goran Madjar.
24 Did you mean this intervention directly by the ministry when you
25 were talking about the third visit?
1 A. When I mentioned the third visit, I wasn't sure that somebody was
2 there from the ministry, although I'm not doubting this document. This
3 document is okay. Goran was there too. But I can't understand why it's
4 not in the documents. On one occasion, eight men went; four from the
5 crime department, four from the police; because the problems were by that
6 time very grave and we needed the police just for security. We had
7 reports that criminals had burst into one of my colleague's hotel rooms
8 by night. They were armed, as I said. And it's -- he can only thank his
9 own professional alertness and adroitness that he was not gunned down.
10 That's why I mention this incident, to just give you an example
11 of how difficult it was to resolve this problem with the local
13 Q. Well, on this document, can you confirm that Mr. Madjar
15 A. Yes.
16 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] This is already an exhibit. This
17 was on the 29th July, 1992. I'm sorry, this was an MFI'd document. I
18 suppose that's why the Legal Officer contacted you. Perhaps -- perhaps
19 we could tender it now, since the witness is aware of the document.
20 JUDGE HALL
21 Mr. Cvijetic, when it's -- this is -- it's 10.25, so, at a convenient
22 point, we will take a break.
23 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] If that's your decision, we can
24 take the break.
25 JUDGE HALL
1 --- Recess taken at 10.25 a.m.
2 [The witness stands down]
3 --- On resuming at 11.10 a.m.
4 JUDGE HALL
5 reason for our delay in resuming. The bench was -- there were certain
6 procedurals matters on which we were meeting.
7 Yes, Mr. Krgovic.
8 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, good afternoon. The
9 Defence would like to point to a question which had to do with your last
10 ruling of the 23rd of February which is the subpoena for the appearance
11 of Witness 179 and 123. Namely, it is stated in that ruling that no one
12 but the representatives of the OTP or of the state requested to execute
13 the subpoena and VW Unit can't contact witnesses prior to their
14 appearance in this court. As obviously this is a template that runs like
15 a red thread through all the decisions because I've checked all the
16 subpoenas that have been issued in this case, and all the rulings contain
17 that part, and our practice so far has been to get in touch with all
18 witnesses, of course, in agreement with the OTP, and we talk to them.
19 We were drawn attention to this fact. So I should like to ask
20 the Trial Chamber to amend its ruling in this particular section, namely,
21 to allow the Defence team to be in contact, establish contact, with these
22 witnesses under specific conditions and in agreement with the OTP.
23 We talked to the Prosecutor, and I believe that the Prosecutor
24 shall have no objection to this request of ours. Thank you.
25 JUDGE HALL
1 in which case I would reverse what -- amend what I'm about to say, it
2 seems to me that without formally amending the order that we would have
3 made, that the practical solution to the valid issue that you raise would
4 be and could be resolved by the ordinary co-operation which the Chamber
5 presumes to continually exist between counsel for the Defence and the
6 Office of the Prosecutor.
7 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, I have to say that this was raised with
8 me in the adjournment, and I pointed out to the Defence counsel that the
9 rule that there is no property in a witness must apply. I think the
10 difficulty is, and it's fair to say, until this problem about witnesses
11 arose a couple of days ago, we hadn't actually picked up the order that
12 was contained in the summonses that the Defence shouldn't speak to them,
13 and we've been allowing them to speak to them. But technically, I think
14 Mr. Krgovic is right; it's a breach of Your Honours' order. We are
15 perfectly happy, subject to what Mr. Krgovic says, that arrangements are
16 made through us and at the witness's consent for the Defence to continue
17 to meet with witnesses, even those who are summonsed.
18 JUDGE HARHOFF: I fully support the observations made by the
19 presiding judge, and so the procedure for you, Mr. Krgovic, is to address
20 yourself to the Prosecution and ask that arrangements be made for you to
21 meet the witness.
22 MR. KRGOVIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
23 [The witness takes the stand]
24 JUDGE HALL
25 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.
1 Can we now see 1446, according to the 65 ter list, please. Just
2 a minute. I do not think that this is the right document, the one which
3 is on the screen. It is 1446 is the number. Please turn to page 2
4 because this is a blank page, so the next page, please, in the English
5 version as well.
6 Q. Mr. Borovcanin, in your document it is 29, in your binder.
7 This is eight days after Mr. Madjar, on behalf of the
8 administration for crime prevention, dispatched this letter. This is a
9 reminder by him for action to be taken according to his previous letter
10 and for the administration to be submitted all the requested data in
11 connection with the stealing of Golf cars.
12 Did you see this letter and this reminder, or are you aware of
13 its existence, Mr. Borovcanin?
14 A. What I know for a fact is that work on this was done
15 continuously, but now when you ask me specifically about this document,
16 I'm not quite sure. But I do know that work was being done on this
18 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, then can this
19 document share the fate of the previous one, namely be MFI'd? I am not
20 sure that conditions are ripe for it to be admitted into the case file,
21 which is why I proposed this, or I can ask the witness to read it and to
22 ask him whether he is familiar with its content.
23 JUDGE HALL
24 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, can I say, I just -- sorry, you may
25 have missed that, I have no objection to this being admitted. It's
1 actually one of our documents, and we would have put it in if
2 Mr. Cvijetic doesn't.
3 JUDGE HALL
4 as an exhibit.
5 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, Your Honour, please. Microphone.
6 THE REGISTRAR: That would be Exhibit D183, Your Honours.
7 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Let us just check.
8 THE REGISTRAR: This is Exhibit 1D183.
9 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Very well. I propose that we now
10 take a look at document 1D94.
11 Q. It is number 30, Mr. Borovcanin, in your binder. 1D94. Have you
12 found it, Mr. Borovcanin?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. So you looked at it and you can see that the minister personally
15 got involved in the investigation of this major case; do you agree with
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Please read the third paragraph of this document. There you can
19 see that the minister is insisting for the centre of security services to
20 immediately draw up a report on their previous work on this case and to
21 make a progress report on it. I'm not quite sure whether you had
22 occasion to see this document before. It has become an exhibit already,
23 but you, I suppose, were aware of the minister's activities and its
24 persistence in elucidating this case?
25 A. Yes, of course I know because many of the initiatives also came
1 from the sessions of the Assembly of the Republika Srpska that were being
2 held. And one of the deputies insisted on this issue being
3 resolved, i.e., on the preventing of stealing Golf cars from the factory
4 which manufactured them.
5 Q. Very well. Mr. Borovcanin, obstruction from Vogosca can be seen
6 of the local authorities as well as of the public security station. How
7 about you? Do you also see that there is obstruction there?
8 A. Well, the public security station of Vogosca was directly under
9 our centre, and Unis or TAS was a major manufacturing firm which produced
10 these Golf automobiles; it was in our area. So they should have been the
11 first ones to actually respond to this dispatch and to submit
12 intelligence and other information on its basis. Obviously, the
13 inference to be drawn is that there was something wrong because they
14 didn't do so, or that they were just withholding information because
15 somebody among them was also involved in these shady deals.
16 Q. You will agree with me that the ministry had to clear -- clean
17 its own house - when I say its own house, I'm referring to the specific
18 station - and Mr. Maksimovic himself, when the inspector was there, also
19 said that they used some vehicles for their own needs; is that right?
20 A. Yes, that is the finding of one of the previous inspections, when
21 he said to them that he had assigned some cars to the police officers.
22 In that context, perhaps it will be interesting to say, I cannot prove
23 it, but one of the locals offered to me, take one of these Golfs and have
24 it registered anyway; you are in great danger; so when the war is over,
25 we shall settle all these accounts. But I told him, Look, we are dealing
1 in murky waters here; it is something that I wouldn't dream of doing.
2 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Let us then look at document
3 65 ter 3096.
4 Q. In your binder, Mr. Borovcanin, it is 31. So irrespective of the
5 obstruction, both the ministry and your chief were persistent in seeking
6 to elucidate this case.
7 You see before you a ruling on measures of temporary removal from
8 tasks and assignment, a suspension from work of precisely
9 Mr. Borislav Maksimovic, because of a suspicion that he had committed a
10 serious breach of work duty, had abused his office, and exceeded the
11 bounds of his official authority. In paragraph 3 he is instructed to
12 return his weapon and his official ID card.
13 I'm now going to ask you to just explain, but please briefly, to
14 the Trial Chamber, what is the essence of this measure of temporary
15 suspension from work? But please be effective and please be brief.
16 A. Well, simply, the criminal offence which he had committed or was
17 suspected of was sufficient reason for disciplinary proceedings to be
18 instituted against him and for his weapons and ID card to be taken from
19 him pending court procedures.
20 Q. So he was not longer able to continue working on his work post,
21 his salary was diminished, and he was waiting for the outcome of the
22 disciplinary proceedings; am I right?
23 A. Yes, and the period for completing disciplinary proceeding was, I
24 believe, about six months.
25 Q. Just tell me this, are you aware of this document about his
1 temporary suspension and the institution of disciplinary proceedings
2 against him?
3 A. Yes, we went through these problems together.
4 Q. You had the occasion to see this through the inspection controls?
5 A. Yes, through the relevant service which actually did those
7 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] I move, Your Honours, that this be
9 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter did not hear the number. I
11 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Perhaps I should repeat the
12 number. 3096, according to the 65 ter list.
13 JUDGE HALL
14 THE REGISTRAR: That would be Exhibit 1D184, Your Honours.
15 JUDGE DELVOIE: Mr. Cvijetic, could you ask the witness, because
16 this -- this document is -- doesn't say why Mr. Maksimovic is suspended
17 disciplinary. Could you ask the witness if he knows if that is in
18 relation with the TAS business?
19 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, we have it two times.
20 The following documents will speak about this, so that's when I was
21 planning to ask him. Thank you.
22 Could we now have the next document, please, 1D00-6682.
23 Q. It's tab 32 in your binder, Mr. Borovcanin.
24 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone please. Microphone for counsel.
25 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation]
1 Q. After the chief suspended Mr. Maksimovic, 15 days later there
2 followed an unusual reaction from his policemen who opposed his being
3 replaced and issued an ultimatum saying they would all abandon the public
4 security station in Vogosca if the chief left, the chief appointed by the
5 Assembly of Vogosca municipality, which alone had the authority to recall
7 Mr. Borovcanin, we have a direct protest by the local police
8 station and its a chief appointed by the local authorities. So this is
9 in the context of what you said about it being difficult to establish the
10 minister's authority in these local stations; is that correct?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. There's another interesting point in the original; it's signed by
13 Mr. Maksimovic, although it has not been translated, the signature has
14 not been translated, but it says Maksimovic in the Cyrillic alphabet. So
15 he was very tenacious, wasn't he, at his local level; would you agree
16 with that? Mr. Borovcanin, as the signature in the original is in
17 Cyrillic, can you tell us who signed this? Can you read the signature?
18 A. Well, obviously it's Maksimovic's signature. It's quite legible,
19 but let me add, we were not very surprised by this reaction because,
20 metaphorically speaking, he had the wind in his sales because his
21 policemen supported him since they themselves had taken part in those
22 activities concerning the cars.
23 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I tender this
25 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, just before -- just before it is
1 tendered, could I ask Mr. Cvijetic, please, where the document comes
2 from? Because it's not one of ours.
3 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, we took it from the
4 disclosed material. We have it's ERN number. It's not our document. We
5 took it from the materials disclosed to us.
6 MS. KORNER: Thank you very much.
7 JUDGE HALL
8 the last exhibit, so it's admitted and marked.
9 THE REGISTRAR: That would be Exhibit 1D185, Your Honours.
10 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation]
11 Q. Mr. Borovcanin, I will now show you the next document, 1D00-3711.
12 It's 33 in your binder.
13 A. I found it.
14 Q. All right then. The situation was getting serious now. Someone
15 had to be stronger. According to the minister's order,
16 Mr. Borislav Maksimovic was arrested, two criminal reports against him
17 were filed, and disciplinary proceedings were instituted. This document
18 provides a summary of the criminal proceedings up to that point.
19 In the fifth paragraph, it says that the proceedings were
20 completed in 1993 and that Mr. Maksimovic's employment had been
21 terminated as of the 16th of August, 1993, and he was placed at the
22 disposal of the Army of the Republika Srpska. Do you see that paragraph?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. If we go back to paragraph 2, we can see that in parallel with
25 the disciplinary proceedings, two criminal reports against him were filed
1 as a early as in November 1992. Do you see that?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. In the context of what we said about the two separate
4 proceedings, disciplinary and criminal, running in parallel, as well as
5 his being put at the disposal of the army, his being placed at the
6 disposal of the army did not obstruct either of the two proceedings,
7 either disciplinary or criminal?
8 A. Yes, of course. That's how it was. So everything went on.
9 Everything was done in the proper way. Of course, criminal proceedings
10 may have been slow due to the lack of courts and so on.
11 Q. Well, we may now turn to the next page to answer His Honour's
12 question as to what his criminal activities consisted in, and one can see
13 this in the remaining part of the disciplinary proceedings. So please
14 just look through this because it's quite long. So there are seven items
15 containing descriptions of his criminal activities and misdemeanours.
16 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] And if we could look at the next
17 several pages, please. It's the next page in English and in B/C/S as
18 well. Yes.
19 Q. I will simply para-phrase, because I've read this, and you can
20 check. The gist of the matter is very simple: People who had obtained
21 Golf cars by theft, obtained certificates from Mr. Maksimovic saying that
22 they were the true owners of the cars, and based on these certificates,
23 they were able to register the cars at his police station and get licence
24 plate numbers. Did you study this? Can you confirm this?
25 A. Yes, yes. So just a few of these activities would have been
1 enough for him to be prosecuted, let alone all of it.
2 Q. The proceedings -- the disciplinary proceedings took quite a long
3 time, probably the disciplinary organ had to wait for the criminal
4 proceedings to be completed because under the law there is the
5 presumption of innocence; is that correct?
6 A. Yes, yes, I have already mentioned that that was the rule.
7 Q. But, however things may be, his employment in the
8 Ministry of the Interior was terminated; that's what it says here?
9 A. Yes, yes, there's no doubt about that.
10 Q. You know about these proceedings and you know about their
12 A. Yes.
13 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I think that we can
14 now tender this important document which completes this line of
16 JUDGE HALL
17 THE REGISTRAR: That would be Exhibit 1D186, Your Honours.
18 JUDGE DELVOIE: Mr. Cvijetic, I seem to have misnoted the date of
19 document now 1D94, number 30 in the tab. Is that 1993, the date of
20 the -- no, it's sorry, 31. The disciplinary ruling, 15 October 1993? Or
22 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] If you are referring to page 2, I
23 think it's 1995, Your Honour. What page, sorry?
24 JUDGE DELVOIE: The date of the ruling, the ruling -- the
25 disciplinary ruling suspending Mr. Maksimovic. I think it's tab number
1 31, 65 ter 3096, if I'm not wrong.
2 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the
3 15th of October, 1992. That's the date that the decision was issued.
4 JUDGE DELVOIE: And can we then have the first page of the actual
5 document, please, the document that's on the screen.
6 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] I have no objection. Just let me
7 find it, please. Date is here as well, Your Honours. You can see it
8 here in the description. It says that he was suspended as of the
9 15th of October, 1992, in the first sentence.
10 JUDGE DELVOIE: Right. I was confused with 1, 2, 3, 4, the
11 5th paragraph where it's stated 16 August 1993, et cetera. Okay.
12 Thank you.
13 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Cvijetic, what is the date of the document on
14 the screen?
15 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, this is a summary, a
16 recapitulation, of everything that was done in the case, so it contains
17 all the dates of all the documents issued up to that point. And on the
18 following page, you can see when the final decision was issued. The
19 16th of August, that's where the measure of termination of employment was
20 handed down. And then Maksimovic appealed. The then-minister upheld the
21 appeal and sent everything back for another proceeding, and then in 1995
22 his employment was terminated again. Is that clear now?
23 JUDGE HARHOFF: Yes, thank you. I understand that the final
24 decision to suspend Mr. Maksimovic was then reached on the
25 18th of September, 1995. Who is the author of this decision?
1 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] This is not the decision on
2 suspension. The suspension was handed down by Mr. Cvijetic. And
3 throughout the disciplinary proceedings, he was suspended. But the
4 decision on his disciplinary punishment was signed by the new chief,
5 Milorad Maric, who was the minister at the time that decision was issued,
6 because Mr. Cvijetic was killed and did not complete this case.
7 That's on the last page of the final decision.
8 JUDGE HALL
9 exhibit, you've described this as a summary. I'm wondering about the
10 back documents which this summarises. Is there -- need we be
11 apprehensive about being surprised somewhere down the line that the
12 summary may have been inaccurate?
13 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I can only assume
14 that this was done by the office where the file was kept, and then the
15 new chief, based on this summary, issued the new decision in 1995. And
16 the document is mentioned up here, and we did show it to you, the
17 document on suspension mentioned in the first line.
18 JUDGE HALL
19 prompted by Ms. Korner's question three exhibits back as to what is the
20 origin of this document. But, any way, we'll see; we'll see where we go.
21 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation]
22 Q. Mr. Borovcanin, Mr. Maksimovic was not alone. Can you tell us
23 what Mr. -- what post Mr. Kelovlankovic [as interpreted] had?
24 A. At that time, Vlado was the commander of the police station.
25 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Can we then have 1D00-3697,
2 Q. The first and last name was Vlado Kelovic; is that right?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. So in parallel and at the same time as the chief, the criminal
5 and disciplinary -- the same sort of criminal and disciplinary
6 proceedings were also conducted against him. And, again, we have a
7 summary of what was done in the case of Vlado Kelovic. And at the end we
8 have an identical decision, and his employment was terminated because of
9 the same violations concerning these cars.
10 So we can just look at the next page, and we can see that a
11 decision to terminate his employment was handed down?
12 MS. KORNER: He put to the witness that this was to do with the
13 cars; where does it say that? Can I take it that a CJB is meant to be an
14 SJB in the translation? Or was that a change in the ... But I'm more
15 interested in where it says that this was all to do with the TAS thefts.
16 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Of course. We did that in the
17 previous case. We have to go into the disciplinary proceedings documents
18 and the decision on sanctions, and items 1, 2, 3, and 4 are lists of
19 vehicles from the TAS factory that were the objective of this abuse.
20 Read out item 1, 2, 3, and 4. We have to go page by page. Already in
21 item 1 there is a reference to a VW Golf and its illegal registration.
22 You can't see it in English because it's on page 2. It's all there now.
23 Would that be sufficient now?
24 Your Honours, to avoid asking the same questions again, I can
25 just ask the witness if he is aware of these disciplinary proceedings
1 against Mr. Kelovic and that they ended in this way.
2 JUDGE HALL
3 race ahead to the end of the road on which you seem to be headed with
4 this document, having regard to the point that you were to establish in
5 terms of the last series of questions with the previous document, does it
6 assist dealing with this particular item? Is the Chamber -- will the
7 Chamber be assisted by adding to the material the -- this item and the
8 questions which you would wish to put to the witness arising from it?
9 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I indicated
10 yesterday the lines of work and activities of the ministry in dealing
11 with problems in various areas. I just announced that I would be talking
12 about the line of questions concerning the engagement of the police in
13 combat; then followed the line of questions concerning efforts to deal
14 with the most serious crimes; and now I'm trying to see what kind of
15 effect the minister's decisions and orders had, how they were carried
16 out, and whether they had any effect on the work of the
17 Ministry of the Internal Affairs.
18 JUDGE HALL
19 this advances anything.
20 Proceed, Mr. Cvijetic.
21 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] For the same reasons as before, I
22 would like to tender this document, and you will decide about its value.
23 [Trial Chamber confers]
24 JUDGE HALL
25 answered the question that you were putting in respect to this document,
1 so perhaps you have the witness's answer and then we'll decide whether we
2 would accede to your application to have it tendered as an exhibit.
3 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation]
4 Q. I have to repeat my question, Mr. Borovcanin. In your inspection
5 work, did you have occasion to look at these disciplinary proceedings,
6 whether they took place in keeping with the regulations, et cetera? Are
7 you aware of this case?
8 A. Of course. They went hand in hand, commander and chief. Because
9 they were charged with abuse of official authority and position.
10 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] I have to add something. This
11 goes to the Prosecution case in the part where they question whether
12 anything was done about serious violations, what happened to the members
13 of the MUP, who were responsible for such violations, et cetera.
14 JUDGE HALL
15 may be admitted and marked as an exhibit.
16 THE REGISTRAR: That would be Exhibit 1D187, Your Honours.
17 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
18 Since the witness said that Mr. Stanisic displayed persistence in
19 dealing with problems in this area, I will finish this line of
20 questioning with 1D73.
21 JUDGE DELVOIE: Did you mention the tab number to the witness,
22 Mr. Cvijetic? It wasn't in the interpretation.
23 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] It's tab 34. We need 1D73. It
24 seems there's something wrong. I apologise, it's 1D173.
25 JUDGE DELVOIE: Tab number 34 is 1D73.
1 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Let's take the 65 ter number.
2 It's 1936. It's a mistake, it's 173. We have a typo in our document.
3 JUDGE DELVOIE: [Overlapping speakers] ...
4 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] 173 is the right number. 1D173.
5 That's the right document on the screen.
6 JUDGE DELVOIE: It's still under tab number 34?
7 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] And it's tab 34 for the witness.
8 JUDGE DELVOIE: Thanks.
9 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] We still don't have the English
10 version. Yes, that's it.
11 Q. You see on this list -- you see that this is the first meeting
12 you probably don't know about held on the 20th December, 1992, it was
13 convened by Mr. Radovan Karadzic; you see a list of people who were
14 invited. And you see at the time Mico Stanisic was already the minister
15 of the interior. Do you remember that, at this time, the government had
16 resigned? I'll take you back because it seems there was no
18 This was an expanded meeting of the Supreme Command held on the
19 20th of December, 1992. You can see the composition. Mr. Stanisic was
20 by that time already minister in the so-called -- in the so-called
21 provisional government, and there was the prime minister designate
22 because the governor had resigned. Do you remember that?
23 A. Yes, I remember when Djeric resigned.
24 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Can we have page 3. It's page 3
25 in English.
1 Q. Could you please focus on the contribution by Mr. Mico Stanisic.
2 He is leaving the post, his ministerial post, and you will agree with me
3 he is not satisfied with the progress hitherto in the affair of those
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. You will agree with me that this thing with the police station in
7 Vogosca was just one operation which obviously had to continue and go
9 A. Yes, of course, it was just the tip of the iceberg, because what
10 was mentioned in the disciplinary proceedings and the criminal
11 prosecution concerning Mr. Maksimovic is the tip of the iceberg. A
12 thousand Volkswagon Golfs were missing, and they were God knows where.
13 Q. You must notice that Mr. Stanisic raised the issue of this
14 scandal in the presence of the entire leadership, and he has the courage
15 to persist, regardless of who might be involved?
16 A. I agree with you completely. And I can even add that I myself
17 thought of this as a very courageous act for the time. And it's my
18 personal opinion that the minister was beginning to irritate some people
19 with his insistence.
20 I can only tell you what I myself experienced when I said at one
21 of the meetings to the political leadership, Gentlemen, please don't
22 stand in the way of our work. Don't send scraps of paper saying that the
23 recipient should be given a vehicle from the depot of seised cars. I
24 thought that this was abuse of official authority. And this was leading
25 nowhere. We could understand that vehicles could be requisitioned for
1 official needs, but that they should be given to private persons without
2 us knowing where the vehicle was going, this was crime. Thousands of
3 such vehicles were driven away to all over Bosnia and Herzegovina and
4 also -- not Croatia, I didn't mean to say Croatia. I meant to say
5 Kiseljak, a Croat populated area.
6 JUDGE HALL
7 ordinarily take the adjournment. Do I -- I gather that you have an hour
8 and a half left, does that arithmetically mean that this witness will not
9 be -- you will not have completed your cross-examination by the time we
10 rise for the day at 1.45?
11 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] I think I will, if we take the
12 break now. I will try to finish by the end of the day.
13 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, I was assured that Mr. Cvijetic would
14 finish by this adjournment. I cannot be here tomorrow, at the moment
15 anyhow. Especially -- can I say, straightaway, I'm supposed to be going
16 to a family funeral. I asked twice whether Mr. Cvijetic would finish by
17 now as to allow Mr. Krgovic to ask, and I was assured that he would.
18 JUDGE HALL
19 MS. KORNER: And time for redirect. There would have been time
20 if he'd finished now. Your Honours, of course, I mean, I accept that
21 before I complain that Your Honours took a longer break.
22 JUDGE HALL
23 20 minutes. And maybe in the break counsel may consult and have some
24 light shed on this when we return.
25 --- Recess taken at 12.07 p.m.
1 --- On resuming at 12.30 p.m.
2 JUDGE HALL
3 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
4 JUDGE HALL
5 which we were dealing when we took the adjournment, there is a
6 possibility of us sitting an extra session this afternoon beginning at
7 2.15. I believe counsel may have been alerted to that. And we would --
8 if that is -- would be convenient, Ms. Korner?
9 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, I'm very grateful for this. I wouldn't
10 have mentioned what is ultimately a personal matter and should not affect
11 the running of this trial. And if -- can I say, straightaway, if
12 necessary, if it's not possible to sit an extra session, then, of course,
13 I will make the arrangements accordingly. But if it can work, I'm very
14 grateful to Your Honours, then it would help me enormously.
15 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I offer my sincerest
16 condolences to Ms. Korner over that family tragedy, and I want to say
17 that I am prepared to accept any reasonable solution to deal with the
18 problem that arose, if that means staying on this afternoon, it's not a
20 JUDGE HALL
21 MR. KRGOVIC: Your Honour, we don't have any problem.
22 JUDGE HALL
23 there's a possibility that this courtroom may be available, but if not,
24 we would move to Courtroom III
25 at 2.15 after the 1.45 break.
1 Mr. Krgovic, how much time do you think that you would need?
2 MR. KRGOVIC: Your Honour, I think half an hour probably because
3 Mr. Cvijetic covered most of my topics.
4 [Trial Chamber confers]
5 JUDGE HALL
6 you when I said that you have an hour and a half left; with think it's an
7 hour. So with the time you have remaining and Mr. Krgovic and then
8 re-examination, we should be able to complete this witness this
10 Mr. Borovcanin, we are taking steps to ensure that your testimony
11 is completed by this afternoon. What it now appears to mean is that
12 rather than taking the adjournment at the usual time at 1.45, we would be
13 returning for another session beginning at 2.15. But the result would be
14 that at the end of today's hearing, we would be in a position to release
15 you. Thank you.
16 Yes, Mr. Cvijetic.
17 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation]
18 Q. Mr. Borovcanin, you still need to tell us to whom you addressed
19 your complaint from the government, from the state leadership, telling
20 them that they should leave you policemen to do your work?
21 A. Well, this was a very important meeting attended by almost the
22 entire leadership, including the prime minister designate,
23 Mr. Branko Djeric; and across from me was sitting Momcilo Krajisnik, who,
24 at the time, was the president of the Assembly. I addressed him directly
25 asking him, and I will para-phrase the words I used then, Mr. President,
1 please don't send us scraps of paper from Pale by way of certain people
2 concerning these cars because it doesn't lead anywhere. And Mr. Djeric
3 expressed his support for me during the break. He said he was glad to
4 see there were policemen doing their job properly. So that we had the
5 best intentions to have the minister's order complied with.
6 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Could we now have 1D00-2420.
7 Q. It's tab 36 in your binder, Mr. Borovcanin. I hope you will
8 recognise it, because it's from the Sarajevo CSB, and it's information
9 about the crime prevention measures on the territory of the centre. And
10 on page 1 you see statistical data; is that correct?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. So let's go through quickly. So let's look at the Milici SJB,
13 and I'll tell you what we are dealing with now. We are dealing with war
14 crimes. And it says here, three criminal reports were filed, or, rather,
15 not filed because there is no prosecutor's office. I'm not sure we have
16 touched on this problem, but I'm sure you observed it on the ground. Did
17 you observe this problem that in certain municipalities there were no
18 prosecutor's offices or regular courts because no one had been appointed
19 to those posts?
20 A. Yes, I touched on this in part when answering your previous
21 questions. The situation on the ground was such that the courts had not
22 been set up, or they were not fully staffed, so that criminal reports
23 kept piling up. Let me just mention that in the course of the work of
24 the MUP, we would not only file a criminal report, we had to follow-up
25 and monitor the outcome. This was important for us to achieve results,
1 and at that time it was not possible. It wasn't just impossible to
2 monitor the outcome, but it was impossible to file the reports because
3 there were no courts in many places.
4 Q. Very well. So let's scroll down, or, rather, let's look at the
5 bottom of the page where it says Ilijas. Where it says that two crimes
6 against civilians had been recorded. In the introductory part, we saw
7 the minister's orders and the forms, and will you agree with me that this
8 is the practical result of those instructions and forms; am I right?
9 A. Of course. Wherever we had such information, there could be no
10 dilemma. We had to act on it ex officio.
11 Q. Thank you. We'll move down to the last paragraph dealing with
12 Bratunac. Bratunac had the same problem because the court and the
13 Prosecutor's Office were not functioning either in Bratunac or in
14 Srebrenica. You knew about this?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Let's move on to the next page of the document.
17 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] I think in English we have to go
18 to the previous page. We need Pale, Novo Sarajevo, and Sarajevo. Is
19 this it? So we have to go back in the English version.
20 Q. So you have the Novo Sarajevo Public Security Station and two
21 crimes against the civilian population reported here; am I right?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. All right. We won't comment, but let's go through the statistics
24 and then I'll show you a document. So this is about war crimes, and we
25 have here reports of war crimes against the civilian population. This is
1 in the centre. Can you remember this? I'll jog your memory with a
3 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Cvijetic, I didn't catch when you were
4 showing this document where exactly it says that the crimes reported are
5 classified as war crimes.
6 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] You have it at the top of the
7 page, Your Honour, about the Sarajevo station. It says two crimes -- two
8 war crimes against civilians.
9 JUDGE HARHOFF: Oh, yes.
10 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation]
11 Q. Mr. Borovcanin, in the next paragraph it says in the Stari Grad,
12 Vogosca, Zvornik, Skelani, Orlovo, Hadzici, Rajlovac, and Kula SJBs, we
13 have no information on the number of crimes recorded. Do you know why
14 this information did not arrive before this document was drafted?
15 A. I can answer that question in part, but I can only give you my
16 opinion. Our communications did not always function properly, and I
17 think my colleague, if he has an opportunity, will be able to say more
18 about it, my colleague who worked on these documents.
19 Q. Very well. I'm asking you now to the extent that you can assist.
20 In the next paragraph - I don't know if it's on the same page in
21 English - it says as regards the non-functioning of courts and
22 prosecutor's offices on the territories of the municipalities of
23 Bratunac, Skelani, Zvornik, Sekovici, Vlasenica, and Ilijas, so there are
24 not a few municipalities where the prosecutor's office and the courts
25 were not functioning; would you agree?
1 A. I have no doubts about that. I said that. But I may have
2 understood your previous question from another angle, which is why I said
3 my colleague would be able to say more about it.
4 Q. All right. And at the end of page 2, the author of the document
5 orders all the stations to immediately submit criminal reports in spite
6 of all this and to provide information about this immediately.
7 So you have to monitor the situation in the judiciary, and as
8 soon as a court is established, you have to submit and file your criminal
9 reports. Is that the correct understanding?
10 A. Yes, of course. This is correct. It's what I've just said,
11 monitoring the outcome of criminal proceedings. That was our duty.
12 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Cvijetic, just one question before you move
13 on. The two war crimes committed against the civilian population that
14 were registered in respect of Sarajevo which you showed to us just a
15 while ago, I wonder if there's any information about the victims of these
16 two war crimes?
17 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] My next document will provide the
18 answer to that question.
19 Q. Mr. Borovcanin, is this information coming from your Sarajevo
20 Centre of Public Security to the municipal stations; am I right?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. You can confirm this statistical information because you are
23 familiar with it; am I right?
24 A. Well, yes, at that time when we exchanged information, and when I
25 look at this it jogs my memory.
1 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, as the chief of the
2 centre is no longer alive, I think this is the best witness through whom
3 to tender this document, so I now wish to tender it.
4 JUDGE DELVOIE: Can we see the last page of it, please. Is it
5 Mr. Cvijetic who has -- who signed it?
6 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] This is the same problem that
7 Ms. Korner had with the document yesterday. It's a public document; we
8 had a similar problem yesterday. But there is no doubt in the witness's
9 mind that this information comes from the Sarajevo CJB; however, we don't
10 have the last page in electronic form. We looked for it, but we couldn't
11 find it.
12 MS. KORNER: Can we just go back to the front page for a moment,
13 because I can't find it in the bundle I was given. I agree, the document
14 I had did say it was from the CSB
15 crime prevention measures on the territory; however it does cover the
16 area, so I have no objection to the document going in.
17 JUDGE HALL
18 THE REGISTRAR: That would be Exhibit 1D188, Your Honours.
19 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Could the witness now be shown
20 document 1D00-5229.
21 JUDGE DELVOIE: What is the tab number, please?
22 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] I am sorry. Your Honours, it was
23 added later. It's not in the binder. We have to look at it on the
25 JUDGE DELVOIE: I have it.
1 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] I would just like to ask the usher
2 to give this document to the witness.
3 Q. Mr. Borovcanin, here we have a specific criminal report for a
4 specific crime. From the description of the crime, we see that the
5 person reported, Stanko Knezevic, was a guard at the penitentiary Kula,
6 and when 12 prisoners were taken outside to the hill called Zuc where
7 they were digging trenches, and when they were brought back in, he lined
8 them up, opened fire at them from an automatic weapon, and then
9 approached those who were still living and killed them off.
10 Do you see that?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. This is an example for several purposes. In this case, there is
13 no question of whether it is a war crime or not. The police who filed
14 this report, the police station of Vogosca under the new chief because
15 the previous one had been suspended, qualifies these acts in the preamble
16 as a war crime against prisoners of war.
17 Do you see that?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Thus, in such cases even the police had no dilemma. They had a
20 specific perpetrator to deal with; the perpetrator was identified. And
21 on the same day, the day of the crime, he was already in custody. The
22 report was filed and submitted to the relevant prosecutor's office in
23 Sarajevo. In such cases, it was the military authorities who had
24 jurisdiction, but you could also get involved if you apprehended such a
25 perpetrator. Am I right?
1 A. Yes, I should just clarify why the Military Prosecutor's Office
2 was the recipient of this criminal report, because, at the time, this
3 person was a military conscript. The crime was heinous, and we acted
5 Q. Promptly, that means quickly, urgently, right?
6 A. Yes.
7 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Since the witness is aware of this
8 case and in the context of our discussion about the prosecution of war
9 crimes, I believe the document is relevant for our Defence and also for
10 the Trial Chamber perhaps, so I tender it.
11 JUDGE HALL
12 THE REGISTRAR: That would be Exhibit 1D189, Your Honours.
13 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
14 Q. Now, I'd just like briefly to tackle the topic of the disbanding
15 of the so-called special units to see how the minister's orders were
16 executed on the ground.
17 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Let's call up 65 ter 2677. I'm
18 sorry, 2677. Tab 39.
19 Q. Do you have it? Have you found it? Mr. Borovcanin, can you hear
21 A. Which number is it in my binder?
22 Q. 39.
23 A. All right.
24 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] I'm being told it's already
25 exhibited. So it's P827. Sorry, 857.
1 Q. The chief of the Vlasenica station says that a unit like that
2 existed. It had been set up just before the war started. You already
3 talked about that period when no control was possible. But it also says
4 that the minister's order must be obeyed, and he explains how. A part
5 was transferred to the reserve force and another part was placed under
6 military command.
7 First of all, do you know about this document; and, second, do
8 you know about this unit that was disbanded?
9 A. Yes, it falls under my line of work.
10 Q. So the answer is yes on both counts?
11 A. Yes, I've talked about it in my answers to other questions.
12 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] I believe, Your Honours, that all
13 the requirements are met for receiving this document. Oh, no, I
14 apologise, it's already an exhibit.
15 May I now ask for 65 ter 1266. It's actually P731. It's already
16 an exhibit.
17 Q. Your tab 53.
18 A. Yes, I have it. Okay.
19 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please. Microphone, please.
20 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation]
21 Q. Rogatica Public Security Station, 14 August 1992. Rogatica is
22 sending this report to your centre, and they write in paragraph 1 that
23 there are no longer any problems caused by paramilitary formations and
24 their activity. But in the fourth paragraph, the large one, it says that
25 all members of the police station had been engaged in the military and
1 the station was totally unable to work, all 36 men. In the middle of the
2 paragraph, there's a sentence that begins with the words:
3 "In the said period, there were constant attempts to subordinate
4 the employees of SJB Rogatica, first to the Territorial Defence, and
5 later to the Army of the SRBH, which created problems among our employees
6 at the beginning, because they had been given information that a kind of
7 military administration was introduced and that the Ministry of Interior,
8 including SJBs, should not operate during the war at all."
9 Do you see that?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. You were talking about the ambitions of the military authorities
12 to suborn the police to them completely. Is this one example in
14 A. Yes. In fact, there are only one or two stations where this did
15 not occur. There was a pronounced duality on the part of the army, if I
16 can put it that way, because they always seem to think that we were
17 shirking military duty, and they were hindering our regular police work
18 in fact.
19 Q. The last sentence confirms what you say, the chief says that he
20 managed to win a halfway solution, that is, to have at least 50 per cent
21 of his personnel remain at the station while another 50 per cent is going
22 to take part in combat.
23 You see that?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Now, look at the last paragraph, the sentence that begins with
1 problems regarding treatment of prisoners. Read that through. The chief
2 is actually echoing what you said a moment ago. The civilian population
3 from war-affected areas are brought to safety by the army, but then
4 nobody takes care of them. And then he says, Although such persons did
5 not fall under our jurisdiction pursuant to the Law on Internal Affairs,
6 we guarded those people and organised their transfer to territories
7 controlled by the authorities of the former BH.
8 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Can we now turn the page both in
9 B/C/S and in English.
10 Q. You see what the chief is saying:
11 "We were unable to grant these citizens free movement because we
12 could not guarantee their safety, in view of the fact that the entire
13 area of Rogatica was engulfed in military activity."
14 Sir, this confirms what you were saying about this problem that
15 was new to the police, and you were looking for solutions as you went?
16 A. Yes, I discussed that with the Prosecutor. I tried to explain.
17 This was a long-running problem. We were left holding the baby. We had
18 to take care of these people with whom we were stuck, and we had to
19 organise transportation because there was no other solution.
20 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] I'm being told this document is
21 already an exhibit, so we can move to the next document.
22 Q. We'll deal very briefly with the topic of the removal of persons
23 who had a criminal record or who were under prosecution.
24 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] And now I'd like to call
25 65 ter 2884.
1 Q. Tab 46.
2 A. I can see it on the screen too.
3 Q. The chief of the Vlasenica Public Security Station reports that
4 he had taken steps - as he says in the first paragraph - all kinds of
5 legal and disciplinary measures against the employees, both active and
6 reserve, whenever there is evidence of a breach of disciplinary or other
8 And in paragraph 2, we see how many criminal reports had been
9 filed against the staff of the station and for which crimes. And reserve
10 policemen were simply dismissed. Further below, he talks about the
11 measures taken against active-duty policemen, regular police officers.
12 Mr. Borovcanin, you knew the chief of this station, and it seems
13 from this document that he was rather diligent in carrying out the
14 minister's order, is that so?
15 A. Yes, I knew Mr. Djuric. I can say very briefly that he was one
16 of our best men. A very serious man, very conscious of the law, and
17 dedicated in law enforcement.
18 Q. Have you had occasion to see his reports and statistics?
19 A. They were rather, should I say, servile or helpful whenever we
20 would come for an inspection visit. In some other places, people would
21 try to stash away documents; but, no, in this station, everything was
22 readily given to us.
23 Q. Are you trying to say that you were aware of these statistics?
24 A. Yes.
25 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] I believe, Your Honours, that this
1 document qualifies to be admitted.
2 JUDGE HALL
3 THE REGISTRAR: That would be Exhibit 1D190, Your Honours.
4 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Our next document is from the
5 65 ter list, 2811.
6 Q. Tab 41.
7 A. I can see it on the screen.
8 Q. Will you just confirm for me that a month later the same chief
9 continues the same activity? And look at the next -- at the second
10 paragraph, eight criminal reports, 47 members removed. The man is
11 obviously purging his police station.
12 A. Yes, you are right. It's self-explanatory.
13 Q. That is the man whom you described as very diligent in doing his
15 A. Yes, very diligent indeed.
16 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] I tender this document for
17 admission for the same reasons as the one before.
18 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Cvijetic, for this document and the previous
19 document, I have the difficulty that I fail to see the relevance of it.
20 Both documents seem to show that in these two police stations, the chiefs
21 were diligent in ensuring that the policemen working there were acting
22 correctly and if they did not perform their duties according to the book,
23 they would be met by disciplinary sanctions. That seems to show that the
24 police station was working well and that the chiefs of the police
25 stations were eager to ensure that the employees were acting correctly.
1 But just how is this relevant to the indictment?
2 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, it is very relevant.
3 If Mr. Stanisic is charged with failing to take appropriate steps and
4 that by omission he allowed crimes to be committed at police stations and
5 he allowed official authority to be abused, then it's certainly relevant
6 to show that he had taken all the steps to enforce his measures using all
7 the mechanisms at his disposal, and he made those mechanisms work.
8 That is the purpose of my questioning and these documents.
9 JUDGE HARHOFF: I understand that very well. But still, I find
10 it's of little assistance to this trial if what we are being told here is
11 only that ordinary civilian crimes, if I may call it that, that is to
12 say, not war crimes, were investigated and prosecuted. The evidence that
13 you are offering to us would have been far more relevant to the case if
14 you were able to show that indeed war crimes were being prosecuted
16 But apart from the two war crimes that we saw committed in
17 Sarajevo five or six documents ago, nothing in the present document or
18 the previous document tends to show that there was much interest in
19 prosecuting the war crimes and the crimes against humanity for which your
20 client is charged.
21 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, you're wrong. It's
22 not only the statistics. I have showed to you a specific criminal report
23 for a war crime, and I discussed this issue with the witness yesterday.
24 Namely, that even in these traditional general crimes, especially
25 murders, it is possible to find cases involving a national element that
1 are qualified initially as a murder. But it is up to the prosecutor to
2 give the final legal qualification. So it's premature on the basis of
3 the first step, which is the criminal report, to say whether it
4 ultimately ended up as a war crime or not. I just wanted to show the
5 good intent to fight all forms of serious crime and that there was no
6 discrimination whatsoever in that respect.
7 JUDGE HARHOFF: That doesn't help me much in relation to the last
8 two documents, but let's move on.
9 [Trial Chamber confers]
10 JUDGE HALL
11 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, before I tender this
12 document on the same grounds as before, I want to add something in
13 response to Judge Harhoff. Namely, the minister of the interior is
14 obliged to create the proper conditions for the ministry to work in
15 strict keeping with the law; and to prosecute war crimes, among other
16 things. And in order to provide the right conditions, and to ensure that
17 there are mechanisms in place, and to lend authority to the officers who
18 are to prosecute all crimes including war crimes, the minister first has
19 to purge the personnel and recreate the ministry, remove people who do
20 not want to work and who obstruct the work and the orders of the
22 That is why this document is relevant, and that's why I propose
23 it for admission.
24 JUDGE HALL
25 THE REGISTRAR: That would be Exhibit 1D191, Your Honours.
1 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation]
2 Q. Mr. Borovcanin, Mr. Stanisic stopped being minister in 1994;
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Can you remember who took his place?
6 A. I believe it was Ratko Adzic, but I can't be sure. You really
7 took me aback with that question, because the ministers changed very
8 quickly after that.
9 Q. Did the next minister continue with these efforts and these
10 investigations, because you were still in your job? In all the areas
11 that we've been discussing these past days, did you continue to feel the
12 progress and improvement in the work of the ministry?
13 A. First of all, we professional people were very disappointed when
14 Mr. Stanisic left his post. I cannot remember clearly his immediate
15 successor, but the series of ministers later either did not know anything
16 about the professional aspects of the work, or they were simply
17 appointees from above and not people who knew the trade. In any case, we
18 had loads of problems with them.
19 Q. With the return of Mr. Stanisic in 1994, were some of these
20 scandals from 1992 taken up again, and did investigations restart?
21 A. Yes, I am aware in particular of the scandal with the theft of
22 these Volkswagon Golfs, and I know Mr. Stanisic as someone who simply
23 doesn't let go.
24 Q. In 1994, there was a very big financial scandal involving some
25 10 million Deutschemark intended for the purpose of petrol for
1 Republika Srpska. This contract landed in the lap of cabinet ministers
2 who are at the same time owners of private companies. And then suddenly
3 there was no money and no petrol. Do you know that Mr. Stanisic started
4 investigations against a large number of cabinet ministers and said in
5 public in the press that he would pursue them to the bitter end, whatever
6 that cost? Do you remember that?
7 A. Certainly I remember. And that was a scandal; that's the proper
8 word to use, "scandal," which really upset people. Imagine fighters at
9 the front line hearing something like this. It was taken up by members
10 of the Assembly. There were complaints by many people asking us, Are you
11 going to see this through? There were others who were not very happy
12 with this manner of working. And with some small reservations, this is
13 my personal opinion, I can say that Mr. Stanisic was getting in people's
15 Q. Mr. Stanisic was criticised by the top leadership for making this
16 scandal public. There was another scandal concerning aluminium and so
17 on. And do you know that after that he was forced to resign?
18 A. Yes, of course I know about this. And these are major issues.
19 When he saw that he did not have the support he needed, I'm not surprised
20 that he resigned.
21 Q. And my last question: How did you professional policemen respond
22 to his resignation?
23 A. Well, you know what the police are like. When someone is strong
24 and persistent, sometimes policemen don't like that. But if you look at
25 the ultimate goal of establishing a proper police force, we did not like
1 this. We knew who we had, but we didn't know who was to come. And there
2 were many problems as transpired later on, but that's a different topic.
3 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Mr. Borovcanin, thank you. I have
4 no further questions.
5 Your Honours, I have completed my examination of this witness.
6 JUDGE HALL
7 Mr. Krgovic.
8 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] I do apologise, Your Honour, for
9 this delay. Mr. Cvijetic finished sooner than I expected him to.
10 Cross-examination by Mr. Krgovic:
11 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Mr. Borovcanin. My name is
12 Dragan Krgovic. We have already met. We met briefly a few days ago. I
13 appear on behalf of Mr. Zupljanin. And, on his behalf, I will put a few
14 questions to you concerning your testimony. I will touch on a topic
15 addressed by Mr. Cvijetic briefly.
16 You were shown a number of documents which you commented on
17 concerning disciplinary responsibility of MUP employees. From the
18 documents which I saw and from your responses, it follows that the
19 procedure needed to dismiss someone and carry out disciplinary
20 proceedings, in line with the legislation and rules, that this was quite
21 an arduous procedure, time consuming procedure in fact; is that correct?
22 A. Well, of course. One needed time to document something properly.
23 It would have been dishonourable to take measures without evidence and
24 with out carrying the procedure out properly.
25 Q. So that some of these cases ended years after the initial
2 A. Well, we were going through a chaotic time, and that's why it
3 took so long.
4 Q. And you were aware of the practice that, in compliance with the
5 minister's instructions, as regards cleaning up the police, people in
6 authority used a so-called summary version or short version of the
7 procedure; and when they heard that someone was not doing his job
8 properly, they would send them over to the ministry -- or to the
10 A. Yes, of course, if we thought that we would put someone at the
11 disposal of the military.
12 Q. And taking someone off the police roster would mean that that
13 person had been dismissed, in fact. That this was some sort of
14 disciplinary measure?
15 A. Well, if it was an active-duty policeman and if he was suspected
16 of a crime, he would have to go through criminal proceedings and
17 disciplinary proceedings; however, if he was a reservist, he would be
18 taken off the list immediately because he was at the wrong place and he
19 would be put at the disposal of the army. And if someone had committed a
20 crime on the territory of the police, a criminal report would be filed.
21 That was the proper road to take.
22 Q. And the dismissal from one's job was the most severe measure that
23 could be taken in disciplinary proceedings?
24 A. Yes, that was the ultimate measure.
25 Q. And, in fact, if you take a reserve policeman off the roster and
1 hand him over to the Ministry of Defence, his employment in the police is
3 A. Well, only one thing changes; his military deployment is not with
4 us, but with the army.
5 Q. And when a reserve policeman was in question, the best way to
6 remove him from the police and the fastest way was to send him over to
7 the military; right?
8 A. Yes, that's how it was, to avoid them giving a bad example to
9 other policemen both active duty and reservists. One couldn't wait.
10 Q. Because, in fact, the biggest problem in the police were not
11 regular policemen who had become police officers through the regular
12 procedure. It was these reserve policemen who, due to circumstances, had
13 become members of the reserve forces of the MUP; is that correct?
14 A. In order to understand this properly, many people who became
15 members of the reserve police force thought that they would have an
16 easier time there, while, at the same time, those who were hesitant or
17 prone to criminal activities thought that the uniform would give them a
18 sort of cover and help them undertake their criminal activities.
19 They were very upset when we decided to send them over to the
20 army. In Novo Sarajevo about 400 of them blocked the police station and
21 didn't allow the local chief to go in or out, or the other senior
22 officers in that station. I arrived there and tried to talk to them.
23 Some of them were drunk; they were carrying automatic weapons; and thanks
24 to my experience, because I believe I am able to communicate with people,
25 I choose my words carefully because the situation was very volatile, I
1 managed to get them to disperse peacefully. But I do want to stress that
2 in the end the decision was complied with and they were all put at the
3 disposal of the Army of the Republika Srpska. And that's just one
5 Q. When we look at the statistics, when we look at the report you
6 discussed with Mr. Cvijetic containing the number of MUP members who were
7 prosecuted and who -- against whom disciplinary procedures were
8 instituted and who were dismissed, we have to add the reservists to that
9 number who were taken off the roster; is that right?
10 A. I didn't understand you properly.
11 Q. Well, when you look at the reports arriving from certain SJBs
12 containing the numbers of people, of men, officers against whom
13 proceedings have been instituted, whether criminal or disciplinary, to
14 that number one should also add those who have been taken off the roster
15 in the reserve police force and put at the disposal of the army; is that
17 A. Of course. Because, at that time, our members were on our
18 roster. I didn't understand your question at first, but yes, yes, you
19 are quite right. There's no doubt about it.
20 Q. I will now move on to another topic you spoke about, that the
21 Prosecutor asked you about. The Prosecutor asked you some questions
22 including one about identifying the voices of certain people. You heard
23 some intercepts, and you spoke about several persons whose voices you
25 I'd like to take you back to another intercept that was not put
1 to you during the examination-in-chief, but it was put to you during your
2 interview. You will remember that the Prosecutor showed you a document.
3 It's 65 ter 1056.
4 You will see it on the monitor, but if it's easier for you, you
5 can look at the hard copy if the usher will hand it to you. That's
6 marked for identification 5981.
7 MS. KORNER: It's in the binder. It's in his binder.
8 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation]
9 Q. I don't know -- do you see it? Do you see it on the monitor?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. This transcript was shown to you, and you also heard the
12 recording of this intercept, so you looked at the transcript while
13 listening to the recording; is that correct?
14 A. Well, that was during my first interview in 2007. That's
15 precisely what happened. Mr. Nasiri [phoen], I think, was the
17 Q. And you told the Prosecutor on that occasion that you might be
18 able to recognise Stanisic's voice but not Stojan's voice, and you hadn't
19 had all that many contacts with Zupljanin?
20 A. Well, Stojan's voice is one I wouldn't be able to recognise.
21 There was a Gvozden whose name -- whose voice I couldn't recognise, but I
22 could recognise Mico's voice. And the other voices, well, sometimes if
23 you don't see the speaker, you can't really be sure whose voice it is.
24 Q. So the fact that the recording was played to you and that the
25 transcript was shown to you, this helped you identify the speakers,
1 didn't it?
2 A. Yes, certainly.
3 Q. But the practice is a little unusual, isn't it, if you're being
4 asked to identify a voice while being shown a transcript where that
5 person's name is mentioned?
6 A. Well, I don't know the rules. I thought that's how it should be.
7 Q. Mr. Borovcanin, you were shown -- you were asked about a meeting
8 in Belgrade on the 11th of July, 1992.
9 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Could we have in e-court the
10 minutes of that meeting; that's P160. That's page 1.
11 Q. You were shown the first page of that document and now let's look
12 at page 3. Look at the next page.
13 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] In e-court that's the page with
14 ERN 0324-1851.
15 Q. Let's just clarify. You see that the opening remarks are made by
16 Mico Stanisic as the minister, which is quite normal; it's to be
17 expected, isn't it?
18 A. Yes, it's to be expected.
19 Q. And if we look at the next page where the discussion is
20 summarised - 0324-1852, that's the next page - it says here, Summary of
21 the discussion. So this is only a summary, as far as I was able to see,
22 of all the interventions, but it doesn't mean that the speaker spoke in
23 this order?
24 A. Yes, whoever drew up the minutes just summarised this in any way
25 they wanted.
1 Q. You don't recall the order in which the participants spoke?
2 A. No, I can't recall that.
3 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Now, what I'm interested in now is
4 on page 5 in the B/C/S version and page 8 in the English version. So
5 could we please have that page shown to the witness.
6 Q. Mr. Borovcanin, look at the fourth paragraph from the bottom on
7 page 5.
8 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Could we zoom in, please. Page 5.
9 ERN 0324-1855.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Sorry, I'm still looking at the
11 summary. Is that it?
12 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation]
13 Q. No, the next page.
14 A. I don't have it on my screen.
15 Q. Well, it will turn up. Just a wait a little.
16 You see it's the longest paragraph, the one in the middle which
17 says "due to the loss ..." or "because of the casualties..." I will
18 read you a sentence which is not clear in the English translation where
19 Mr. Zupljanin says:
20 "The army is asking for the engagement of the entire composition
21 to be resubordinated and then they are pushing them forward on to the
22 most difficult front lines. This should be -- this should be made
23 impossible. Should be prevented."
24 In your responses, you spoke about resubordination. Did they ask
25 for the entire personnel of the station to be resubordinated to them and
1 engaged in combat activities?
2 A. I can answer that as follows: This tendency could be seen on the
3 territory of the centre also, and at the meeting I learned that that's
4 how it was in the Krajina. Excuse me.
5 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] As we are almost at the end of this
6 session, I think we could take a break now and continue later on so the
7 witness can recover from his cough.
8 JUDGE HALL
9 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, can I ask, are we in Court I this
10 afternoon? Are we in Court I?
11 JUDGE HALL
12 going to rise immediately.
13 Mr. Borovcanin, the usher will escort you from the courtroom now,
14 but we will resume here at 2.15.
15 THE WITNESS: Thank you.
16 [The witness stands down]
17 JUDGE DELVOIE: The Trial Chamber will raise two matters on which
18 it is seeking submissions. On Friday, the 19th of February, the
19 Prosecutor informed the parties and the Chamber by e-mail of a document
20 that is intends to use with Mr. Borovcanin. Among these documents was
21 Rule 65 ter 1931. This document was tendered by the Prosecution
22 yesterday and admitted into evidence as P998. It has come to the
23 Chamber's attention that Rule 65 ter 1931 does not appear on the
24 Prosecution's exhibit list submitted on the 8th of June, 2009, nor is it
25 included in the Prosecution's motion of Thursday, 18th February, to amend
1 the exhibit list. The Chamber asks the Prosecution for an explanation
2 when the hearing resumes at 14.15.
3 Second matter is the following: On the 22nd February, the
4 Prosecution informed the parties and the Chamber by e-mail of the
5 documents it intends to use with ST-166, who begins testimony tomorrow.
6 Twenty one of these documents are subject of the Prosecution's motion of
7 the 18th of February to amend its exhibit list. These are
8 Rule 65 ter numbers 03500 to 03520. The Trial Chamber has also noted
9 that two other documents which Prosecution -- which the Prosecution
10 intends to use with ST-166 are also subject of the motion. These are
11 Rule 65 ter numbers 03557 and 03559.
12 The Trial Chamber intends to rule on the motion in respect of
13 those 23 documents before ST-166 begins to testify. The Stanisic Defence
14 responded on the 23rd of February opposing the addition. However, the
15 Zupljanin Defence has not yet responded. Mr. Pantelic, if you intend to
16 respond to the motion regarding the 23 documents or the motion in its
17 entirety, the Trial Chamber will hear you as we resume at 14.15 hours.
18 Thank you.
19 --- Recess taken at 1.49 p.m.
20 --- On resuming at 2.22 p.m.
21 MS. KORNER: Do Your Honours want me to deal with the exhibit now
22 or after the witness is finished? 1931.
23 JUDGE HALL
24 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour, at this applies to me also
25 because these are housekeeping matters. Thank you.
1 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, Mr. Krgovic, please continue.
2 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Mr. Borovcanin, we were at this
3 document which I would kindly ask to be brought up on the screen again.
4 It is document 560. P160, I apologise. It is page number 5 in the B/C/S
5 version and page number 8 in the English version. This is the page with
6 the ERN 0324-1855 in the Serbo-Croat version.
7 Q. Mr. Borovcanin, we have talked about this part, we talked about
8 it before the break, about this practice for entire police stations to be
9 resubordinated to the army so that the police stations would actually be
10 depleted of personnel and would not be able to do their own work. That
11 was a large-scale phenomenon, was it not?
12 A. Yes, it was.
13 Q. And when you were talking about the functioning of the MUP about
14 the various rules and regulations, the way it should be organised, and
15 the way in which it should function and proceed generally, you were
16 speaking from the aspect, shall we say, of a normal state of affairs,
17 normal times, as it were. But for one to appreciate the situation in
18 which you were concretely at that time and the entire MUP, that should be
19 placed within a war context, should it not?
20 A. Yes, of course. In May or April in 1992, nothing was normal.
21 The situation was chaotic. First of all, it was difficult for one to
22 observe everything and to see what was happening, let alone take the
23 necessary measures. One had to be mindful of one's sequence of steps.
24 To be able to take any steps, one had to be aware of what was happening.
25 One had to have the proper information. Everything was taken in one
2 Q. It is much easier, you will agree with me, for us to observe the
3 functioning of the MUP in that period from this time distance and to also
4 find fault with it than it was for you who were right there in the thick
5 of the events and when you should have been the ones to be best informed?
6 A. But, of course, when some time has elapsed, if you observe things
7 after a distance, after the passage of time, with a sober head, you, of
8 course, in hindsight, know what measures should have been taken. But one
9 has to conjure up the situation that we had, this picture of chaos. It
10 is very difficult for someone who was not there, who had not experienced
11 it himself. And, of course, that being so, it is easy to criticise in
13 Q. And it is the united stand of all the participants in 1992 that
14 the situation was all but satisfactory and that actually at that meeting
15 you came to actually air your troubles to one another and to see what
16 could be done; was that not the case?
17 A. Yes, when I spoke before about this topic, I said it was first of
18 all an occasion for us to meet and to see one another and then it was
19 easier for us when we realised that problems were also present in other
20 areas, that they were common problems. That is when we could actually
21 set about making a strategy to deal with them.
22 Q. And more or less the problems which were presented at this
23 meeting that Stojan Zupljanin speaks about, these problems also featured
24 throughout the territory of Republika Srpska, including your own centre
25 of public security; right?
1 A. Yes. I have already talked about the centre. We heard about it
2 from Mr. Stojan and from Mr. Savic in respect of Trebinje and other
3 centres in Doboj, et cetera. We all realised -- altogether realised how
4 formidable the problems were that we were all faced with and that we had
5 to set about dealing with those problems within the MUP in an organised
7 Q. You said, actually, Mr. Zupljanin, Stojan Zupljanin is talking
8 about the existence of certain centres and places where the army or
9 actually the Crisis Staffs were bringing the civilian population and
10 handing it over like a hot potato to the MUP. That is the first time
11 that you heard of such things happening, was it not?
12 A. Yes, that was the first information that we received about such
13 events at that collegium meeting, at least as far as I'm concerned, that
14 was the first time I heard about it.
15 Q. In your interview with the Prosecutor, you said that -- I shall
16 paraphrase, but the gist of it was that you said, If I had not read this
17 statement, my memory has faded, but I do know something else, namely as a
18 result of this contribution of Stojan Zupljanin's, the ministry took an
19 action. There was a MUP inspection which actually inspected the
20 collection centres in situ, and, after that, they were disbanded.
21 Was that what you said?
22 A. Yes, exactly. The first information about this -- after
23 receiving the first information about this, the minister took urgent and
24 prompt action because he was aware of how prejudicial this generally was,
25 and he ordered that all these centres within the Banja Luka centre area
1 should be inspected and proper action taken, which was indeed done.
2 Q. Because bearing in mind what Stojan Zupljanin has presented that
3 it was actually the army and the Crisis Staffs in the various
4 municipalities, that they were the ones setting up these collection
5 centres. This was not something that could be dealt with by individual
6 police action. It had to be on a more general level, the government, the
7 army, the minister who was the one to initiate the resolution of that
9 A. In my -- what little I know about this, and as I said before, any
10 war in the world also produces prisoners of war; that is one of the
11 collateral damages of war. So my modest knowledge, as I said according
12 to the Law on All People's Defence, the Army of the Republika Srpska was
13 primarily responsible for the collection centres, for their security, for
14 their reporting to the ICRS, et cetera. Members of the ministry - but I
15 didn't know that at the time - in Krajina, they asked us to secure these
16 camps; so it was indeed a hot potato that was given us in that sense.
17 And it should be seen as such, because it was primarily the
18 responsibility of the army. It was within their competence.
19 Q. And the information given by Stojan Zupljanin at this extended
20 collegium about the existence of these centres and the conditions which
21 obtained there, as well as the subsequent action the minister took
22 including -- involving you, this is something -- this is something that
23 anyone would have done including you?
24 A. Of course, first of all, they would point out the problem, if any
25 existed. That is the first step. And this information opened the eyes
1 of us all. We started re-examining what was happening in our area, as
2 I've already described.
3 Q. And an adequate reaction on the part of the minister ensued, did
4 it not?
5 A. Yes, of course. This was something that broke to no delay. This
6 was the priority of priorities.
7 Q. And, after that, the ministry sent numerous dispatches and
8 instructions on what kind of action was taken in cases like this, what
9 was to be done. So action was -- some action taken, was it not?
10 A. I would not just call it an action. Action is something very
11 specific or maybe a one-time phenomenon. This was a series of measures
12 and activities. First of all, by the preparation of dispatches informing
13 the competent centres, the SJBs, et cetera. And in every dispatch, it
14 was insisted that the content, i.e., the orders given from the top of the
15 MUP, should be executed. This was done in continuity. This was arduous
16 work. And that is how it should be seen.
17 Q. Could you please look at the next page.
18 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] That's page 6 in the Serbian
19 version, and in English it's page 9. It's 0324-1856. The -- well, it's
20 page 8, actually, in the English version; that's where the answer starts.
21 Q. Mr. Borovcanin, look at the second paragraph from the top where
22 Mr. Zupljanin talks about the problems you mentioned today, several
23 thousand court cases pending, no judges to try criminal cases,
24 intimidation of judges, courts not functioning at all in some areas. So
25 this is the same sort of situation that obtained on the territory of your
1 centre, is it not?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Another problem, as I understand this, hardened criminals are
4 being released from prison, and this is hindering the establishment of
5 the rule of law. As I understand this, the police would arrest someone
6 against whom a criminal report had been filed, and then they would
7 release him and he would turn up somewhere else. And, of course, this
8 influenced your work and your ability to prevent crime?
9 A. Well, now you've jogged my memory and reminded me of a problem
10 which was a huge problem in practice. We would bring someone in, detain
11 him while we did our operative work. We couldn't hold that person for
12 longer than three days. We would ostensibly file a criminal report, but
13 there was no one to hand it over to, and that person would be at liberty
14 again. And very often we would get complaints from citizens. They would
15 say, How come this person is at large, wandering around, firing shots,
16 threatening people. But, I tell you, it was a long process, and that's
17 how it should be understood.
18 Let me assure you, and I'm not speaking only from the viewpoint
19 of the Serbian MUP, it was probably like that in the Federation as well.
20 Criminals took over in many areas. That's how it was.
21 Q. And, finally, Mr. Zupljanin, there was mention of the way the MUP
22 was funded, and it was concluded that the MUP should be funded from a
23 single centre because local municipalities who funded MUP stations
24 thought this gave them the right to issue orders, and this had an impact
25 on the proper workings of the MUP?
1 A. Yes, I've already told you, this was an enormous problem. If
2 someone is paying me, then I answer to them, metaphorically speaking.
3 However, this was a mistake on the part of people who thought they could
4 now have their own private police force. This couldn't be allowed to
6 Q. And the general standpoint was that all these issues should be
7 solved, that conclusions should be drawn up, and that efforts should be
8 made to put a stop to all this?
9 A. Yes, that's right. This was a significant new beginning in the
10 organisation of the MUP and its work.
11 Q. And, to the best of your knowledge, in the further work of the
12 MUP, everything possible was done to create a foundation for the MUP,
13 appropriate to a state governed by the rule of law, and to establish a
14 proper hierarchy?
15 A. Yes, that's correct. In every government there are some
16 ministries which are the most important, and among them is always the
17 Ministry of the Interior which is in charge of maintaining law and order,
18 protecting citizens and their property. With all due respect to other
19 institutions, especially in times such as those were, the MUP was an
20 institution which had to have support at all levels in order for it to be
21 what it was supposed to be.
22 Q. And, certainly, in your later work, you saw that there was a lot
23 of resistance coming from various sides, that it was a long and arduous
24 process, and that up to the end of 1992 it was very difficult to
25 establish order; some sort of order was established, but not fully?
1 A. Of course it was difficult. I have to make just a small
2 digression and tell you that in that period I was more afraid of my own
3 Serbs, so to speak, because of the operative action I had to take on the
4 ground to prevent their criminal activities, than I was afraid of being
5 killed on a front line somewhere. And I wasn't the only one. We were
6 all threatened. We mentioned paramilitaries and other self-organised
7 criminal groups.
8 Q. And in this period, that is, April, May, June, and July up to
9 this meeting, complete chaos prevailed, disorganisation, and it was not
10 possible for the MUP to carry out its work properly and according to the
11 law. Is that how it was?
12 A. Yes, of course that's how it was. A lot of things were not
13 functioning. Communications were not functioning. It's a long story. I
14 do not want to take up your time, but that's really how it was.
15 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Borovcanin, I have
16 no further questions for you.
17 Re-examination by Ms. Korner:
18 Q. Mr. Borovcanin, I thought we'd actually dealt with communications
19 because we looked at the report. Is it your -- now your evidence that
20 between April and July there was no communication between the CSB and the
21 SJBs? Because that's what you've just said.
22 A. I said in several places. But if you were to take the context of
23 everything I said about the functioning of communications, I think the
24 real conclusion would be that in some places it was very difficult at the
25 beginning. I never said it did not function at all, but it was all work
1 in progress. We didn't have staff; we had to find lads who could install
2 things. We had some ancient Motorolas, museum pieces. And you have to
3 understand that, unlike many other centres, we sprang up from scratch.
4 We entered premises not belonging to us to start work, communications
5 were difficult, and I said that we even had to organise a courier service
6 when needed.
7 Q. All right. I accept entirely that communication was difficult,
8 but it is not your evidence, I just want to make this quite clear, is
9 that right, that there was no communication, that, in other words, that
10 SJBs were wholly cut off from the CSB in Lukavica?
11 A. At one point they were cut off.
12 Q. When?
13 A. In April. April and part of May. And there were some with whom
14 we had no communication whatsoever. But for me to remember out of those
15 25 stations under our jurisdiction, I'd have to give it a lot of thought
16 to recall how things happened and how we managed to cover all these
17 communications. It would take time for me to clarify it. I know exactly
18 how things went.
19 Q. Would it -- let's see if we can arrive at a happy medium. Would
20 this be fair: From time to time there would be difficulties in
21 communication with a particular SJB?
22 A. Well, if we look at things in that narrow way, throughout the war
23 there are occasional difficulties in communication, but, generally
24 speaking, the beginning was very difficult. At the beginning, there were
25 more times when communications were cut off than when they were working.
1 Q. All right. Telephone lines were all existing, even during
2 April and May, were they not?
3 A. No. To illustrate or to help you understand --
4 Q. No, I don't want an illustration. I want you tell me, please,
5 when you say telephone lines were not working between the CSB and the
7 A. At the very beginning of the war all communications were cut off,
8 even in the security centre where we were, there was only a single
9 telephone line. I don't know how it functioned. I'm not an expert, but
10 that was the only communication we had with the federal part of town.
11 And if I were now to start talking about Vogosca, Ilijas, Ilidza, and so
12 on, that's the western part of Sarajevo, I don't know when was the first
13 time I established communication. I can't recall, but it was certainly
14 not in April or May, definitely not.
15 Q. Are you saying you had absolutely no communication with Vogosca,
16 Ilijas, and Ilidza for the whole of April and the whole of May? No
17 reports, nothing. Is that what your evidence is?
18 A. Well, I can't say that for the entire two months there was
19 nothing at all. I can't remember every detail. But, certainly, lines
20 were very difficult. The technicians in charge did their best to set it
21 up. But, well, really I don't understand your question. I'm trying to
22 give you as objective an answer as possible.
23 Q. It's a very simple question. I don't know what the difficulty
24 is. But I think you've dealt with it, in any event.
25 All right, I want to go back to some of the matters you were
1 asked about during cross-examination. Firstly, you were shown a document
2 which, just a moment, I think had 65 ter number 2398. No, I think it's
3 P993. Yes.
4 MS. KORNER: And can we have in English the second page, please,
5 because this was the part that you were shown. It's in B/C/S also, the
6 second page.
7 Q. Now, you were asked about this by Mr. Cvijetic, paragraph in the
8 middle, about the appointment of Mr. Stevanovic and Vasiljevic and about
9 the appointment by some other people, by the municipal bodies. Right.
10 And you then said -- you agreed, when it was put to you by Mr. Cvijetic,
11 that there was a lot of interference by the local bodies. Do you
12 remember that?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. You were asked, weren't you, during the course of your interview
15 about this, about interference by Crisis Staffs. And I'd like you to
16 refresh your memory, if you could, to what you told the investigators.
17 A. Excuse me, are you referring to the 2007 interview or the one I
18 had with you before appearing in the courtroom? Which particular
19 interview are you talking about?
20 Q. You didn't have an interview with me, but you had an interview,
21 one interview, and one interview only in 2007.
22 MS. KORNER: Can I ask you, please, there is in fact,
23 Your Honours a B/C/S -- it's one of the few; we've had it translated,
24 amazingly enough, into B/C/S. And the Defence put it into their document
25 bundle. And I think you'll find it -- well, I don't know, it might -- we
1 didn't have any dividers given to us, so I don't know where it was put
2 in. Maybe the Defence can help. There is a B/C/S version of his
3 interview, and it's page 30 of 77.
4 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] If you are referring to the
5 interview or the tape of the interview, it is in the witness's binder
6 under number 3.
7 MS. KORNER: It should be a copy in the witness's own language.
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I have it. I have it before me.
9 MS. KORNER:
10 Q. Good. Could you turn to page -- at the bottom you'll see it's
11 got page numbers. And it says page 30 of 77. And could you just read to
12 yourself from halfway -- from the question about halfway down the page
13 and then for the next couple of pages. So pages 30, 31, and 32. Let me
14 know when you've finished, please. Let me know when you've read down to
15 the answer -- or the question from Mr. Nasir [phoen]. You said that the
16 Crisis Staff had no influence on your work as a police chief or the CSB
17 chief of police affairs, and you said, Absolutely not. Just let me know
18 when you have reached that part.
19 A. I'm done. You can ask your question.
20 Q. Thank you. Having refreshed your memory from this interview, is
21 it right that you told the investigators on three occasions that there
22 had been no complaints to you from SJB chiefs about influence from
23 Crisis Staffs and indeed they had no effect on your work as a police
24 chief. Now you seem to say that the opposite is the case; that the
25 authorities, the municipal authorities were interfering, interfering
1 constantly. So which is correct?
2 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, just to prevent a
3 misquote, the interview refers to the Crisis Staff. And in his report,
4 the gentleman said that municipal bodies were doing -- making some
5 appointments in the SJB and that is what led to the duality. So in his
6 interview he is referring to a different agency.
7 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, that's exactly the question I ask.
8 Q. I said, In your interview you told them that the Crisis Staffs
9 had no effect on your work or nor did the SJB chiefs complain to you
10 that. Now you're saying municipal authorities were interfering. What's
11 the difference, at this stage we are talking about, between the
12 Crisis Staffs and the municipal authorities?
13 A. It is a difficult question, for me to make this distinction
14 between the Crisis Staff and the municipal authorities. I'll tell you
15 why. I know who the municipal authorities were, appointed people, the
16 President of the Assembly of the Executive Board, et cetera. But with
17 their functions overlapped with other posts, that is something that I
18 don't know, namely for a president of the municipality to also have been
19 the president of the Crisis Staff. I don't know that that was the case.
20 I was not affiliated with any party. I have no information about the
21 goings on as far as the Crisis Staffs were concerned. What I do know for
22 a fact is that we had such problems, and I referred to Mr. Cvijetic in
23 connection with Marko Milanovic and a local [indiscernible], shall I call
24 them that, who were actually waging policy at municipal level. That is
25 the whole truth about that.
1 As regards to the interview, let me just say how I understood
2 that things were being done because when I see a document, my memory is
3 jogged. Perhaps when I gave this interview in 2007 I was selectively
4 given some documents for my perusal, and so guided by the documents that
5 were presented before me, that is actually how I remembered specific
6 things. I can understand this as a policeman, this sort of investigative
7 method. Had I been formulated a question differently or shown a
8 different document, perhaps I would have given a different reply, because
9 my replies were guided in this way. This is what I can say.
10 Q. Well, just go back to the beginning of it, because the
11 question -- you weren't shown any documents, were you, Mr. Borovcanin?
12 The investigator said to you:
13 "Can you tell us about since you are visiting the SJBs in the
14 1992, what role the Crisis Staffs had in the workings of the SJB?"
15 So it was an open-ended, no document question.
16 Your answer:
17 "I never had the opportunity to be present at any meeting of that
18 kind, so I cannot officially comment on any of the role, because,
19 personally, did I not see any influence on them within the stations."
20 The investigator said to you:
21 "I understand that. You didn't attend a meeting, but you were
22 meeting -- you were within the police stations. Did they tell you that
23 any influence on Crisis Staffs on them" -- it's rather badly
24 phrased, but ...
25 And your answer, again:
1 "As far as I'm familiar with, no."
2 And then it went on for two pages, as you've just read.
3 So you weren't shown any documents and you never said to them,
4 I'm sorry, I don't know what a Crisis Staff is.
5 You knew what a Crisis Staff was, didn't you?
6 A. Let me try to put this in simple terms. A Crisis Staff is a sort
7 of a self-organised group of people, that is how I conceived of it. I
8 never attended any of their sessions. That is true. But, by just being
9 there, I learned that a local authorities were interfering with the MUP's
10 personnel policy. I mentioned a certain document -- a certain gentleman
11 at whose place I spent the night, and this is illustrative. This man who
12 had a very good intention of putting things in order who was called the
13 commissioner of town, this was one Lukic, he warned me, because I delved
14 deeper into some crime issues and problems. He told me, Do not go out at
15 night because you will vanish into thin air.
16 And I'm just illustrating because something similar had happened
17 to him. I'm just illustrating the situation at the time. Had the police
18 been different, the things would have been different. And local
19 authorities definitely interfered. It is -- this is not just in relation
20 to the Crisis Staff. The Crisis Staff cannot explain everything that
22 Q. All right. In any event, in this particular event that was
23 covered in this report, if we look at the paragraph underneath that, it
24 was suggested and immediately accepted by Ostoja Bozic, that the command
25 of the deputy posts were to be taken over by Bogdan Stevanovic and
1 Milos Vasiljevic who have for these posts the decision of the ministry,
2 and the handover was to be carried out.
3 So once it was discovered what was happening, the proper
4 personnel took over the police station; is that right?
5 A. Well, yes. This just confirms that the ministry's endeavours to
6 put things in order. And that is how Mr. Stevanovic and Vasiljevic were
7 appointed. These were experienced policemen, especially Bogdanovic. But
8 it was thanks to a degree of flexibility that we exhibited that we could
9 solve this problem in a peaceful way. The people realised that they had
10 been wrong, and they withdrew peacefully, stepped down peacefully.
11 Q. The reality was that the local -- the municipal authorities could
12 suggest appointments, and quite often did, but it was only the minister
13 who had the power to make those appointments, wasn't it?
14 A. You just omitted to say one thing. Yes, the municipal
15 authorities could suggest it, but they -- the potential candidates had to
16 pass some tests, physical, mental ability, aptitude, and what we
17 call -- what we used to call moral and political suitability of
18 candidates had also to be checked; they had to be vetted for that.
19 Q. All right. And on the same note, let's have a look at this
20 Maksimovic saga, shall we. You were shown a document --
21 MS. KORNER: I'm not sure, I think it was produced as an exhibit,
22 nor am I sure what the number is, but I think it's -- it was 1D00-6682.
23 It's the one after --
24 JUDGE HARHOFF: That's the 31st October response from Vogosca.
25 MS. KORNER: It is, yes. Thank you very much. Exactly,
1 Your Honours.
2 JUDGE HARHOFF: It's 1D185.
3 MS. KORNER: Could we have that up, sorry. I suppose I didn't
4 make that clear.
5 Q. And this, I think, was to demonstrate the interference and the
6 difficulties with this police station, at least I assume it is. And it
7 states there:
8 "The policemen have issued an ultimatum. They will all quit
9 Vogosca if the chiefs goes. He was appointed by the Assembly of the
10 Vogosca, a Serbian municipality, and only that Assembly can recall him."
11 MS. KORNER: Now, could we have up, please, 65 ter 3091.
12 Q. Okay. Does that show that Mr. Maksimovic, contrary to what's
13 asserted in this document here, was temporarily assigned the duties and
14 task of commander until the adoption of the rules of procedure of the
15 Ministry of the Interior, and that's dated the 1st of April and signed,
16 stamped anyhow, by Mico Stanisic? Were you aware that he wasn't
17 officially appointed? I know it's temporarily, that was while all of
18 this was going on, as Mr. Stanisic says, that he was appointed by
19 Mico Stanisic?
20 A. That he was the chief? I knew that. As for this document, this
21 is the first time I see it. And I didn't know that he had been appointed
22 to this post as indicated here. I know that there had been a suggestion,
23 a proposal on behalf of the local community, but the checking here was
24 purely done, this is what I can assess on the basis of this document,
25 prior to the appointment, Mr. Maksimovic's appointment.
1 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] These are two different posts,
2 different functions. Here he is appointed the commander, the "komandir."
3 It was the municipal -- the competent municipal organ appointed him chief
4 of ...
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, now I can see that it is the
6 commander in the sense of "komandir."
7 MS. KORNER:
8 Q. He was appointed commander -- I don't know whether the -- wasn't
9 he also -- he couldn't have been the chief of the SJB had he not been
10 authorised as chief of the SJB by Mico Stanisic as minister; isn't that
12 A. I did not quite understand your question the way it was put.
13 What do you mean by "he had not been authorised"?
14 Q. Without a formal appointment by Mico Stanisic, could
15 Mr. Maksimovic, whatever the Assembly or the Crisis Staff in Vogosca
16 wanted to do, could he have been the chief of the SJB without an
17 appointment from Mico Stanisic?
18 A. If I understand you properly, that is exactly so. I don't know
19 about this intermezzo between his appointment as commander, "komandir,"
20 or -- and his later appointment as chief. I can suppose that someone
21 from the local authorities promoted him to the position of chief of the
23 Q. No, no. Let's not repeat this, shall we. Whatever the local
24 authority recommended or wanted to do, they had no power, did they, to
25 appoint the chief of police?
1 A. Of course. And this was so in other areas, not only in Vogosca.
2 They did not have the power, but they did appoint. How did they do that?
3 They ignored the MUP as an institution. That is why this interlude is
4 not clear to me, as I say, because they probably appointed him without
5 the knowledge of the minister. Otherwise, the relevant, or whatever,
6 would have been signed by the minister, Mr. Stanisic.
7 Q. Yes, well -- all right. For the moment, let's not take that
9 MS. KORNER: Would Your Honours give me one moment.
10 Q. Let's move on to another topic. You were shown --
11 JUDGE DELVOIE: Ms. Korner, you don't want this document
13 MS. KORNER: Oh, well, if I can. He says he has never seen it
15 JUDGE DELVOIE: Oh, okay.
16 MS. KORNER: I mean, if I can, I would, yes. It is definitely on
17 our 65 ter list. Well, Your Honours, I certainly do ask, if there's no
18 objection, if I can have this exhibited. It's obviously relevant to the
19 saga that Mr. Cvijetic has been going through.
20 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, we object for a very
21 simple reason: The admission of this document has to be accompanied by
22 an explanation, but we no longer have the right to question the witness.
23 How it came about that this Maksimovic became komandir, a commander on a
24 temporary basis, but we will have to deal with that through another
25 witness, because I cannot testify and I can no longer examine this
1 witness. So we'll have to wait for another witness to whom we can put
2 this question in cross-examination.
3 JUDGE HALL
4 marked for identification at this stage.
5 THE REGISTRAR: This will be Exhibit P1000 marked for
6 identification, Your Honours.
7 MS. KORNER:
8 Q. I want to move on to a slightly different topic but an allied
9 one. You were -- it was put to you by Mr. Cvijetic again that
10 Mico Stanisic repeated his order on a number of occasions about the
11 removal of police who had committed crimes to be put at the disposal of
12 the army. You remember that? Do you have any idea why Mico Stanisic
13 felt it necessary to repeat that order so often?
14 A. The answer to that question is simple. Is it logical for members
15 of the MUP to be criminals and to continue working as police officers?
16 That doesn't go together, does it?
17 Q. No, but he was the minister of the interior. Why wasn't one
18 order sufficient? Why repeat it? If you don't know, say so.
19 A. It was necessary because the thing didn't end with just one
20 crime. Crimes kept being carried out. So every time this happened, he
21 needed to repeat his order and say, Let's clean up our ranks. Just one
22 order wasn't enough to finish the job.
23 Q. Why didn't -- I understand what you say that this didn't mean
24 that no criminal proceedings would be instituted, but why doesn't it say,
25 Police officers who commit crimes shall be removed and prosecuted? Why
1 doesn't it say that?
2 JUDGE HALL
3 Ms. Korner?
4 MS. KORNER: I appreciate the problem.
5 Q. Would you have expected, in your position, with your length of
6 service, that the order issued by Mico Stanisic would have said these
7 criminals within the police shall be removed and criminal reports filed
8 against them?
9 A. I don't see what's so odd about that. He ordered that we should
10 remove those who had strayed, so to speak. And in spite of my best
11 intentions to focus on your question, I still find it a little bit
13 Q. Let's do it one more time, shall we. Again. The order simply
14 says those who commit crimes shall be dismissed or suspended from the
15 service and placed at the disposal of the VRS.
16 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Just a moment. Your Honour, the
17 order was not interpreted completely. It also says, Take the legally
18 prescribed measures. So that should be included also.
19 In your binder, sir, that's in tab 14. So look at the order
20 before you reply.
21 MS. KORNER: All right. Can you tell me what the number of the
22 order is and we'll have it up. Not the tab number, what's the exhibit
24 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] 1D58.
25 MS. KORNER:
1 Q. Right. Let's read 1:
2 "Legal measures to be taken against all members the MUP who have
3 committed criminal acts (other than political and verbal offences) before
4 or since the beginning of the war, in other words, the formation of the
5 MUP of the Republic of Serbia of Bosnia-Herzegovina, they should be
6 removed from our order, dismissed, and made available to the
7 Army of the Serbian Republic."
8 So the legal measures to be taken, and if you say that's a
9 misreading, are that they shall be removed, dismissed, and made available
10 to the army. Where does it say there "and criminal proceedings will be
12 A. You are narrowing the area covered by the legal measures. Police
13 officers act according to a legal act, and these are the legal measures
14 referred to. The minister couldn't put a detailed description here as to
15 all the things that should be done, but the police knew that. It was
16 prescribed in the law. And criminal proceedings would be carried out at
17 the same time, in parallel with the disciplinary procedure. I don't see
18 anything here that isn't clear.
19 Q. Right. So it is your understanding and you say it would be every
20 police officer's understanding that the legal measures are not simply
21 throwing them out of the police and giving them to the army but also
22 taking criminal proceedings? You say that's absolutely clear from that
23 order, do you?
24 A. Let me repeat. These are two different processes, disciplinary
25 proceedings. For example, a policeman commits a your murder, he is
1 automatically suspended --
2 Q. I'm going to stop you. I'm sorry, because, again, time is
3 running out. I -- my question was simply: Do you say that any officer
4 reading that order would realise that legal measures encompassed criminal
6 A. If he was at all trained, he would understand this. But it
7 wouldn't be the police officer but his superior officer who would
8 initiate the disciplinary and the criminal proceedings. And the police
9 officer would simply participate in this.
10 Q. All right. Well, as I say, I want to move on.
11 You were asked about the documents 1D56 and 1D55 about the camps.
12 MS. KORNER: Sorry, Your Honours, just a moment.
13 Q. And you said, if I can find it -- that's right. We better have
14 that up, I suppose.
15 MS. KORNER: ID -- have we got that up? 1D56.
16 Q. Yes, this is where the ministry should immediately be informed of
17 the existence of possible wild prison, camps, et cetera, or treatment of
18 prisoners of war, et cetera. And you said this, that:
19 "We had nothing to do with the camps."
20 Now, were you -- you were aware by then, weren't you, that - this
21 is the 17th of August and that's what prompted all these requests from
22 the ministry - that camps were being run by the police and had nothing to
23 do with the military?
24 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] That's a leading question because
25 something that has not yet been established is being put to the witness.
1 MS. KORNER: No, the witness said in chief, Your Honours, if you
2 recall, that he had seen the television footage in relation to the
3 Prijedor camps, Omarska.
4 Q. So you knew by then, by the 17th of August, that camps --
5 MR. KRGOVIC: When? Witness saw this picture? That's the basis
6 for the question.
7 MS. KORNER: Okay.
8 Q. Did you see the television footage aired around the 6th of August
9 of the camps in the Prijedor region?
10 A. At that time, definitely not. At that time, we could not watch
11 TV regularly but only from time to time. We would get news programmes
12 occasionally. I can't remember at what period that image kept being
13 shown on both the Republika Srpska TV and the federal TV. It's still
14 being shown to this day. So I couldn't tell you the date, but my
15 knowledge about this stems from the first collegium meeting in Belgrade
16 when this was discussed. And when I saw those images, I understood that
17 this was what they had been talking about. But I cannot remember what
18 period of time it was.
19 Q. Okay. You are talk about the meeting on the 11th of July when
20 Zupljanin explained about the camps that they were running; right? Is
21 that right?
22 MR. KRGOVIC: Your Honour, it's misleading. Zupljanin in -- this
23 document does not say that running by the police at all.
24 MS. KORNER: You know, I really don't want to have to go back to
25 each document, but I will. If there's any dispute that what Zupljanin is
1 saying is the army rounded up people and they were left to the police to
2 look after these people in camps; is that disputed? Is that disputed
3 that's what he said at this meeting? Right. No, I hear it's not
4 disputed. Right.
5 Q. By the 17th of August, were you aware of the Susica camp run by
6 police officers, by the police?
7 A. No. Definitely not.
8 Q. When did you first hear about that then? In your area of
10 A. I can't recall for certain when I heard about it. There were
11 many events. In 1992, yes, but I can't recall what month, really.
12 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Yes, but I think it would have
13 been fair to ask who ran the Susica camp and who was in charge of it.
14 JUDGE HALL
15 MS. KORNER: Thank you.
16 Q. All right. It is -- I just want understand -- for the
17 Trial Chamber to understand with you -- from you, Mr. Borovcanin, it's
18 still your case, is it still what you assert, that police officers, the
19 MUP, had nothing whatsoever to do with the running of detention camps,
20 and they were all run by the military? Is that what you want the
21 Trial Chamber to hear?
22 A. In a nutshell, yes. The army was in charge of the camps.
23 There's no doubt about that. We only provided security occasionally, and
24 I've already spoken about that.
25 Q. All right. Now, I want to turn to another topic, please, very
1 quickly. You told us that you were in charge of uniformed police and had
2 nothing to do with crime investigation; is that right?
3 A. If you are referring to the uniformed police, okay, yes. I was
4 in charge of them, but the largest part of the work was done by the crime
5 prevention department. We were engaged in other operative work on the
7 Q. [Overlapping speakers] ... that's what you told us yesterday and
8 to this is what I'm querying. You've been shown a large number of
9 documents today relating to crime investigation and crime prosecutions
10 and the like. And you've given your opinion and said you were aware of
11 them. Why, when you were in charge of the uniformed police and did not
12 deal with the crime, the investigation department, are you suddenly able
13 to talk about all these matters that you were shown by the Defence?
14 A. Quite simply, let me try to explain again.
15 Q. Shortly, please, we've got, I think, by my reckoning, 15 minutes,
16 if we're lucky.
17 A. In the context of your question, let me say we were not able to
18 deal with crime investigations of that kind, especially as the police was
19 frequently engaged in combat at the front lines. The ground was not
20 covered, and we could barely manage to carry out our regular work and
21 responsibilities. That's why we didn't deal with that kind of work in
23 Q. No, but -- all right. Actually I didn't -- I think this is more
24 argument than anything else. So can I deal with some other matters,
1 Well, I'm asked to go back to -- the person in charge of
2 Susica camp, Mr. Cvijetic wants me to put to you and perhaps you knew
3 this, was a man called Dragan Nikolic, wasn't he?
4 A. I don't know that.
5 Q. Who was a member of the police?
6 A. You mean that Nikolic was a member of the police? This is the
7 first time I hear of it.
8 Q. All right. I'm sorry, I just -- I'll have to -- all right. You
9 were asked a number of questions about the investigations, I say, for
10 which you gave various answers, so I want to put some further ones to
11 you. When a potential crime, including a war crime, became known to the
12 police, where was it recorded?
13 A. In every public security station there is a crimes register, in
14 other words, a book in which one enters, under the different serial
15 numbers in the different columns, the type of crime and its
16 characteristics, the time of commission, possibly the perpetrators, and
17 all pertinent data.
18 Q. Would this include cases in which a perpetrator is unknown or has
19 left the area?
20 A. It would -- any crime would be registered, whether the
21 perpetrator is known or unknown. That was the rule.
22 Q. Would the potential crime be logged in the crime register even if
23 the police hasn't finished their full investigation into the case?
24 A. Anyone who knows about police work --
25 Q. Just answer yes or no, please.
1 A. It certainly would have been logged. There is no dilemma there.
2 Q. Would there ever be an instance where the police would not record
3 a potential crime in the crime register?
4 A. If something is not registered, then it didn't exist. There may
5 have been such instances, but not that I am aware of.
6 Q. You see, that's what -- something you said earlier. You wouldn't
7 be aware of it, unless you knew from other sources, if it hadn't been
8 recorded, would you? So someone deliberately doesn't enter a crime into
9 the register, then you would have no knowing -- no way of knowing whether
10 a crime had occurred and not been registered?
11 A. Well, that's not exactly so. Any information, even if it is
12 post festini [as interpreted], would be registered. Even a year later.
13 Now, regards to your question, whether people deliberately failed to
14 register or log something, that is speculation as far as I'm concerned.
15 I don't know. I cannot say. Individuals might have done that, but it is
16 something that should not have happened. I don't see that any
17 professional policeman would have withheld any information of that kind.
18 Q. And as you said earlier, when RS MUP or CSB inspectors visited
19 the SJBs, they would review the crime registers, wouldn't they?
20 A. That is right. They would review all the registers maintained in
21 the stations. They would inspect all the information contained there and
22 any abuses of power and everything that such inspection reviews
24 Q. Given what you know about what was happening to the non-Serb
25 population in your CSB
1 showed no crimes at all committed against Muslims or Croats during this
3 A. As regards this, in addition to the crime register, the ministry
4 also sent forms to be filled about committed war crimes. We didn't have
5 that before the war because no such need existed before the war because
6 it was a new phenomenon produced by the war. So an additional document
7 were these questionnaires where such war crimes would be documented.
8 Q. I'm sorry, I'll go back to the original question.
9 Would you be surprised if crime registers for any of the stations
10 within your area of responsibility, the CSB Romanija Birac, contained no
11 entries at all during 1992 for crimes committed against non-Serbs?
12 A. I would be surprised if there had been such crimes and they were
13 not registered. Nothing more.
14 Q. All right. Now, finally, on this aspect, you were shown this
15 criminal complaint in respect of this incident in December of 1992 from
16 Vogosca, the seven Muslims who were shot by the Serb perpetrator. You
17 said this was a heinous crime. Was it one that was very notorious within
19 A. It certainly was a heinous crime. Now, how do you mean was it
20 notorious in Sarajevo? What part of Sarajevo are you referring to?
21 Q. I mean well known that this incident had happened, attracting
23 A. Well, it is not every day that such a crime happens. That's one
24 thing. Secondly, I don't know how publicised it was, how known it was.
25 That is something I cannot comment on.
1 Q. All right. I'm sorry, I did -- I left the question of camps, but
2 I just need to ask a couple more questions.
3 JUDGE HALL
4 3.43 now.
5 MS. KORNER: All right.
6 Q. Whether or not you agree that they were, if the police were
7 running camps, they would be obliged, would they not, to maintain basic
8 standards of living and the like?
9 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, this is incorporated
10 in the question: "If the police were running the camps." That is
11 hypothetical. Before that, it should have been cleared --
12 MS. KORNER:
13 Q. Can I just deal with it very simply. If any police chief set up
14 a camp, a detention facility, would that be something that he would be
15 obliged to support -- to report to his superior in the CSB?
16 A. First of all, there was no such case. And God forbid had any
17 been set up, this would have been the first information that would have
18 reached the MUP. But I do not know of a single case of the MUP having
19 set up such a place, organised it, disbanded it --
20 Q. Not reached the MUP. Would the SJB chief be obliged to report
21 this to his superior? Yes or no? It's very simple.
22 A. Yesterday I referred to the instructions about urgent interim and
23 ongoing reporting, and everything is spelled out in so many words in that
25 Q. So you don't want to answer the question. All right. Finally,
1 it was put to you --
2 A. I apologise, it is not that I do not wish to reply to the
3 question, because it is understood. In the instructions, all the
4 instances of reporting by the person in charge of a particular station to
5 the MUP are precisely defined.
6 Q. I mean, this is the final question. You were asked about
7 listening to the tape and interview, the intercept, and you were given
8 the transcript between Stanisic and a man said to be Zupljanin. You said
9 you recognised the voice of Stanisic. Would you have said that you
10 recognised the voice of Stanisic even with the transcript if you had not
11 done so?
12 A. I would have recognised his voice. We spoke on the telephone
13 many times, and I would be really remised to say that I cannot recognise
14 his voice.
15 Q. And when you listened to the intercepts yesterday -- on Sunday,
16 is it right you did not have any transcripts given to you? You listened
17 to them without the assistance of a transcript?
18 A. Yes, namely, I did not have a transcript. But there is no
19 dispute about anything there.
20 MS. KORNER: Yes, thank you very much.
21 JUDGE HALL
22 the Tribunal --
23 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, Your Honour, please.
24 JUDGE HALL
25 You are now released as a witness, and we wish you a safe journey back to
1 your home. So we --
2 Yes, Mr. Pantelic?
3 MR. PANTELIC: Sorry, Your Honour. So we are not adjourning yet.
5 JUDGE HALL
6 will escort you from the courtroom.
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Allow me to thank you for an
8 extremely correct and fair treatment of myself on the part of all your
9 associates from the moment I landed at the airport up to this very
10 moment. I offer my gratitude to all of them and to you. Thank you.
11 [The witness withdrew]
12 JUDGE DELVOIE: Ms. Korner, about the one document.
13 MS. KORNER: Exhibit 1931, yes. Your Honours, it was removed
14 from the 65 ter list in 2008 as part of this great culling. Because I
15 instructed Ms. Bosnjakovic to clean up, if I can, some of the writing
16 that was on the exhibit list, also cleaned up, was the warning to me,
17 this that had been removed. So I forgot about it, so it's entirely my
19 Your Honours, you will remember it's all about Bratunac war
20 crimes and the like. It couldn't be more relevant. The witness was able
21 to speak to it. There was no objection to its admission. The Defence
22 knew it, and I'm sorry about that. But please can we have it as an
23 exhibit, still?
24 JUDGE DELVOIE: Ms. Korner, we more or less thought of that
25 explanation, which is more or less evident. We have a slight problem
1 with the fact that one of our in-home investigators, not to say
2 Sherlock Holmes, saw that this document was very recently uploaded. So
3 someone on your team must have realised, if I understand well the system,
4 that it was not on the 65 ter list.
5 MS. KORNER: No, Your Honour, I was aware, originally. What I
6 said was, when I got -- Your Honours will recall, you mentioned that
7 normally the 10.000 list, which is clear that it's new on our 65 ter
8 list, is marked in red. And I explained to Your Honour yesterday, when I
9 was explaining that it was not on our 65 ter list, that there were
10 markings on this particular document. There's been a change this week
11 between Mr. Smith and Ms. Bosnjakovic. But some of the markings were
12 other notes to me about those documents. So I said, Just remove the
13 whole lot before we send it out because of the internal reminder. But
14 also removed, by an error, was the fact that this was not on our
15 65 ter -- had been removed from our 65 ter list, so I knew about it. But
16 I forgot when I was going through them because I had an uncoloured
17 version because -- and because the number was 1981.
18 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
19 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, I have to say, I have a little trouble
20 with Legal Officers spending time which, in my view, could be better
21 spent on other things. I know that in double-checking the document
22 admission, if there's not an objection or an argument, then, with the
23 greatest of respect, we do spend, as Your Honours have said, quite
24 rightly, a lot of time on this. There are -- there were problems with
25 the way that we organised our case --
1 [Trial Chamber confers]
2 JUDGE DELVOIE: Ms. Korner, let me just say, I strongly disagree
3 with what you said about our team members and how they should act and
4 shouldn't act. They are doing a great job, you know.
5 MS. KORNER: Well, Your Honours, I am sorry, I didn't mean --
6 JUDGE HALL
7 would be aware that we are dependent on the interpreters to facilitate
8 our work, and we are now trenching on our time.
9 So we will take the adjournment now and resume at 2.15 tomorrow
11 MR. PANTELIC: Your Honour, I do apologise, just for the record,
12 the Defence for Zupljanin fully adopts submission expressed in
13 Stanisic Defence response dated and filed on 23rd February, 2010, with
14 regard to the 65 ter. Just for the record. Thank you so much.
15 JUDGE HALL
16 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 3.53 p.m.,
17 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 25th day of
18 February, 2010, at 2.15 p.m.