Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 7987

 1                           Tuesday, 23 March 2010

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           --- Upon commencing at 9.11 a.m.

 5             THE REGISTRAR:  This is case number IT-08-91-T, the

 6     Prosecutor versus Mico Stanisic and Stojan Zupljanin.

 7             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.  May we have the

 8     appearances for today, please.

 9             MS. KORNER:  Good morning, Your Honours.  Joanna Korner,

10     Matthew Olmsted, and Crispian Smith, case manager, for the Prosecution.

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

12     Slobodan Cvijetic and Eugene O'Sullivan appearing for Stanisic Defence.

13             MR. PANTELIC:  Good morning, Your Honours.  For

14     Zupljanin Defence, Igor Pantelic, Dragan Krgovic and Miroslav Cuskic.

15             JUDGE HALL:  Could the Usher escort the witness back.

16                           [The witness takes the stand]

17                           WITNESS:  VLADIMIR TUTUS [Resumed]

18                           [Witness answered through interpreter]

19             JUDGE HALL:  Mr. Tutus, again I remind you that you are still on

20     your oath.

21             Yes, Mrs. Korner.

22                           Re-examination by Ms. Korner:  [Continued]

23        Q.   Mr. Tutus, just before we leave the parade, we can see painted on

24     the vehicles, in fact, Judge Harhoff raised it, the words "Milicija."

25     Just for the avoidance of any doubt, milicija was the name for the

Page 7988

 1     police, it was not?  It doesn't mean military?

 2        A.   That's correct.

 3        Q.   Right.  Next I want to move to the -- the "Glas" article that

 4     was -- at least I hope I am.  I now need to say I haven't got it with

 5     me -- yes, I have.  It was marked 1D032165 MFI.  I don't think it was

 6     tendered yet.

 7             MS. KORNER:  I am going to ask Your Honours, you remember I

 8     raised this, that -- it is, in fact, an exhibit.

 9        Q.   Now, this is an article in "Glas," and you were asked about it,

10     of the 24th of April, and is this right:  It -- it was the reaction to

11     statements apparently made by Mr. Muharem Krzic, who was the president of

12     the SDA in Banja Luka.

13        A.   Could we please read what you are referring to, because I don't

14     really remember.

15        Q.   I'm sorry.  I didn't catch the answer.  Can we just go back for a

16     moment to -- yes.  Okay.  If we go in the English to the second page, you

17     were asked about statements you had made.  I think it's all on the same

18     page in the original.  And in the article, about halfway through, the

19     reporter quotes you; is that right?

20        A.   Could you please read the quotation you're referring to?  The

21     letters are tiny, so I can't really read it.

22        Q.   Sorry.  That's my fault, Mr. Tutus.  This is what the reporter

23     says that you said:

24             "Mr. Muharem Krzic has for a long time been systematically

25     attacking the CSB and the SJB of Banja Luka.  My assessment says this is

Page 7989

 1     a deliberate construction aiming to break up the unity and efficiency of

 2     the service and so create a wartime atmosphere in the area."

 3             Can you see that?  I think it may be marked, about -- on the

 4     right-hand column.  If we go that way.  Yes.  Yes.  Do you see it now?

 5        A.   Yes.  Now that you've read it, I remember that's how it was, yes.

 6        Q.   All right.  And what I want to ask you about is what the reporter

 7     says you said.

 8             "I shall just say, by way of illustration, that the declaration

 9     of loyalty to the Serbian Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina has so far been

10     signed by 73 per cent of the Croats and 61 per cent of the Muslims of the

11     previous number of people employed in our SJB."

12             First, did you say that to the reporter?

13        A.   Yes, I did.

14        Q.   And from where did you get the statistics?

15        A.   They were obtained for me by my -- at my request by the clerk.  I

16     asked -- named Momcilo Savic.  I asked him for this information so that I

17     would know how many people stayed.  It refers not to the total number of

18     employees of the Banja Luka Public Security Station but the total number

19     of Croats and the total number of Muslims.  So of that number, this is

20     the percentage that stayed.

21        Q.   Well, are you able to tell us now what the total number of

22     Muslims in the three security -- in the SJB plus the -- the police

23     stations that came within its area of responsibility?

24        A.   I couldn't say that.  I don't know.

25        Q.   All right.  What about Muslims?  Are you able to tell us that?

Page 7990

 1        A.   At that time?  Is that what you mean?

 2        Q.   Yes.  Well, no.  You say 61 per cent of the Muslims had signed

 3     the oath of loyalty.  How many Muslims were there altogether working in

 4     the SJB or the other police stations?

 5        A.   At this point in time I can't remember that.

 6        Q.   And this was your response, was it, to criticisms that had been

 7     made by Mr. Krzic?

 8        A.   In a previous article, he put forward some incorrect information

 9     concerning the numbers of Muslims and Croats in the Banja Luka Public

10     Security Station.  He said there were only six.  That was a lie, a

11     fabrication.  Before that, he had said untruths in public.  For example,

12     when there was an explosion near the mosque, and I remember that

13     "Oslobodjenje" published him saying everyone knows except the chief.  So

14     it turned out that I had been informed of that event, and, in fact, I

15     hadn't.  So those were all lies.

16        Q.   What, nobody had told you about an explosion at the mosque?

17        A.   There was an explosion at a mosque.  A hand-grenade had been

18     thrown on it.  And the Party of Democratic Action made a public

19     statement, signed by Krzic, saying that they had informed me personally

20     of this event.  This was untrue.  They had not informed me.

21        Q.   So are you saying you did know about the explosion or you didn't

22     know about the explosion?

23        A.   I learned about the explosion later on, but it wasn't true that

24     the Party of Democratic Action informed me about it.

25        Q.   All right.  I want to move on to religious --

Page 7991

 1             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mrs. Korner, perhaps the witness remembers how

 2     many -- how many persons, how many Muslims stayed and how many Croats

 3     stayed.  So the 73 per cent would represent how many persons, and the

 4     60-whatever, 61 per cent would represent how many persons?

 5             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation]  Your Honour, I really don't know

 6     that.  I don't know those numbers.  These percentages are obtained for me

 7     by the service, but I don't know what the numbers were.  I know that some

 8     did remain and were -- went on working in that period and are still there

 9     today.

10             MS. KORNER:

11        Q.   All right.  Well, that's all I want to ask you about this

12     article.

13             MS. KORNER:  Your Honours, there have been a number of questions

14     on it.  I would ask now that it be admitted and marked.

15             MR. ZECEVIC:  We object.  Thank you.

16             JUDGE HALL:  Admitted as an exhibit.

17             MS. KORNER:  Yes.

18             JUDGE HALL:  So admitted and marked.

19             MS. KORNER:  Thank you.

20             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit P1095, Your Honours.

21             MS. KORNER:

22        Q.   All right, next can we move, please, to the operative work plan

23     and the various questions that you were asked about it.  Now, you were

24     only shown a part of these documents, I think, which was marked as

25     1D001267.

Page 7992

 1             MS. KORNER:  I don't know what the exhibit number was, but, in

 2     fact, Your Honours, that document is part of a Prosecution document with

 3     the 65 ter number 2680, and I'd like, because it's all one document,

 4     this, and I'd like to look at it in that form.  Oh, it's already an

 5     exhibit, is it?  860.

 6        Q.   Now, Mr. Tutus, the first part of this document, which was all

 7     one document when it was received or put together, is a report dated the

 8     17th of April, 1992, on what's called "Security Incidents Increase in

 9     Crime in the Area of Banja Luka SJB."  And it contains a number of

10     documents.  It does not appear to be signed by anybody, if we look at the

11     last page.

12             MS. KORNER:  I'm sorry, could we have the P, please.  I don't

13     want the 1D exhibit, I want the P exhibit, which is P860.  That's not

14     P860.  That's the Milos report.  Yes, that's it.  Can we look at the last

15     page.  I don't think there's any signature on it.  The last page -- the

16     last page of the document doesn't help, no.  All right.  Go back to the

17     first page, please, because it's two documents.  Sorry, can we go back to

18     the first page in English?

19        Q.   All right.  Do you recognise, Mr. Tutus, this report?  It appears

20     to come, in fact, from the CSB rather than from you, but it's about the

21     SJB report -- area.

22        A.   I'd have to look at the entire document.  It's very hard for me

23     to say based on just one page.

24        Q.   All right.  Well, what it's saying is that in the statistical

25     period from the 1st of April to the 17th of April, 1992, there were

Page 7993

 1     13 terrorist attacks on buildings in the Banja Luka area.

 2             From your --

 3             MR. ZECEVIC:  I'm sorry.  In all fairness to the witness, he

 4     should be shown the document, I think.

 5             MS. KORNER:  Okay.  Yeah, certainly.  I wanted -- didn't want to

 6     waste time, but --

 7        Q.   We'll give you, Mr. Tutus, a copy -- oh, no, we won't, because I

 8     didn't bring the B/C/S.

 9             MS. KORNER:  Is it possible to print this out so that the

10     B/C/S -- so that the witness can have a look at it?

11        Q.   Perhaps you could just continue reading on the screen, Mr. Tutus,

12     while that's done.  And let us know when you've read the first page.

13             MS. KORNER:  Can we move the page down so Mr. Tutus can see it.

14             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation]  Yes, we can go on.

15             MS. KORNER:  Yes.  Can we go to the next page, please, just so

16     Mr. Tutus can read it.

17             MR. ZECEVIC:  Your Honours, while the witness is consulting the

18     document, reading it, may I make, I don't know, an observation?  I

19     don't -- I don't see how these -- this document is one document, because

20     it consists of obviously two completely different documents.  One

21     document is this information which the witness is -- is reading right

22     now, dated 17th of April, 1992; and the second document is operative plan

23     of 25th of May, 1992.  I don't -- I don't really understand.  I mean, it

24     would be very difficult even for Your Honours to deal with such

25     documents.  If two documents are combined into one exhibit, I really

Page 7994

 1     don't see how are we -- are we doing --

 2             JUDGE HALL:  Sorry, please remind me.  Were they, in fact,

 3     exhibited as one, given one exhibit number?

 4             MR. ZECEVIC:  Yes, that is correct.  That is P860.  Now, I have

 5     exhibited the other part during my cross-examination as -- as one

 6     document, which is definitely -- but I wonder how it happened that this

 7     document was -- I probably didn't notice at the time when it was -- when

 8     it was exhibited as 860, that it consists of two documents.  I'm just

 9     suggesting that this -- this situation --

10             JUDGE HALL:  I understand what you're saying.

11             MR. ZECEVIC:  -- might be creating a problem in the future.  That

12     is all what I --

13             JUDGE HALL:  The -- perhaps the -- in order to keep the sequence

14     of numbering that we have, the Registry night --

15             MS. KORNER:  No.  If Mr. Zecevic and Your Honours wait, there is

16     purpose to why I'm dealing with this in this way, because as you will see

17     there are some oddities about this whole document.

18             JUDGE HALL:  I was only going to suggest that we preserve the

19     number and just split it into A and B.

20             MS. KORNER:  No.  Your Honour, we're saying that this is how the

21     document came to us.  And we're saying if you look at it, there are some

22     oddities about the whole sequence, and Mr. Zecevic waits and Your Honours

23     wait, you will see from my questions.

24             MR. ZECEVIC:  I will wait.  Thank you.

25             MS. KORNER:

Page 7995

 1        Q.   Now, have you had a chance to read that document, Mr. Tutus, now?

 2        A.   Yes, I have read it.

 3        Q.   Is that a document that was prepared by your -- presumably your

 4     crime police?

 5        A.   I don't think it was prepared by the crime police that was under

 6     our control, that is, in the public security station.  Can you go back to

 7     page 1?  I think it's a document issued by the security services centre,

 8     actually.

 9        Q.   It is.  It is.  No, it's issued by the CSB, but would the

10     information contained therein have come from your crime police in the

11     SJB, or would it have been done by the crime section of the CSB?

12        A.   Most probably some initial operative information was sent by the

13     crime prevention service to the centre, and I would not deny the fact

14     that that information might be included in this document.

15        Q.   And one of the people this document refers to is Mr. Cavic, who

16     we discussed when we looked at the report of the paramilitaries, you'll

17     recall.  You have to say yes or no.

18        A.   Yes, I remember.

19        Q.   All right.  Well, it contains a list of attacks carried out with

20     explosives devices between the 1st of April and the 17th of April, 1992,

21     and there's a handwritten -- now let's move, please, to the document

22     which is supposedly dated the 25th of May.

23             MS. KORNER:  In English, six pages in.  And I imagine it's

24     probably roughly the same in B/C/S.  Page 7, thank you, in B/C/S.

25        Q.   Now, this is the one about which you were asked a great number of

Page 7996

 1     questions, I think, by both counsel for both accused.  It begins -- and

 2     this is the operational work plan on solving acts of robbery, terrorism,

 3     et cetera, and it says:

 4             "From the 2nd to the 3rd of April, 1992, to this day, the

 5     25th of May," and it talks about the SOS and then THE -- and then it

 6     says:

 7             "From the middle of August to this day, there have been

 8     76 incidents of explosives devices ..."

 9             Now, it was put to you this is August 1991, but that's not what

10     it says, is it?

11        A.   Well, no, it doesn't say so.  I don't see the year.

12        Q.   No.  And why would this report in May 1992, when the earlier,

13     17th of April, talked about explosions, go back to August 1991?

14        A.   Quite frankly, I don't know.

15        Q.   All right.  Well let's move further into this document, shall we?

16     On page 2 in English, it deals with the incidents of explosions in the

17     area of Banja Luka SJB.

18             MS. KORNER:  I hope it's on page 2.  The next page in English,

19     and I hope the next page in B/C/S as well.  And it's the paragraph near

20     the end of the page in English.  Okay.  It would be the next page in

21     B/C/S, it looks like.  Yes.  That's it.  Thank you very much.

22             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation]  Excuse me.  If you allow me.  The

23     previous question you asked, I can try to think professionally why they

24     go back to 1991.  I can suppose that the service had certain statistics

25     about crimes for that period as well, back to 1991, then they received

Page 7997

 1     information later about perpetrators and included the prior period as

 2     well.

 3             MS. KORNER:

 4        Q.   The -- the list that went with it doesn't refer to anything in

 5     1991.  It refers to incidents in 1992, doesn't it?  You went through that

 6     with either Mr. Zecevic or Mr. Krgovic yesterday.

 7        A.   Yes.

 8        Q.   Well, let's just have a look at this paragraph then.

 9             "In order to solve the incidents of explosion in the area of

10     Banja Luka SJB, work on solving a series of explosions which according to

11     intelligence were set off by a group of people headed by Vedran Mandic.

12     Information indicates that this group committed 27 crimes of causing

13     public danger by setting off explosive devices, hand-grenades and firing

14     rockets at buildings.

15             "The group consists of Draza Burnic; Drasko Mihajlovic, deceased;

16     Mr. Maric; and Nenad Kajkut, deceased."

17             Now, those are the two people who together with Mr. Mandic

18     launched the attack on or killed -- not launched the attack, were killed

19     in the course of an incident Mejdan police station; is that right?

20        A.   Yes, I think that's true, the police station Mejdan.

21        Q.   Yes.  About which no report was put in, as we saw yesterday,

22     until June, I believe it is.  June the 30th.  Because you were directed

23     to a criticism by -- apparently written by Mr. Zupljanin that it had

24     taken so long to report.  Is that right?

25        A.   That incident and the on-site investigation and the investigation

Page 7998

 1     was within the jurisdiction of the CSB, and the public security station

 2     was not involved.  The on-site investigation was carried out the very

 3     next day.  The investigating judge was present and all this was under the

 4     supervision of the CSB.

 5        Q.   And interestingly enough, Vedran Mandic was also killed in that

 6     attack, wasn't he?

 7        A.   Yes.

 8        Q.   Well, then, why doesn't it say, "Vedran Mandic, deceased"?

 9        A.   I don't know that.

10        Q.   You see, what I'm wondering is that -- is that date actually

11     correct of the 25th of May on this so-called operative work plan?  Are

12     you able to assist?

13        A.   You mean that incident.

14        Q.   No.

15        A.   When it happened?

16        Q.   No, no.  The -- this report, this operational work plan about

17     which you've been asked so much which allegedly is the 25th of May.  Can

18     you help us whether that date is actually right?

19        A.   I can't remember the exact date.

20        Q.   Next I want to move to the question of religious destruction in

21     Banja Luka, in the Banja Luka area.  You were asked to look at document

22     1D01130 --

23             JUDGE HALL:  I'm sorry.  Before you move on, Ms. Korner, to the

24     extent that the witness, as I understand his evidence, has not assisted

25     in clearing up this curiosity, for want of a better word, about the date,

Page 7999

 1     does that still not leave us with the possible confusion to which

 2     Mr. Zecevic referred?  And I come back to my suggestion about separating

 3     the number between an A and a B so when we come to look at this, we don't

 4     confuse ourselves.

 5             MS. KORNER:  Well, Your Honours, we can't say one way or another

 6     where the -- how accurate all of this is.  What we can say is that when

 7     we received the document or the documents, they were one document.

 8     That's how we got it, and that's why it's together and it was translated

 9     together, and it bears the ERN numbers together.

10             Just a moment, Mr. Zecevic.

11             MR. ZECEVIC:  Sorry.

12             MS. KORNER:  Mr. Zecevic has decided to separate them up and put

13     that in as a separate exhibit.  I'm not sure that that is the right way

14     of looking at it.  And therefore, we suggest that -- there's already a

15     separate copy, but this is the way the document was, and we suggest it

16     should stay together.  We may get some elucidation later about whether it

17     is actually produced at the time which it is said and represents

18     something that actually happened.  So that's all I can say.

19             JUDGE HARHOFF:  But, Mrs. Korner, if your point is that the two

20     documents were actually conceived at the same time, either in April or

21     May --

22             MS. KORNER:  Or later.  Your Honours, we're suggesting later

23     because we're not sure the reference to August is actually a reference to

24     August 1991.

25             JUDGE HARHOFF:  In any case, for the Chamber to make an

Page 8000

 1     assessment of whether there's anything to it, we need to be shown the

 2     reasons why you think that they may be conceived simultaneously.  And

 3     thus, my question is:  If your suspicion hangs only on the facts that

 4     Vedran Mandic was not indicated as deceased, as were the two other

 5     gentlemen who were killed apparently at the same date, then I am not sure

 6     that I am convinced by your argument that there is any possibility that

 7     these should -- two documents should be drafted together at the same

 8     time.

 9             MS. KORNER:  Your Honours, it's not just that.  The report on the

10     death of the three men at the Mejdan police station, as Your Honours saw

11     yesterday, was not actually sent until the 30th of June.  Our possible

12     suggestion, and I can put it no higher than that, Your Honour, and all

13     we're dealing with at the moment is whether this exhibit should stay as

14     one exhibit or two exhibits, because it is already an exhibit in the

15     case, is that if you look at that plus the reference to August, it may

16     well be that those documents were drafted at a later date, and that's the

17     only suggestion which, on the face of what's there, we're entitled to

18     make at the moment.

19             JUDGE HALL:  I fully understand your -- that road down which

20     you're headed.  My only question is:  Inasmuch as this is a matter for

21     argument and there will be -- of some controversy, what level it will

22     reach it remains to be seen, whether to the extent that it appears on the

23     face of it to be from the dates, two documents, whether we should not,

24     for ease of reference, just so identify them.  I don't see how it would

25     harm your -- the case that you will put at the end of the day.

Page 8001

 1             MS. KORNER:  Well, Your Honours, I'm perfectly happy if it -- if

 2     it makes Your Honours happier, that we mark it A and B.

 3             JUDGE HALL:  Mr. Krgovic, you want to be heard on this?

 4             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I did not mean to

 5     object at this stage of Mrs. Korner's examination, but I do have to

 6     object now.

 7             Mrs. Korner is misleading the witness and misrepresenting the

 8     document, creating a confusion which really doesn't exist concerning the

 9     status of Vedran Mandic.

10             THE INTERPRETER:  Counsel is now too far away from the

11     microphone.

12             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] The document speaks about a group

13     led by -- that was led by Vedran Mandic.  In all the other passages we

14     see references such as "led by," and this one is the only exception.  The

15     group was led by Vedran Mandic.  So there is really no confusion.  At the

16     moment of the creation of this document, it is clear that he no longer

17     leads that group, that he was its leader, and then follow indications who

18     is dead and who is alive.

19             Look at the name Palackovic.  It says "is leading the group."

20     Vedran Mandic is the only one who finds himself in the past tense.  So

21     there is really no doubt.

22             JUDGE HALL:  We will mark the document A and B and move on.

23             MS. KORNER:  Yes.  All right.

24        Q.   Could we have a look at 1D208 about which you were asked during

25     cross-examination.

Page 8002

 1             Now, this is the -- the note from Mr. Bulic, the head of the

 2     crime police, I think, number 2 to Zupljanin in the CSB, talking about:

 3             "The Banja Luka Bishop's Ordinate has informed us there had been

 4     fire at the convent building and parish church in Bosanski Aleksandrovac.

 5     Since attacks of religious buildings are also occurring in other places

 6     in the area, it is necessary to take steps in order to stop such events

 7     and identify the perpetrators of the act reported so far."

 8             And you were asked about this at page 7823 on Friday, and you

 9     said you didn't remember the attack on the church and the convent

10     building in Bosanski Aleksandrovac.  Is that right, you don't remember

11     that?

12        A.   That's true.  Bosanski Aleksandrovac is in the area of another

13     public security station, not Banja Luka, but either Laktasi or Gradiska.

14     It's not in the Banja Luka SJB area.

15        Q.   Yes, I know, but surely somebody firing on a Catholic convent

16     building and a parish church was worthy of note in Banja Luka.  You don't

17     remember anything about it at all?

18        A.   Well, there were such incidents.  There were more serious

19     incidents.  One pushed out the other from our focus.  There were many

20     such events.  At the time I was informed, but I no longer remember

21     everything.

22        Q.   Yes.  That's right, wasn't it?  Although the major explosions

23     of -- as against mosques in Banja Luka happened in 1993, that is to say,

24     the Ferhadija mosque, and I think the Arnaudija mosque; is that right?

25             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I have to object.

Page 8003

 1     How is this -- what is the reason for this question?  It's outside the

 2     period of the indictment, and the question goes beyond the scope of

 3     cross-examination.  It concerns an explosion from 1991.  I don't remember

 4     anyone asking any questions about this event from 1993 in

 5     cross-examination, plus it's outside the period of the indictment.

 6             MS. KORNER:  I haven't even finished the question before the

 7     objection.  The -- first of all, it's nothing to do with 1991.  This

 8     document is dated July 1992, and I was setting the scene for the

 9     question, which I was in the middle of, and I will repeat the question.

10        Q.   Although the major destruction took place in 1993, in 1992,

11     Mr. Tutus, there were a number, weren't there, of serious attacks against

12     religious institutions in the Banja Luka area?

13        A.   Unfortunately, yes.

14        Q.   All right.  Now, this says you must take steps in order to stop

15     such events, and your response when you were asked about this, the

16     question was at page 7823:

17             "As part of your responsibilities in the Banja Luka SJB, did you

18     take any steps and measures in order to prevent religious facilities,

19     religious buildings from being attacked, and did you take measures to

20     identify perpetrators of crimes that had been reported at the time?"

21             Your response:

22             "We certainly acted in accordance with this letter, and at

23     meetings we conveyed the order issued."

24             Now, I'm going to ask the same question that you were asked, I

25     think, by Mr. Zecevic.  Did you take any steps and measures in order to

Page 8004

 1     prevent religious facilities or religious buildings from being attacked?

 2        A.   Our specific task was to use police patrols to tour these

 3     buildings more frequently.  I remember issuing an order that every police

 4     station in its own area should pay special attention to religious

 5     buildings.

 6        Q.   Most of these attacks on the religious buildings, which in 1992

 7     included, did it not, the -- sorry, let me just get my -- the Pecinska

 8     mosque?

 9        A.   I don't remember the names.

10        Q.   The Petricevac Franciscan monastery?  Do you remember that?

11        A.   I remember that convent, yes.

12        Q.   The premises of the Islamic Community, which is close to the

13     Ferhadija mosque?

14        A.   Yes.  In that case those explosive devices were thrown, as I

15     said.  I believe a hand-grenade was thrown on that mosque.

16        Q.   And is it right that most of these attacks took place at night?

17        A.   I suppose so, but I'm not sure.

18        Q.   Did you place police officers or reserve police officers of whom

19     you had a number, as we've discussed, on guard at these places to prevent

20     these attacks?

21        A.   I don't know how the station commander assigned the staff and how

22     he gave them specific tasks, but he had received an order from me to pay

23     special attention and give special protection to religious buildings.

24     Whether they assured constant presence and security details, I don't

25     know.

Page 8005

 1        Q.   Let's go to the next topic you were asked about, please.  You

 2     were shown the document P367, I think it is, the record of the meeting of

 3     the 6th of May at the CSB.

 4             MS. KORNER:  And we need to move to the page, which I think is

 5     probably the fourth page in English, where Mr. Zupljanin says:  "In all

 6     our activities we are obliged to abide by."  Thank you very much.  And I

 7     think it's probably in the second page in the B/C/S.  Paragraph 23.  Yes.

 8     Thank you very much.  If you can just highlight a bit.

 9        Q.   Now, it was suggested to you that that referred only to

10     disarmament.  Now, obviously you can't say what was in the mind of

11     Mr. Zupljanin when he made this statement, but is it your evidence that

12     the words "in all our activities we are obliged to observe all measures

13     and apply all procedures ordered by the Crisis Staff of the autonomous

14     region," applied only to disarmament?

15        A.   I don't think it concerns only disarmament.

16        Q.   Thank you.  Next, you were asked about Simo Drljaca, and you

17     described how Mr. Zupljanin had said he would -- I'm paraphrasing, he

18     would pay for what he had done in Prijedor, and it was suggested to you

19     that that was said as a -- during or as a result of the 11th of July

20     meeting.

21             Now, in meetings that you attended at the CSB in -- towards the

22     end of August and later, was there discussion of the killings that had

23     taken place at Koricanske Stijene, Vlasic Mountain, by the Prijedor

24     police?

25        A.   There was no discussion of that at the meetings.

Page 8006

 1        Q.   Was it ever discussed at all at any of the meetings which the SJB

 2     chiefs attended at the CSB in Banja Luka?

 3        A.   I don't mean it the way you said.  Chiefs of the CSB, that may

 4     mean the senior collegium --

 5        Q.   I mean chiefs --

 6        A.   -- but I don't remember it was discussed at the professional

 7     council meetings that I attended.

 8        Q.   All right.  So you don't recall any discussion at meetings you

 9     attended, which is where the SJB chiefs were, of what had happened at

10     Mount Vlasic?

11        A.   I don't recall that.

12        Q.   But weren't the SJB in Banja Luka crime police assigned to

13     investigate the case?

14        A.   Not to my knowledge, no.

15        Q.   So can you now recall in what context Zupljanin make that remark

16     to Simo Drljaca?

17        A.   Well, I told you.  He criticised Simo and told him he would be

18     held responsible for what had happened in Prijedor, but he didn't say

19     precisely what he meant by that.

20        Q.   Okay.  All right.  And now finally, can we move to the question

21     of the SOS and the Special Police about which you were asked a lot of

22     questions.

23             It was put to you at one stage that you couldn't say that all the

24     members of the SOS were criminals.  Do you remember that being put to

25     you?

Page 8007

 1        A.   Yes, I remember that something like that was asked of me, yes.

 2        Q.   And do you know, one way or another, whether all of the SOS were

 3     criminals?

 4        A.   Well, I don't know that.  I know what I was told by my

 5     colleagues.  They told me that there were individuals who were well-known

 6     criminals and who had criminal records.

 7        Q.   I'd like you to have a look, please, at the report that you did

 8     put in to the public -- or what was put in by the CSB to the public

 9     prosecutor's office on those three men who were killed at Mejdan police

10     station.  I'm afraid I've forgotten what the exhibit number is but it's

11     1D010230.  1D57.  2D57.

12             And this is the one where you say you recognised -- do you

13     recognise the writing or is it just Zupljanin's initials?

14        A.   All the handwriting is his.

15        Q.   And he says he wants to know why you've had to wait so long.

16     Now, it says on the 30th of June, 1992, you received our report.

17     Vedran Mandic; Nenad Kajkut, son of Nikola; and then Drasko Mihajlovic.

18     This is, is it not, a different Kajkut to Nenad Kajkut, although the

19     name's the same, to the gentleman who's in the Special Police.

20     Obviously, as we'll see, because that person is still alive and kicking,

21     but do you know?

22        A.   I know of only one Nenad Kajkut.

23        Q.   Well, in that case he did a remarkable return from the grave, but

24     anyhow.  What I want to ask you about is this:  If you look, please --

25     now -- yes, okay.  In English it's the ninth page in English.  And in the

Page 8008

 1     B/C/S it is the fourth page.

 2             MS. KORNER:  No.  No.  No.  Whatever that is, I don't know.  In

 3     English, starting with that it's one, two -- that's it.  Top paragraph.

 4     And in B/C/S, as I say, it should be -- sorry, it's the eighth page in

 5     B/C/S.  Yes.  Sorry.  Eighth page.  My fault.

 6        Q.   Now, this is where -- this is where the -- the witness whose

 7     statement this is, and I think you looked at part of it, it's the -- it's

 8     the Official Note - sorry - provided by Mr. Petar Tanazovic, and you were

 9     asked about this, is recording what Mr. Vedran Mandic is saying to him.

10             "He told me that he was a member of the SOS and that he was at

11     the barricades when it was necessary to be there because that was what

12     the politicians demanded, but now when they did not need us, nobody was

13     taking care of us.  I told him that he was wrong and that he had the

14     opportunity to report to the district TO staff, just as the rest of his

15     comrades had done.  However, he brushed this aside, saying he did not

16     trust anyone and that he acted only on Nenad Stevandic's orders ..."

17             Now, do you know whether at any stage any investigation was

18     carried out by the SJB, you, or the CSB into Nenad Stevandic?

19        A.   That was not within the competence of the Banja Luka Public

20     Security Station.  As to whether the centre or the National Public

21     Security Service did something about this, I don't know.

22        Q.   Now --

23             MR. ZECEVIC:  I'm sorry.  The witness says whether the national

24     state security or CSB Banja Luka did anything, he is not aware, and it

25     wasn't recorded.

Page 8009

 1             MS. KORNER:  Oh, I see.  Right.  Thank you.

 2        Q.   And is that because, to your knowledge, Mr. Stevandic was a part

 3     of, you said the state security service, which I think was still in those

 4     days the SDB as opposed to the SNB.  Was that because you were aware

 5     Mr. Stevandic was a part of that?

 6        A.   I didn't know that he was a part of that service, and that's not

 7     the reason, but the reason is it was not within our competence.

 8        Q.   But then why did you mention, as Mr. Zecevic had just said, why

 9     did you mention the state security if you didn't know Mr. Stevandic had

10     anything to do with it?

11        A.   I mentioned the National Security Service because I felt that

12     armed rebellion fell within their purview.  They were tasked with

13     gathering information on such things.

14        Q.   But are you saying this incident was armed rebellion?

15        A.   I don't know how else to describe it.  If a group of 20 --

16     200 armed men suddenly turns up in the streets.

17        Q.   I see.  You're back to -- all right.  You're back to the SOS.  I

18     was talking about this incident here at Mejdan police station.

19             All right.  Finally, last topic, thank you, Mr. Tutus, back to

20     the Special Police.  Now, you were asked a number of -- you were shown

21     Mr. Dubocanin's card which appears to show that he was a member of the

22     military, and then you were asked a number of questions about the list of

23     the Special Police and also the payroll for August.  And it was suggested

24     to you that these people, under some agreed deal, although they were not

25     members of the police, had received payment in August.

Page 8010

 1             Now, I want you to look, please, at a document which relates to

 2     three of the people.

 3             MS. KORNER:  Your Honours, it's dated -- sorry, I can't just find

 4     it.  Yes.  Now, Your Honours, this one, although it was on my original

 5     list, we noted that it had not -- it was not on our 65 ter list, and it's

 6     part of the application we made in February, February the 18th, to add.

 7     The document number bears -- the old number is 65 ter 275 and it appears

 8     in schedule E, and we haven't had a response to it but I'm going to ask

 9     whether I can use it subject to your response.  It was on my original

10     list.

11             MR. KRGOVIC:  Your Honour, I vigorously object to that because we

12     had the ruling about the using documents which is not in the 65 ter list,

13     so I vigorously object to that.

14             JUDGE HALL:  The -- I assume, Mrs. Korner, that your application

15     is to merely use it at this point, not admit it.

16             MS. KORNER:  No.  Exactly.  I'll use it and have it marked for

17     identification subject to Your Honours' ruling.  I mean, can I say we've

18     given enough notice that we wanted to use it.  It's February the 18th.

19             JUDGE HALL:  Yes.

20             MS. KORNER:  Thank you.  Could you have a look, please, at

21     65 ter 275.  Oh, we need, sorry, page 2 in English and page 2 in B/C/S.

22        Q.   This is dated the 31st of December, 1992.  It's addressed to the

23     chief of the National Security Service sector and then to the police

24     brigade command.  Firstly, by the end of 1992, had a police brigade been

25     set up?

Page 8011

 1        A.   On the 31st of December, is that what you said?

 2        Q.   Yes.  By the 31st of December, 1992, had a police -- an actual

 3     police brigade been set up?

 4        A.   Well, that's what follows from this order.  The command was being

 5     set up as well.

 6        Q.   No.  I'm asking whether you were aware of it as a police officer

 7     in Banja Luka, please.  Not what this order says.  We can all read that.

 8        A.   Well, if you're asking me, I can't recall.

 9        Q.   All right.  Now, the order is:

10             "In order to improve the quality of execution of combat tasks in

11     the Banja Luka CSB Police Brigade, I hereby appoint:

12             "Ljuban Ecim, as commander of the 1st Battalion;

13     Zdravko Samardzija, assistant battalion commander; and Nenad Kajkut,

14     commander of the 1st Company of the 1st Battalion.  And then the chief of

15     the national security sector must appoint an assistant."

16             Now, would Mr. Zupljanin have been able to appoint people --

17             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, objection.  First, the

18     Prosecutor should ask the witness whose signature this and whether the

19     document was signed by Stojan Zupljanin, and then she could put this

20     question.

21             MS. KORNER:  I don't think it is.  I think it's signed on his

22     behalf by Mr. Bulic, but if you want to take that point.

23        Q.   Can you just tell us?

24        A.   Could you repeat your question, please?

25        Q.   Are you able to say who signed this document on -- over

Page 8012

 1     Mr. Zupljanin's typed signature?

 2        A.   It was signed by Djuro Bulic, the chief of the public security

 3     sector, the CSB in Banja Luka.

 4        Q.   Does it say "za" somewhere, "on behalf of"?

 5        A.   Yes.

 6        Q.   Thank you.  Well, if there's any point -- any further point that

 7     needs to be taken on that.

 8             What I want to know is:  Whether it was signed by Mr. Bulic on

 9     behalf of Mr. Zupljanin or not, would it appear that these three men,

10     including, I would suggest, a different Mr. Kajkut from the one that was

11     killed at Mejdan, were appointed by Mr. Zupljanin?

12        A.   I would say they were appointed by the security services centre.

13     As to what the result of their agreements and talks was, I wouldn't be

14     able to say with any precision.

15        Q.   All right.

16             MS. KORNER:  Well, Your Honours, may I have that marked for

17     identification pending Your Honours' ruling?

18             JUDGE HALL:  So marked.

19             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit P1096, marked for identification,

20     Your Honours.

21             MS. KORNER:  Right.

22        Q.   And then finally, let's just have one last look, please, at the

23     payroll for August document and the attached list of Special Police.

24     Again I've forgotten the exhibit number.  I've got 65 ter 23 --

25             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I do apologise.  Just

Page 8013

 1     to clarify a point linked to this document.  Is it the position of the

 2     Prosecution that this document has something to do with the Special

 3     Police, the document shown previously, because if that is the OTP

 4     position, then this document is being misinterpreted.  It does not refer

 5     to the Special Police or any special unit of the police.

 6             MS. KORNER:  Your Honour, this is [indiscernible].  This is

 7     argument.  We are saying three members, and I'm just going to confirm, of

 8     the ex-Banja Luka Special Police, including the two leaders, are still

 9     under the command of Zupljanin by the end of 1992.  That's what we're

10     saying.  Still connected with the CSB.  The suggestion was made at length

11     and rather boringly, for which, quite honestly [indiscernible]

12     Mr. Krgovic did it, that none of these people stayed in the police.  That

13     is not the case, we say.

14             JUDGE HALL:  Well, as you say, Ms. Korner, all of this is a

15     matter for argument.  What I thought Mr. Krgovic's objection was going to

16     be - and I know when you were putting the question, this is immediately

17     before the document was marked for identification - that Mr. Krgovic had

18     begun to rise and apparently had a change of mind.  And I, too, was

19     wondering - I don't know whether the objection that he was considering

20     making was what was running through my own mind - that the document not

21     being exhibited, merely being shown to the witness, you were asking the

22     witness to comment on this -- on this, on the accuracy of the contents of

23     this document which you would have known at that point would not have

24     been exhibited at this point.  But then the witness's answer of not being

25     able to assist, to my mind, made that -- that any such objection of no

Page 8014

 1     consequence, and for that same reason the -- as you say, at this point

 2     everything is a matter of argument, so we move on.

 3             MS. KORNER:

 4        Q.   Could you have one last look, please, at Exhibit P1092.  Number 4

 5     on the payroll is Nenad Kajkut.  Do you agree?  And it's signed for.

 6        A.   Yes, I agree.

 7        Q.   So clearly there are two gentlemen pottering around Banja Luka at

 8     this time called Nenad Kajkut, unless he didn't die in Mejdan.

 9             You were taken through a number of people on the list of

10     Special Police.

11             MS. KORNER:  Which we need to go, please, to the one, two, three,

12     fourth page in English and pretty much the same, I hope, in B/C/S.

13     Actually, I think it's the fifth page in B/C/S.  Sorry, it's the seventh

14     page in B/C/S and the -- oh, no, sorry, not the fourth page in English.

15     Eighth.  It's eighth page in both.

16             This appears, does it not -- I think we've been through this

17     before and you've been asked, but this is a list of the Special Police

18     detachment as it was before it was abolished and effectively what

19     happened to them since the abolition.  Is this -- is that right?  Where

20     they went to.

21             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, objection.  This is a

22     leading question, because from this document the movement of members of

23     this detachment after it was disbanded cannot be seen, because there are

24     notes on their movements while the unit or the detachment was actually in

25     existence.

Page 8015

 1             MS. KORNER:  I don't know on what possible basis you can say

 2     that.

 3             JUDGE HALL:  Let's move on, please.

 4             MS. KORNER:  Yes.  Can I just -- can I just say, Mr. Krgovic, not

 5     helping matters.  You went through this document at length for your

 6     purposes.  I now propose to try and correct the impression you made.

 7        Q.   Right.  Now, if we look, please, at number 11,

 8     Mr. Vojislav Burgic, he apparently is at the SJB in Laktasi as a reserve

 9     policeman.  Number 14, Mr. Borjan, SJB Novi Grad, active policeman;

10     Mr. Zarko Bulaja, SJB, active policeman; Mr. Predrag Bodiroza, SJB

11     Banja Luka, training course graduate; Mr. Blagojevic, CSB Banja Luka,

12     active policeman.

13             You went -- were taken through this.  Does it appear that numbers

14     of the special unit remained in some form or other in the police service,

15     some indeed in the CSB Banja Luka?

16        A.   Yes.

17        Q.   Now, you -- you were asked to look at a number of criminal

18     complaints that were brought against, in particular, members of the SOS,

19     and you provided to the Office of the Prosecutor when you were

20     interviewed numbers of documents relating to the Special Police and also

21     prosecutions.

22             Now, first, are you able to recall whether there were any

23     criminal prosecutions in respect of the various members of the

24     Special Police that you named in your various reports?

25        A.   Yes, yes, there were criminal prosecutions, prosecutions.

Page 8016

 1        Q.   Right.  And where are, please, the documents that relate to those

 2     prosecutions?

 3        A.   They should be in the court and in the operative records of the

 4     crime prevention police of the present security service.

 5        Q.   All right.  When you provided to the Office of the Prosecutor

 6     interviewer in 2004 copies of various documents, where did you get those

 7     documents from?  You declined to tell the Office of the Prosecutor then,

 8     but I'm asking you now.

 9        A.   I don't understand.  What do you mean by declining to tell

10     something?

11        Q.   You turned up with a whole pile of documents which you handed

12     over to the Office of the Prosecutor.  Do you remember that in your

13     interview?  Mr. Sebire, the investigator, was asking you questions, took

14     copies.

15        A.   Oh, yes, I remember that.  And I wish to tell Their Honours that

16     I was at that time suspected of being a member of a joint criminal

17     enterprise.  I was told of my rights, and I was offered the opportunity

18     to have a defence counsel present.  I did not feel I needed to have

19     counsel.  I agreed to be interviewed.  I had certain documents with me

20     which I used for my defence.  During the break, there was a lady there

21     from the OTP, and there was this gentleman.  I think his name was

22     Nicholas.  And they looked at the documents to see where I was getting my

23     information from, and they asked me to give them those documents, which I

24     did, and that is correct.  Yes, all of that is correct.

25        Q.   Absolutely.  You're quite right, Mr. Tutus.  And it's a simple

Page 8017

 1     question.  Where did you get the documents from that you gave to

 2     Mr. Sebire?

 3        A.   I happened to have those documents there because I was still --

 4     when I was still the chief of the station.

 5        Q.   Right, but where in the station did you get those documents from?

 6        A.   I didn't find them in the station.  When I received the summons

 7     for the suspect interview, I prepared for that.

 8        Q.   I quite understand, Mr. Tutus.  You're going around the houses

 9     now.  Just tell us where you got those documents from that you gave to

10     the investigator.

11        A.   I had them.  They were in my possession.

12        Q.   I'm sure you did.  And how did you get them?

13        A.   Well, ask me about a particular document and I'll tell you.  Most

14     of them were given to me by Zoran Jusic, the chief of the crime police.

15        Q.   Right.  That's all I'm asking.  And is he still at the SJB in

16     Banja Luka?

17        A.   Yes.

18        Q.   Fine.  Thank you very much, Mr. Tutus.  That's all I ask.

19                           Questioned by the Court:

20             JUDGE HALL:  If I may follow up on Mrs. Korner's last question.

21     This bundle of documents that you received, did you exercise -- did you

22     decide what to select, or you just received these and handed them over to

23     the investigator?

24             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the most important

25     piece of information from 1993, which we compiled at the request of Tomo

Page 8018

 1     Kovac, the chief of the public security sector, it contained all the

 2     information I had with me, and there was no reason to deny the OTP that.

 3     And there was a dispatch concerning the attack at Tunjice and a criminal

 4     complaint where we took into custody a member of the Special Police

 5     detachment and that was it.  But I didn't make an overview.

 6             JUDGE HALL:  Sorry.  The question that I really wish to ask,

 7     Mr. Tutus, is what, if anything, are we to make of the fact that

 8     apparently this bundle of documents didn't include any records of

 9     prosecutions of persons in respect of whom complaints -- either you made

10     complaints or you're aware that complaints were made.  What -- is there

11     anything that we should make of that absence or gap?

12             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I did not deal with

13     the archives.  I didn't feel I needed to have that.

14             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.  Yes.

15             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, when this witness

16     started to answer, there was a small imprecision in the interpretation

17     which led to confusion, so if you'll allow me to clarify this point

18     during the cross-examination, because the witness said something that was

19     not interpreted correctly and throws a different interpretation on the

20     whole matter.

21                           Further Cross-examination by Mr. Krgovic:

22        Q.   [Interpretation] Mr. Tutus, when you were answering the question

23     there was some confusion.  When you answered the question as to how you

24     came into possession of that document, you said:

25             "Those documents happened to be in my office while I was still

Page 8019

 1     chief of the Banja Luka Public Security Station."  That's what you said,

 2     didn't you?

 3        A.   Yes.  And when Mrs. Korner asked me who gave them to me, I told

 4     them the chief of the crime prevention department, Josic.

 5        Q.   And he gave them to you at the time that these documents were

 6     actually compiled?

 7        A.   Yes.

 8        Q.   So in 1993, not after you left the public security station?

 9        A.   No, no.  In that period, because they were characteristic and I

10     felt I needed to have them with me because I felt they were important for

11     me.

12        Q.   And Mr. Josic is now a lawyer in Banja Luka and has nothing to do

13     with the public security station; is that correct?

14        A.   Yes.

15             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, that's how I

16     understood this.

17             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.

18             MS. KORNER:  I'm very grateful to Mr. Krgovic because there was a

19     misunderstanding.  I had understood that Mr. Josic had given them to him

20     for the purposes of the interview.  Your Honours, may I just go back over

21     this for a minute then.

22                           Further Re-examination by Mrs. Korner:

23        Q.   Why did you keep -- when you left Banja Luka S --

24             JUDGE HALL:  Ms. Korner, I had -- I had not ignored but I had

25     gone past the break thinking we would finish this witness.  And we've

Page 8020

 1     reached the point now, at 10.32, whether, in fact, we shouldn't take the

 2     break and just complete this witness when we come back.

 3             MS. KORNER:  Your Honour, that's all I -- I mean, this is the

 4     only point that I still want to get cleared up, but if Your Honours have

 5     more questions then it would --

 6             JUDGE HALL:  Yes.  Thank you.

 7                           [The witness stands down]

 8                           --- Recess taken at 10.33 a.m.

 9                           --- On resuming at 10.56 a.m.

10                           [The witness takes the stand]

11             MS. KORNER:

12        Q.   Mr. Tutus, just a -- it's a really simple point this, now that

13     we've cleared up the misunderstanding thanks to Mr. Krgovic.

14             When you left the SJB Banja Luka, you took with you, did you,

15     copies of a number of documents from the period you'd been there?

16        A.   I didn't do it for any particular purpose, but as events

17     unfolded, the crime police brought me copies of documents that were

18     typical in their opinions for my information, for the purpose of

19     informing other prosecution organs.  There was one, for instance, typical

20     criminal report concerning the murder of Milan Kocic.  Sometimes I

21     brought them home and left them there.  All the copies of various

22     articles from the "Glas" newspaper I also kept.

23        Q.   I'm sorry, I don't quite understand.  Is it because the crime

24     police and you felt that things were not being done as they ought that

25     they were giving you copies of these various documents?

Page 8021

 1             MR. KRGOVIC:  Objection, leading.

 2             MS. KORNER:

 3        Q.   Well, I want to know what you mean by:  "The crime police brought

 4     me copies of documents that were typical in their opinions for my

 5     information."

 6        A.   Well, for example, let me give you the example of one document.

 7     A copy of a criminal report against one group of former members of the

 8     Special Police detachment who kidnapped Milan Kocic near the

 9     Internacional Hotel.  They killed him, threw the car in the river, and

10     then when their houses were searched, a certain amount of weapons was

11     found.  The crime police did all the work.  These perpetrators were

12     detained, and they brought me this file as an example of how they -- how

13     successfully they had dealt with this job.

14        Q.   All right.  So can we take this -- because I don't want to spend

15     so much time on this.  You provided to the -- the investigator during the

16     course of your interview documents 2506, 2507, 8, 9, 10, all matters

17     connected with the Special Police.  So you had kept or been given copies

18     of matters which related to the Special Police.  Why was that?

19        A.   Well, I cannot tell you precisely why, because it was in the

20     jurisdiction of the CSB.  Some of it remained in my possession and some

21     of it in the possession of the CSB.  I don't have all of it, but all of

22     it is certainly in the CSB.

23        Q.   But why were you concentrating, certainly as far as the interview

24     was concerned, so heavily on the documents that you had somehow acquired

25     that related to the behaviour of the Special Police?

Page 8022

 1        A.   I believe the conduct of some members of the Special Police to be

 2     problematic, and perhaps for that reason I kept some of those documents

 3     so that I can substantiate my arguments to that effect at the

 4     professional council meetings.

 5        Q.   All right.

 6             MS. KORNER:  Now, Your Honours, I'm really sorry but I need to go

 7     back, if I may, with your permission, to this question of the 25th of May

 8     document, because in the break something has been drawn to my attention I

 9     think which puts this in the light which may make it clearer.  May I have

10     that permission?

11             JUDGE HALL:  Well, before you do that, there was something I was

12     going to say for the record when this witness had completed his

13     testimony, and that is, having been so advised by the Registry, the

14     proposal of separating this number between an A and B is technically not

15     workable, so we're left with the original number.

16             MS. KORNER:  Well, can I -- Your Honours, can I ask, please,

17     because I think this will deal with it, that the document which is 2D57

18     be put back on the screen, and can we go in both B/C/S to page 14 and in

19     English to page 14.

20        Q.   Now, this is part of the file on the killing of the three men,

21     Mr. Kajkut, Mr. Mandic, and Mr. Mihajlovic, that we've looked at quite

22     often.  And this is --

23             MS. KORNER:  Could we have it in English, please.  All right.

24        Q.   This is to the public prosecutor's office, dated the

25     22nd of September, 1992.  And I don't know why they're bothering when

Page 8023

 1     there are three dead men, but certainly it seems to be taken further.

 2     Can we look --

 3             MR. ZECEVIC:  I'm sorry, we don't have the Serbian --

 4             MS. KORNER:  Is that not it?

 5             MR. ZECEVIC:  No, that's not it.

 6             MS. KORNER:  It should be page -- you're quite right.  22nd of

 7     the 9th, 1992?  Is that not the thing to the public prosecutor's office?

 8     No, it's not.

 9             MR. ZECEVIC:  It is.  I'm sorry.  I'm sorry.  I'm terribly sorry.

10             MS. KORNER:  Can we go to the next page in each, please -- oh,

11     no, stay on that page in B/C/S.  No, sorry, sorry, go back.  It's the

12     page I want in B/C/S.  Sorry.  And could we go to the next page in

13     English.  And it's the second paragraph in English about these three men.

14        Q.   "They committed these crimes between the 3rd of April, 1992, and

15     the 16th of June, 1992, when they were killed during an armed attack on

16     the Mejdan police station."

17             And indeed I think you told us originally it was June that the

18     attack took place.  Is that right, Mr. Tutus?

19        A.   I don't know the exact time.  I really don't know the exact time.

20        Q.   But the point that I want to make, and I don't want to have that

21     document up again on the screen, is that report, allegedly dated the

22     25th of May, refers to these two men being -- two out of the three being

23     deceased.  Now, that is not possible, is it, because they weren't killed

24     until the 16th of June.

25             MS. KORNER:  Who said that?

Page 8024

 1             MR. KRGOVIC:  I mean, it's obviously misleading.  Not leading,

 2     misleading completely, Your Honour.  If you look at the rest of this

 3     document, you will see when this -- 6th of May.

 4             MS. KORNER:  Well --

 5             MR. KRGOVIC:  I don't have here this document in front of me, but

 6     if you go further to this document, you find the exact date of this and

 7     when these men was killed.

 8             MS. KORNER:  Well, Your Honours, I know that's -- I had

 9     originally worked on the 6th of May and then I realised that's not right

10     apparently.  But anyhow, I don't think we can take this matter any

11     further at the moment.

12             MR. ZECEVIC:  Ms. Korner, with all due respect, it might be a

13     typo.  It might be a typo in this document.

14             MS. KORNER:  Anything might be.

15             MR. ZECEVIC:  I agree with you but I'm just suggesting.

16             MS. KORNER:  Well, Your Honours, that's why -- can I say it's now

17     a matter for argument and comment and we'll see where we get to, but

18     that's in effect what this report says.

19             And, Your Honours, thank you very much.  That's all I do ask this

20     witness.

21                           Further Questioned by the Court:

22             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mr. Tutus, I just have a small question for you

23     in relation to something you told us yesterday in response to a question

24     put to you by Mr. Krgovic.

25             And if anyone wants to follow your testimony yesterday, it was

Page 8025

 1     yesterday's testimony at page 54, if you want to click back to the place.

 2             And let me read out to you what was entered into the transcript.

 3     Mr. Krgovic is saying the following to you:

 4             "I see that both you and the centre, the security services

 5     centre, filed a large number of criminal reports containing

 6     qualifications of these criminal offences, and I see that you are using

 7     the qualifications from the Criminal Code, murder, robbery, and you

 8     qualify them as regular crimes; is that right?"

 9             And your answer was:

10             "Yes."

11             And then Mr. Krgovic then goes on to say:

12             "When my learned friend Mr. Zecevic and the Prosecutor were

13     putting questions to you concerning dispatches concerning war crimes, you

14     thought that as Banja Luka was not in the war theatre, you described

15     these crimes the same way you would as in peacetime; is that correct?"

16             And your answer was:

17             "Yes."

18             Mr. Krgovic then went on to say:

19             "Regardless of the fact that persons of other ethnicities were

20     the victims of the crimes, this did not, in your view, make it a war

21     crime; is that correct?"

22             And your answer is then that:

23             "Well, we thought we should do the job in the way we did, but

24     that doesn't mean that the prosecutor could not have altered that.  As we

25     were not actually in the war theatre, on the battle-field, we thought

Page 8026

 1     that this was the proper way to go about it."

 2             That's the testimony of yesterday.  My question to you now is

 3     this:  Would it have made any difference if you, as the police, had

 4     classified these documents right from the beginning as war crimes?

 5        A.   It would have made no difference.

 6             JUDGE HARHOFF:  So your testimony is that the procedure you would

 7     follow and the authority to which you would submit your reports would be

 8     the same regardless of whether it was a peacetime crime or a war crime;

 9     is that correct?

10        A.   That's correct.

11             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Let me just clarify one question with you, then.

12     If in wartime a crime that could be characterised as a war crime was

13     committed by a member of the armed forces, to whom would you report or

14     what would the procedure be that would have to be followed in case of a

15     war crime being committed in wartime?  Would the police be involved at

16     all, or would it be the military police who would assume the

17     responsibility to investigate the crime?

18        A.   All this would have been done by the military justice and the

19     military prosecutor, or perhaps they would have only asked us for

20     assistance in terms of resources and technical assistance.

21             JUDGE HARHOFF:  And if you were then investigating a crime

22     starting out from the assumption that this was a peacetime crime but

23     reaching the conclusion that because of the nature of the crime and the

24     circumstances under which the crime was committed you would end up

25     finding that this could and should be treated as a war crime, would you

Page 8027

 1     then have submitted your report to the military police or to the military

 2     prosecutor?

 3        A.   Well, if military organs were involved in the crime, then we

 4     would defer the case to the military security organs; and if we reached

 5     such conclusions in the course of the investigation, we would submit it

 6     to the military prosecutor.  We would have done the same, basically.

 7             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Thank you, sir.

 8             MS. KORNER:  Well, Your Honour, I don't want Your Honours or the

 9     witness to mislead himself.  He actually gave us a document which I

10     didn't trouble to use but which is on this point.  Can I ask that be it

11     put up on the screen?  It's 65 ter 2393.  This is a document that he gave

12     to us in interview.

13                           Further Re-examination by Ms. Korner:

14        Q.   Mr. Tutus, these are instructions on the implementation of the

15     Law on Internal Affairs; is that right?  Going back to 1986?

16        A.   Yes.

17        Q.   And which you -- do you remember giving those to the

18     investigator?

19        A.   I remember that.

20             MS. KORNER:  Can we look then, please, at the third page --

21     fourth -- third page in English, and in B/C/S also it's the third page.

22        Q.   Does that show in paragraph 5:

23             "The centres act on crimes for which the penalty provided by law

24     is a prison sentence in excess of ten years ..."

25             And then halfway through that paragraph:

Page 8028

 1             "Crimes against humanity and international law."

 2        A.   Yes.

 3             MS. KORNER:  It was Your Honour's question, so I just thought you

 4     better have a look at this.

 5             MR. ZECEVIC:  I'm sorry, I understand that Ms. Korner was trying

 6     to assist the Trial Chamber on that, although I don't -- I don't know how

 7     it fits with the -- with the procedural rules, but in any case, I don't

 8     think, Your Honours, that it was exactly your question.  Your question

 9     was quite different than this.

10             JUDGE HARHOFF:  My question sprang out of the question that was

11     left with me when the witness had offered his testimony yesterday,

12     because I thought that it was somehow strange that these crimes would be

13     characterised only as civil crimes while the whole thing was going on

14     in -- at a time which was clearly wartime.

15             MR. ZECEVIC:  I understand that quite clearly, but what I'm

16     trying to say is that this document does not correspond or it does not

17     assist the Trial Chamber in that respect with what your question was.  I

18     mean, we will, of course, explain during the course of the trial the

19     nature of this document.  Thank you.

20             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Thank you very much.  I have no further

21     questions.

22             JUDGE HALL:  Well, Mr. Tutus, we thank you for your assistance to

23     the Tribunal over the past several days.  Your testimony's now at an end.

24     You're released as a witness, and we wish you a safe journey back to your

25     home.  The Usher would now escort you from the courtroom.

Page 8029

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation]  Thank you very much.

 2                           [The witness withdrew]

 3                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 4             JUDGE HALL:  Mrs. Korner, you're on your feet.  I don't know

 5     whether it is to articulate what you alluded to yesterday, that you would

 6     be making an oral application to -- yes.  Could we hear you, please.

 7             MS. KORNER:  Yes.  Your Honours, can I -- the oral application

 8     that I'm going to make can be made in open session.  The oral application

 9     that Mr. Olmsted will make on behalf of the next witness will have to be

10     done in private.

11             Your Honours, yesterday you delivered a ruling in private session

12     because part of it related to timings for the trial, but this part, I

13     take it, I can refer to in open session because it was an order to us.

14             JUDGE HALL:  Yes.

15             MS. KORNER:  Thank you.  Your Honours, the order read that if for

16     one or more of the 92 ter witnesses, more time in chief is needed than

17     20 minutes, in parenthesis because it doesn't occur on the transcript

18     there, specifically to present new evidence for that part viva voce, as

19     it were, the Trial Chamber expects the OTP to file a written motion with

20     the reasons why, and it reads "how many extra time should be allotted,"

21     but I think that should be "how much extra time should be allotted."

22     Your Honours then later said that because of the fact that two witnesses

23     were due very shortly, we could deal with this orally.

24             Your Honour, the witness who will come after the next witness,

25     Mr. Mandic, Your Honours will know until Your Honours decided that it

Page 8030

 1     would be 20 minutes, we had put down six hours for, despite the fact that

 2     he's 11 days of transcript in the Krajisnik trial, a part of the 92 ter

 3     package.  Accepting, therefore, that Your Honours will have read the

 4     11 days of transcript, it is not proposed to go over with him what he

 5     said in that transcript.  However, the trial of Krajisnik was not

 6     specifically geared towards the police.  It was geared towards a member

 7     of the Presidency.

 8             We have therefore -- you will have seen, Your Honours, we

 9     provided a list of some 120 documents which we thought we might have to

10     deal with through him.  In actual fact, having gone -- may I say

11     Mr. Mandic is at present, because he saw the Defence on Sunday, he is

12     still ploughing his way through the various documents, but on the basis

13     of my review yesterday evening, at present there are 33 documents which

14     are not yet exhibited.  I'm leaving out all the ones on our list which

15     are already exhibits which he can speak to.  And therefore, I would wish

16     to call him to deal with those documents.

17             That -- working on a rough average of ten minutes per document,

18     33 documents, give or take, is something in the region of between three

19     and four hours.  Therefore, my application is that I may have four hours

20     with him on top of his 92 ter package.

21             Your Honours, can I say he's the last witness, really, who apart

22     from being part and parcel for a time of the police, then the Ministry of

23     Justice, and has intimate knowledge of Mr. Stanisic and other members of

24     the Bosnian Serb leadership, that I would ask for that amount of time.

25             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Five hours?

Page 8031

 1             MS. KORNER:  Four hours.

 2             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Four hours --

 3             MS. KORNER:  We originally asked for six and I'm reducing it to

 4     four.

 5             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Four plus the half hour or the 20 minutes?

 6             MS. KORNER:  I suppose it takes -- it takes 20 minutes just to

 7     establish that they've said all this before.  Four hours -- I would say

 8     four hours in total, give or take.

 9                           [Trial Chamber confers]

10             MS. KORNER:  Your Honours, my maths is terrible.  That would be

11     5.5 hours, but, Your Honour, I would hope to do it in 4.  I'm told that

12     my maths on 33 documents, 10 minutes each, works out to 5.5, not 4.  But

13     one way or another, I will just have to try and keep it under 4.

14             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mrs. Korner, I'm a bit lost here.  I'm unsure

15     about whether you're asking for four hours, four and a half hours, or

16     five hours, or still six hours.

17             MS. KORNER:  I'm not asking -- I'm not asking -- well --

18             JUDGE HARHOFF:  All inclusive.

19             MS. KORNER:  Can I have an all-inclusive six hours in the hopes

20     that I can do it in a lot less?

21                           [Trial Chamber confers]

22             MS. KORNER:  And, Your Honours, one of the documents I know for

23     sure is a video that we're going to play, so that always takes a little

24     bit more time.

25             JUDGE HALL:  So the -- you would be permitted six hours with this

Page 8032

 1     witness.

 2             JUDGE HARHOFF:  All inclusive.

 3             JUDGE HALL:  That's a total of six hours.

 4             MS. KORNER:  Then, Your Honour, I think we need to go into closed

 5     session --

 6   (redacted)

 7             MS. KORNER:  Your Honour, can we redact?  Yes, Your Honours, can

 8     we -- can we go into private session, then closed, and Mr. Olmsted will

 9     deal with that.  And, Your Honours, would Your Honours then excuse me

10     once Mr. Olmsted has made his application.

11             JUDGE HALL:  Yes.

12             MS. KORNER:  Thank you.

13                           [Private session]

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 8033











11 Pages 8033-8034 redacted. Private session.















Page 8035

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7                           [Closed session]

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 8036











11 Pages 8036-8075 redacted. Closed session.















Page 8076

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17                           --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.45 p.m.,

18                           to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 24th day of

19                           March, 2010, at 9.00 a.m.