1 Wednesday, 25 May 2011
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.03 a.m.
5 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. Good morning to
6 everyone in and around the courtroom.
7 This is case IT-08-91-T, the Prosecutor versus Mico Stanisic and
8 Stojan Zupljanin.
9 [Trial Chamber confers]
10 JUDGE HALL: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
11 Good morning to everyone. May we have the appearances, please.
12 MR. HANNIS: Good morning, Your Honours. For the Prosecution,
13 I'm Tom Hannis, along with Alex Demirdjian, and our Case Manager today is
14 Indah Susanti.
15 MR. ZECEVIC: Good morning, Your Honours. Slobodan Zecevic,
16 Slobodan Cvijetic, Eugene O'Sullivan, and Ms. Tatjana Savic appearing for
17 Stanisic Defence this morning. Thank you.
18 MR. ALEKSIC: [Interpretation] Good morning, Your Honours --
19 THE INTERPRETER: Nothing heard in the channel.
20 JUDGE HALL: May the witness be escorted back to the stand, if
21 there's nothing we need concern ourselves with.
22 The -- could we have the appearance again in respect of the
23 Stanisic Defence because nothing came through on the channel.
24 MR. ALEKSIC: [Microphone not activated]
25 THE INTERPRETER: The microphone is not working. The counsel
1 should use another microphone.
2 MR. ALEKSIC: [Interpretation] Good morning, Your Honours.
3 Aleksandar Aleksic appearing for Zupljanin Defence.
4 JUDGE HALL: It seems to have come through now. Thanks.
5 [The witness takes the stand]
6 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Bjelosevic, good morning to you, sir, for, what
7 we trust will the last time. I give you the usual reminder of your
8 solemn declaration before I ask Mr. Zecevic to continue.
9 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you, Your Honours.
10 WITNESS: ANDRIJA BJELOSEVIC [Resumed]
11 [Witness answered through interpreter]
12 Re-examination by Mr. Zecevic: [Continued]
13 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Bjelosevic.
14 A. Good morning.
15 Q. Mr. Bjelosevic, yesterday, towards the end, we spoke about
16 P5530 [as interpreted], and that was the Law on Internal Affairs of the
17 Serbian Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina. And the topic we discussed
18 was assistance.
19 A. Yes.
20 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] P530.
21 Q. During examination-in-chief, page -- or, rather, during
22 cross-examination, page 20935 and onwards, you were answering questions
23 from Ms. Korner. That's when you commented on Articles ^ 27 and 31 of
24 this law. That is page 4 in the Serbian language.
25 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Can we have that on the screen?
1 Q. What I would like to hear about from you are some examples for
2 the application of Article 27. It says that the public security station
3 shall implement regulation passed by the municipal assembly, relating to
4 law and order and road safety.
5 Mr. Bjelosevic, a decision by the municipal assembly, whereby
6 cafes are supposed to close, say, at 2300 hours, is that one such
7 regulation, as mentioned here?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. A decision by municipal assembly prescribing that cafes serving
10 alcohol may not open before noon, for instance. Is that another example
11 of such a regulation?
12 A. Yes. Municipal assembly decisions regulate precisely those kind
13 of issues.
14 Q. A decision by municipal assembly that certain segments of the
15 road shall have speed limits because of the proximity to a school or
16 hospital, is that another example of such regulation?
17 A. Yes. It is the jurisdiction of the municipal assembly to decide
18 and mark such places in town and on the roads.
19 Q. If, for instance, the Visegrad Municipal Assembly decides to ban
20 the traffic across the Drina River bridge, the old monumental bridge, is
21 that another example of a regulation stipulated by this article of this
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. So these are my examples. Are these examples representatives --
25 representative for Article 27 of this Law on Internal Affairs and the
1 kind of regulations envisaged there?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Is public security station duty-bound to enforce such
4 regulations, in accordance with this article?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Can a municipal assembly adopt regulations pertaining to - if you
7 know, that is - can a municipal assembly adopt regulations pertaining to
8 matters that are already regulated by another law?
9 A. I think that, in principle, they can go into details, in
10 accordance with that law.
11 Q. Let us take another example.
12 If the Law on Internal Affairs defines measures and authority of
13 the officials of internal affairs and the circumstances under which such
14 authorities may be used, accompanied by force, is it then possible for a
15 municipal assembly to change what has been defined by the Law on Internal
16 Affairs by its own regulation?
17 A. No.
18 Q. If a municipal assembly were to adopt a regulation contrary to
19 the Law on Internal Affairs which regulates your authority, is then a
20 public security station duty-bound to enforce such regulation?
21 A. No.
22 Q. Let us now turn to Article 31.
23 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] That's the next page of the law.
24 Q. Sir, Mr. Bjelosevic, Article 31 defines the obligation of CSB and
25 public security station to provide reports and information, if so
1 requested by the municipal assembly and the executive committee. Is this
2 sort of reporting a replacement for your regular reports that are sent to
3 the Ministry of Interior?
4 A. No. This is the so-called horizontal reporting that goes towards
5 municipal organs. Those informations are copied to them, so that they
6 would be informed. It's for your information.
7 And as for the flow of information towards the ministry, in its
8 entirety, and according to lines of work, that is something that is
9 defined by the hierarchical structure.
10 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
11 MR. ZECEVIC: I'm sorry. Thank you very much.
12 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Bjelosevic, let us take another example.
13 Municipal assembly requests public security station, or the Doboj CSB, to
14 inform them about the situation with crime in the municipality,
15 particularly relating to narcotics. Is then the Security Services
16 Centre, in accordance with this request, duty-bound to provide this
18 A. This article is quite precise. All the information, all the
19 events relating to the area of a particular municipality, yes. In such a
20 case, they have a duty to provide such information.
21 Q. Sir, this Article 31 that is something that imposes a duty to the
22 public security station, or the Security Services Centre to provide
23 information upon request by municipal organs. Does it impose this --
24 does it impose a duty, as well, to enact an order that you might receive
25 from the municipal assembly?
1 A. Yes. If it relates to the areas in which municipal assembly may
2 enact its regulation as bylaws.
3 Q. Do you refer to the articles mentioned in Article 27?
4 A. Yes. That's what I had in mind. So if it's something in
5 relation to such decisions, decisions that fall within the jurisdiction
6 of the municipal assembly, then, yes, they're duty-bound to enact them.
7 Q. In order to clarify this issue, we should take a look at
8 Article 32.
9 Mr. Bjelosevic, let us stay with the example that I've just
10 given. It's a hypothetical. Municipal organs of the Doboj municipality
11 are concerned about the rise in substance abuse among underage persons,
12 for instance, in schools. They request a report from the CSB in which
13 the CSB has to describe the situation with crime, in accordance with
14 Article 31, and in such report, you confirm their concerns. That,
15 indeed, the number of offences committed by underage persons related to
16 substance abuse is, indeed, on the rise.
17 In such a case, the municipal assembly wants to introduce some
18 measures, and they say, We request the Security Services Centre to
19 increase the number of operatives in charge of this particular crime,
20 this particular kind of crime. We want them to control and prevent
21 substance abuse in schools and other institutions. Is it then
22 possible -- should the municipal assembly, in accordance -- in accordance
23 with Article 32, forward this kind of proposal to the ministry for their
24 additional consideration?
25 A. Yes. If they propose some additional activities, or changes in
1 the normal course of work, then they should put it in writing as a
3 Q. When this proposal is considered in the ministry, and when it is
4 found to be justified there are reasons for the ministry to undertake
5 certain steps in relation to that, is the ministry then duty-bound to
6 issue to you an order, directive, or instruction for you to act in
7 accordance with it?
8 A. Yes. If there are any change in the organisation of work, they
9 have to issue such an instruction.
10 Q. So, this kind of a report -- this kind of a request submitted by
11 the municipal assembly or the municipal organs should go, first of all,
12 to the ministry, and if it is accepted by the ministry, only then should
13 be sent to the CSB, and only then is the Security Services Centre
14 duty-bound to enact it in accordance with the order that comes from the
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. A decision or a request by municipal assembly or its organs that
18 does not follow this procedure but goes directly from the municipal
19 assembly to the Security Services Centre, or public security station,
20 without the ministry being consulted, is that kind of directive or
21 instruction then something that imposes a duty on the Security Services
22 Centre to act?
23 A. No.
24 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Zecevic, I don't know whether it's a case of
25 Mr. Hannis exercising extraordinary restraint, but apart from the
1 ordinary -- the minimal utility on propositions beginning with "if",
2 because, of course, that can be unending, the last series of -- the --
3 coming back to -- I'm surprised Mr. Hannis hasn't challenged you for
4 making a speech instead of asking questions.
5 I don't know what usefulness the last set of exchanges has been,
6 in terms of the -- what the witness is saying.
7 Could you assist us by focussing on the -- exactly how you relate
8 to the articles to the practice on the ground?
9 MR. ZECEVIC: Well, Your Honours, I was trying to do that by
10 giving the examples. That's why I was using the "ifs" in a hypothetical
11 meaning. But I will -- I will -- I will ask the witness to -- to explain
12 his position.
13 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Bjelosevic, the CSB, or the SJB, actually,
14 is it duty-bound to implement the decisions of municipal bodies that
15 are -- or -- that are not covered by Articles 27, 31, and 32 of the Law
16 on Internal Affairs?
17 A. No. Only if subordinate legislation is in accordance with the
18 law, then, yes; but, otherwise, no.
19 Q. Thank you. Mr. Bjelosevic, let's take a look at something else.
20 During your cross-examination, you commented your diary for
21 Ms. Korner on more than one occasion.
22 A. I don't have one here. Perhaps you're referring to that one.
23 Q. I think it was returned and it is currently with the Registrar.
24 A. Thank you.
25 Q. Ms. Korner showed you document 65 ter 20103. That's in the
1 Prosecution tab 107B. It's about your diary entry dated 10 March 1992.
2 You confirmed to Ms. Korner that this is about a meeting held in
3 Bosanski Brod; do you remember?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. We'll return to this later because I now cannot find the
6 reference in the transcript, so I'll move on to my next question.
7 Mr. Bjelosevic, you commented your diary and the entries made in
8 late December in the context of Stevan Todorovic, chief of the Samac SJB;
9 do you remember?
10 A. Yes.
11 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Could the witness please be shown
13 Q. Mr. Bjelosevic, is this your dispatch dated 25 November 1992, and
14 tell us what it is about?
15 A. Yes, it is. This is a dispatch that I sent to the ministry or to
16 the minister, rather, with a request to replace Stevan Todorovic from the
17 position of chief of the SJB, and I pointed out that Stevan Todorovic was
18 never appointed pursuant to a decision of the minister or anybody else
19 from the ministry, and that for that reason, disciplinary proceedings
20 cannot be instituted against him.
21 Q. Now that you've mentioned disciplinary proceedings, you will
22 remember that Ms. Korner and the Trial Chamber had some questions about
23 this. Tell me, Mr. Bjelosevic, under the Law on Internal Affairs and
24 subordinate legislation regulating these matters, against who can
25 disciplinary proceedings be instituted?
1 A. Against such persons who are lawfully employed with some body or
2 institution. Which means, in practice, that the person in question was
3 appointed by virtue of a decision of the official in charge.
4 Disciplinary proceedings can be instituted against such persons.
5 Q. To be completely clear, let me ask you: Can disciplinary
6 proceedings be instituted only against MUP members who are employed with
7 the MUP?
8 A. Yes. I believe that's what I said in my previous answer. Only
9 in such a case can -- are disciplinary proceedings possible.
10 Q. We have seen that the MUP also has a reserve police force. Can
11 disciplinary proceedings be launched against reserve police members?
12 A. No. Disciplinary proceedings are not possible in that case. The
13 person in question can only be deleted from the list of reserve police
14 members. Their wartime assignment is cancelled.
15 Q. You said "wartime assignment." When you say that, you mean their
16 wartime assignment as members of the reserve police.
17 A. Yes. Well, that's what we're talking about, the reserve police
19 Q. Thank you.
20 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Could the witness please be shown
21 1D520, just for a brief comment.
22 Q. Mr. Bjelosevic, is this your dispatch dated 27 November? And why
23 did you send this dispatch to the minister and the commander of the
24 special police brigade?
25 MR. HANNIS: I'm sorry, Your Honour. Again, I'm operating at a
1 handicap. But I'm not sure where in the cross-examination this stems
2 from. If I could have a reference.
3 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Just a moment, please.
4 [Defence counsel confer]
5 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Unfortunately, I cannot give you a
6 page reference now because by mistake or -- as a consequence of an update
7 of the transcript, we lost the exact page references. But my question
8 refers to the 23rd of May, Ms. Korner's cross-examination about
9 Stevan Todorovic on pages 19 through 25 of that day's transcript, and
10 then pages 27 through 33.
11 I don't know if this is sufficient for your purposes. I cannot
12 give you a more exact reference, but it's basically a technical problem.
13 I'm being informed that the pages are 21097. That's the
14 beginning of Ms. Korner's examination concerning Stevan Todorovic.
15 May I continue?
16 JUDGE HALL: Yes, please.
17 MR. ZECEVIC:
18 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Bjelosevic, my question was whether this is
19 your document, what the date is, and what the reason was for drafting and
20 sending out this document.
21 A. Yes. This is a dispatch that I sent out, and the reason, as
22 stated here, is the aggravated security situation in the Samac
23 municipality, which ensued after the arrest of the then-station chief
24 Todorovic, and the president of the Executive Board of Bosanski Samac,
25 Mr. Simic. Then the president of the municipality ordered that the
1 passage through the corridor shall be blocked. That was why I requested
2 additional forces, because I wanted to stabilise the situation and put
3 things under control.
4 Q. Thank you. On transcript page 33 of that day -- I'm not sure now
5 but it's probably 21990 or some such. Anyway, you commented on your
6 audit of some documents which you conducted as CSB chief. Do you
7 remember that?
8 A. Well, could you give me more detail to jog my memory?
9 Q. Ms. Korner put to you that some documents that are routinely kept
10 by a CSB or, rather, an SJB, you never saw at the Samac SJB.
11 A. Yes, I remember the question. But that's not a task of the chief
12 of the centre but a task of the inspectors, according to their respective
13 lines of work.
14 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Could the witness please be shown
15 document 1D519. The page reference is 21.117 of the transcript.
16 Q. Tell us, sir, do you know this document? Who is Mirko Blazanovic
17 and what is this document about? We can see the signatures on page 3, so
18 possibly you can authenticate the document.
19 A. Yes. This document was drafted after an audit of the Samac SJB
20 and signed by the then-chief of the department of the police at the Doboj
21 CSB, Mirko Blazanovic. And his team conducted the audit and drafted this
23 MR. HANNIS: [Previous translation continues] ... I'm sorry.
24 Your Honours, I need to interrupt. The question was: Can you
25 authenticate the document. He has done that. And the document is
1 already in evidence, as I understand it, and this seems to be a re-hash
2 of the direct testimony of the witness on this point. I'm not sure how
3 it arises from cross-examination.
4 MR. ZECEVIC: Just in all fairness to the witness, I wanted to
5 show him the signature at the end. I know it's -- it's already admitted
6 document, so, therefore, I'm not trying to re-hash his direct evidence.
7 The question which was posed by Ms. Korner refers to the
8 inspections, the -- of the -- of the CSB Doboj in -- in -- in Samac SJB
9 and that is precisely what I want to discuss with the witness.
10 MR. HANNIS: I believe that was already discussed in direct
11 examination, and I don't see anything new arising from cross-examination.
12 MR. ZECEVIC: Well, the suggestion during the cross-examination
13 by Ms. Korner was that it was for the witness to -- that the witness
14 should have gone to the inspection of the -- of the SJB of
15 Bosanski Samac. Than is the only thing I want to discuss.
16 MR. HANNIS: And on cross-examination, the witness said no, it
17 wasn't his job. It was the job of the inspectors.
18 So I don't know that it needs any further clarification.
19 JUDGE HALL: Yes, let's move on, Mr. Zecevic.
20 MR. ZECEVIC: Okay.
21 [Interpretation] Could the witness please be shown 65 ter 285D1.
22 That is tab 208.
23 Q. Could you please tell us what this is all about. Is this your
24 document; and could you tell us what this document is about?
25 A. Yes. This is a document of the CSB Doboj and I signed it. This
1 is a cover letter, accompanying the report of the working group for
2 coordination of the SJB Bosanski Samac. It is sent to the ministry, to
3 the administration for police duties and assignments.
4 Q. Was it only after this report about the work for coordination --
5 the work of the group for coordination that a decision could be made
6 about replacing Stevan Todorovic?
7 A. May I be allowed only two sentences about what was found, inter
8 alia, during this inspection?
9 MR. HANNIS: [Previous translation continues] ... Your Honours,
10 that's not the question.
11 A. The then --
12 MR. HANNIS: [Previous translation continues] I would request --
13 that you direct the witness to answer the question.
14 JUDGE HALL: Yes, Mr. Bjelosevic, could you confine yourself to
15 answering the question posed by counsel, please.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. It was only after this
17 inspection and after this information was written up that a dispatch was
18 sent. If I remember correctly, even to the president of the republic,
19 all for the purpose of having Chief Todorovic replaced.
20 MR. ZECEVIC:
21 Q. [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Bjelosevic.
22 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] I would like to tender this
24 MR. HANNIS: Your Honour, for what it is worth, it's a cover
25 letter. It's not the report.
1 JUDGE HALL: How does this assist, Mr. Zecevic?
2 MR. ZECEVIC: Well, Your Honour, the suggestion by Ms. Korner to
3 the witness was that, even in December 1992, Stevan Todorovic, despite
4 the knowledge of the -- of the witness and at that point, relatively
5 public knowledge of what Mr. Todorovic did during the 1992, when he was
6 chief of the SJB Samac, he wasn't replaced by the end of 1992. And that
7 is precisely why I want to introduce this document.
8 JUDGE HALL: Could somebody remind me as to whether the report is
9 in evidence?
10 MR. ZECEVIC: Well, Your Honours, I believe this -- the report
11 which I showed to the witness before, which is 1D519, is the report
12 which -- which is -- which is sent with this letter.
13 JUDGE HALL: So the -- why do we need the cover letter or is it
14 merely for completion?
15 MR. ZECEVIC: Because of the date. Because the report itself
16 does not have a date, 1D519. And now this cover letter shows --
17 [Overlapping speakers] ...
18 JUDGE HALL: [Overlapping speakers] ... I follow you Mr. Zecevic.
19 Mr. Hannis.
20 MR. HANNIS: [Overlapping speakers] ... Your Honour, there's not a
21 date on the report. How do we know that that report is the one that's
22 attached to this cover letter?
23 JUDGE HALL: Because of the witness's testimony is the short
24 answer. Wouldn't it be?
25 MR. HANNIS: I guess I wasn't here to see him say that. But
1 Mr. Zecevic said this was because of the suggestion by Ms. Korner that
2 the witness, even in December 1992, had not been removed. I'd like to
3 have a transcript reference to where Ms. Korner made that suggestion.
4 From what I have been able to glance over, it appears that she was saying
5 he wasn't removed even up until 1994.
6 JUDGE HALL: If we can separate the arguments for the evidence,
7 Mr. Hannis, it seems, that, as Mr. Zecevic has said, the relevance of
8 this cover letter is to put a date to the report that's already in
9 evidence. So it's for that limited it -- with that understanding. I see
10 no difficulty of it being admitted.
11 Now, in terms of the rest of what you have said, Mr. Hannis,
12 that's a matter for argument.
13 Yes, so the letter is -- letter/note is admitted and marked.
14 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit 1D544, Your Honours.
15 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you.
16 JUDGE HALL: As a matter of curiosity, Mr. Zecevic, in my part of
17 the world and I suppose it holds true here as well, that a lawyer's
18 minute is not exactly what it is by the clock. I see that you're 53
19 minutes into the 30 minutes that you indicated that you would be when we
20 adjourned yesterday.
21 MR. ZECEVIC: Well, it was a misunderstanding, Your Honours,
22 that -- I requested, I was hoping to finish yesterday within 30 minutes,
23 and then I said that it would not be possible, and, therefore, I'm --
24 JUDGE HALL: I see. I thought I misunderstood you, because I
25 thought when we took the adjournment you indicated that you would be 30
1 minutes longer than you thought you would have been.
2 MR. ZECEVIC: No, no, I am afraid not, Your Honour.
3 JUDGE HALL: I see. We proceed.
4 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you.
5 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Bjelosevic, Ms. Korner asked a number of
6 questions about these payment lists and documents. I have prepared these
7 documents for you so that you can give us your brief comment.
8 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Could I please be assisted.
9 MR. HANNIS: Can I have a reference in the transcript where this
10 topic was addressed so I can follow along.
11 [Defence counsel confer]
12 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] 21037 is the transcript reference.
13 MR. HANNIS: I'm sorry, Mr. Zecevic. Ah, it came out on the
14 transcript -- now I have it. 21037?
15 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes.
16 [Interpretation] Could the witness please be shown P1346. That
17 is Prosecution tab 13.
18 Q. Mr. Bjelosevic, you do remember that Ms. Korner showed you this
19 document, and your comment was that you were unfamiliar with the
20 document, if I remember correctly.
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. On the basis of this document, and on the basis of what you see
23 before you, can you tell us about the provenance of this document?
24 A. I do not recognise the signatures. Probably from the station?
25 The Public Security Station Doboj, I assume.
1 MR. HANNIS: I'm sorry, the witness has said he doesn't recognise
2 the signatures. And the document I see on the screen doesn't appear to
3 have any signatures but one. Is he talking about the same document I'm
4 looking at?
5 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes, he is talking about the same document. The
6 document which is on the screen has two signatures. If they can be
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There are two signatures.
9 MR. HANNIS: Thank you. I didn't see the one under this
10 signature -- this seal.
11 MR. ZECEVIC:
12 Q. [Interpretation] The next document that I wish to show you is
13 65 ter - it's a Prosecution document - 20113, tab 26B. I have been
14 informed that it is now P2328.
15 Sir, you remember that Ms. Korner showed you this document.
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. In order to have a perfectly clear transcript, can you tell us
18 whether you recognise the signature on page 5 of this document?
19 A. Obren Petrovic, chief of the SJB; it's his signature.
20 Q. In your view, is this a document of the public security station
21 of Doboj or not?
22 A. Well, no doubt. If it was signed by the chief of the station,
23 then it is a document of the public security station Doboj.
24 Q. The next document that I wish to show you is P1338; Prosecution
25 tab 14F.
1 Mr. Bjelosevic, you remember that this document was also shown to
2 you by Ms. Korner.
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Could you please have a look at the first eight pages of this
5 document and give us your comment with regard to this document. The
6 first eight pages. 20.0007. The ERN number is that -- of that
7 particular page.
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Sir, all of these eight pages or, rather, seven pages of text, do
10 they all have two seals, a big one and a small one? And, if so, can you
11 tell us what they are?
12 A. Yes. The big seal was made, I cannot remember exactly when, I
13 think it was sometime in July, and these lists for payment were made
14 retroactively, because in the month of April, the employees who worked
15 there did not receive a salary. They were supposed to receive a salary
16 from the Ministry of the Interior of the Socialist Republic of
17 Bosnia-Herzegovina. Because of everything that happened, in terms of war
18 developments, that had not been done. In order to regulate everything
19 that had to do with employees, this was done as I said already, and I
20 point that out again, the amounts were minimal but it was important from
21 the point of view of health and social and pension insurance and things
22 like that.
23 Q. Mr. Bjelosevic, these first seven pages of the document, do they
24 contain your signature and your stamp of the CSB Doboj?
25 A. Yes. In the middle, it is my signature and that's the stamp too.
1 And to the left is the signature of every chief of every organisational
2 unit at the time. And on the right-hand side, the person who was
3 actually paying these amounts out.
4 Q. When you say that this person was in charge, does it pertain to
5 the month of April or to the time when this document was actually
7 A. The document -- the period of time when the document was actually
9 Q. And when was that, if can you tell us?
10 A. I think it was the month of July.
11 Q. Please look at the next three pages of the document that start
12 with FI20-0008 and then further on. Those are the ERN numbers. We see
13 that there are two signatures, that there is a small stamp. Can you tell
14 us something about these documents.
15 A. Yes. These documents are not signed by the centre chief and
16 there is also no stamp of the CSB centre Doboj. I wouldn't know whose
17 stamp that is because it is smeared, and also I cannot recognise the one
18 on the right.
19 Q. Mr. Bjelosevic, in this document, on all three pages, we see
20 lists of names. Is any among those persons, as far as you can remember,
21 an employee of the Doboj CSB? Or was any of them an employee of the
22 CSB Doboj at the time?
23 A. I cannot recognise any name on this list as an employee of the
25 Q. Thank you.
1 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Can we have P2334, MFI. It's
2 tab 24G. It's Prosecution tab 24G.
3 Q. This is also a document that was shown to you by the Prosecution
4 and you commented on it. Is this a CSB document or not?
5 A. No. This is a document originating in the public security
6 station in Doboj, and it is signed by its chief. You can see it in the
7 lower right-hand corner. It was the chief of the public security
8 station, Obren Petrovic; it's his signature.
9 Q. Sir, my learned colleague, Ms. Korner, pointed to number 15, a
10 person named Veljko Solaja. You gave your explanation, but I don't think
11 it is entirely clear in the transcript. Could you tell us once again:
12 What is your explanation that the fact that Veljko Solaja is on this
14 A. During the period that we are discussing now, there was no crime
15 department within the Doboj CSB and all the inspectors whose names are on
16 this list worked, at that time, in the crime department of the public
17 security station in Doboj. Later on, Inspector Solaja arrived in that
18 department when it was being re-established, sometime by the end of July.
19 But during this period, they all worked in the crime department of the
20 public security station.
21 Q. When you Inspector Solaja arrived in the department, what was the
22 organ? Was it the Department of the Security Services Centre? Is that
23 what happened in July?
24 A. Yes, it was the centre.
25 Q. Thank you.
1 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] The following document is 2331,
2 MFI; 24F, Prosecution tab.
3 Q. Sir, you were also shown this document. Can you tell us whose
4 document it is, in your opinion; who signed it; and did any of the
5 persons listed here work in the Security Services Centre in Doboj?
6 A. The document speaks for itself. This is police detachment staff
7 of the public security station in Doboj. And the document is signed by
8 the chief of the Doboj public security station, Obren Petrovic. All
9 persons listed here from number 1 to number 11 worked at the relevant
10 time in the public security station in Doboj. That was their place of
12 Q. Thank you. Mr. Bjelosevic, can you remember, payment of salaries
13 in the Doboj CSB in 1992, from what point on was it carried out,
14 performed by the Ministry of Interior?
15 A. The flow of funds from the Ministry of Interior began
16 approximately at the time when the ministry itself was constituted in the
17 field. And that is end of July, beginning of August.
18 Q. Thank you. And up to that point, as far as you know, what was
19 the source of funds for salaries for the lists that we have been looking
21 A. I think that the funds were secured by the Crisis Staff and
22 that -- that the payments of salaries went through the accountancy
23 service of the CSB Doboj.
24 Q. Thank you.
25 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Can we have P2326, MFI. It's
1 Prosecution tab 77.
2 Q. Mr. Bjelosevic, you remember that the Prosecution showed you this
3 document and asked you to comment on it.
4 A. Yes, I remember.
5 Q. Sir, during cross-examination, Ms. Korner asked you to explain
6 this document and to tell -- to tell us what the abbreviations I-LP and
7 I-LR stand for. But there is something that you were not asked to
8 comment on. The eight persons that we see here, are they members of the
9 CSB or SJB in Doboj?
10 A. These are the individual lists of killed and wounded persons
11 submitted by public security stations in the area covered by the centre.
12 Those lists were then collated and forwarded to the Ministry of the
13 Interior. We can find the names of both active and reserve members of
14 police in those lists of killed and wounded persons.
15 Q. When we talk specifically about these persons here, to which
16 public security station do they belong?
17 A. I think that they belong to a number of stations. Some of them
18 belong to the Doboj public security station.
19 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Can we have P2340. That's tab 100.
20 MR. HANNIS: [Previous translation continues] ... Sorry, before we
21 move on, in light of the witness's answer, could we have a specific
22 question addressed to him about the fact that the document itself says:
23 "The following members of the Doboj SJB."
24 That seems to be contrary to his answer, where he said they came
25 from several stations.
1 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Indeed. Thank you, Mr. Hannis.
2 This is my omission.
3 Q. The document says: "Members of the Doboj public security service
4 who were killed or wounded."
5 Can you comment on that?
6 A. Yes, that's right. It is also my omission.
7 The whole list pertains to the Doboj public security station. I
8 apologise. I was trying to recognise the names, but now I see that we
9 have it written here quite clearly.
10 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Can we now have P2340.
11 May we have the second page.
12 Q. Mr. Bjelosevic, you remember that Ms. Korner showed you this
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Is this your document? Maybe we can show the last page, page 4,
16 which contains the signature.
17 A. Yes, I would like to see the signature.
18 Yes, that's my signature.
19 Q. Mr. Bjelosevic, the persons listed here and we see 119 names,
20 plus seven, which gives a total of 126. That is, seven killed and 119
21 wounded. To whom did they belong?
22 A. This list contains the names of members belonging to all the
23 public security station covered by the area of the CSB in Doboj.
24 Q. Is this a unified, collated list that you submitted to the
25 Ministry of the Interior which contains information on the MUP members
1 who had been killed or wounded?
2 A. Yes. This is a collated list that covers all the public security
3 stations that belong to our CSB.
4 Q. Does it contain the names of both active and reserve policemen?
5 A. It contains the names of both active and reserve policemen who
6 had been killed or wounded.
7 Q. Thank you.
8 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Can we now show to the witness
9 P2333, MFI. It's tab 106.
10 I would like to ask the Prosecution who -- Ms. Korner showed a
11 printed coloured version to the witness, and maybe we could provide the
12 same version now so that the witness can follow.
13 Q. Mr. Bjelosevic, you remember that you spoke to Ms. Korner about
14 this document?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. If I remember it well, you said that did you not recognise this
18 A. No. And I also can't read what's written on the front page on
19 this white piece of paper.
20 Q. Judging by its contents, are you able to say, after you've taken
21 a look at the contents of the book, for instance, page 2 and onwards, are
22 you able to say what this is? What is your opinion?
23 A. I think it's a log-book from the public security station in
24 Doboj. If I look at the columns and the contents of the columns, then I
25 think that that's what it is.
1 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
2 MR. ZECEVIC:
3 Q. [Microphone not activated]
4 A. No. This is a book coming from the public security station in
5 Doboj. Judging from what I can see here.
6 Q. Could you speak more slowly. Actually I have to repeat my
7 question because I forgot to switch on the microphone.
8 Does this document have anything to do with the CSB in Doboj?
9 A. No. This is a document originating in the public security
10 station in Doboj.
11 Q. Thank you.
12 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Could the witness please be shown
13 65 ter 20101. That's Prosecution tab 105.
14 I'm not sure whether the Prosecution has this document in a
15 printed form. Thank you very much.
16 You remember, Mr. Bjelosevic, that Ms. Korner showed you this
17 document as well.
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. I believe that you did not recognise this document either.
20 A. No, I did not recognise it. And I hadn't seen it until it was
21 shown to me here.
22 Q. Take a look at the second page and the third page. And tell us
23 what is your opinion? What is it? What kind of document is it.
24 A. This is a log-book recording all daily events.
25 Q. I think that the position of Ms. Korner was that this document
1 originated in the public security station in Bosanski Samac.
2 A. If we take a look at the columns, we can maybe establish it.
3 Q. Take a look at the places mentioned.
4 A. That's exactly what I'm looking for.
5 Yes, the places mentioned here belonged, at the time, to the
6 public security station, Bosanski Samac, Obudovac, Pelagicevo. Yes.
7 Q. Thank you. Could the witness please be shown 65 ter 20100 --
8 JUDGE HALL: [Previous translation continues] ... Mr. Zecevic,
9 it's that time for the break.
10 MR. ZECEVIC: Oh. I'm sorry.
11 JUDGE HALL: So perhaps we can take it now before you move on to
12 something else.
13 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes. Yes, thank you very much.
14 [The witness stands down]
15 --- Recess taken at 10.25 a.m.
16 --- On resuming at 10.53 a.m.
17 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honours, while the witness is ushered in, may
18 the record reflect that Stanisic's Defence is joined by Ms. Suzana Mohr.
19 And I would like to tell the Trial Chamber that I have two more
20 issues and I think roughly 20 minutes. But Mr. Hannis, during the break
21 we discussed, and I need to return to a previous document to comment with
22 the witness. Thank you.
23 [The witness takes the stand]
24 MR. ZECEVIC: May I, Your Honours?
25 JUDGE HALL: Yes, please.
1 MR. ZECEVIC:
2 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Bjelosevic, during the break, Mr. Hannis
3 asked me to comment on something with you. It's document 2333, MFI.
4 That's tab 106 in the OTP binder. That's the first document you were
5 looking at.
6 A. Yes, this one. The first one.
7 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Please go to page with ERN number
8 06651339. The numbers are in the upper right corner. It's a lengthy
9 document, and I apologise, because I'm not sure of the page. It's
10 probably page 20 in e-court.
12 Q. The first date is 3 December 1992.
13 A. Yes, I've found it. 3-9.
14 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Can we see it on the screens too.
15 The sequential number is 136, the first one. Thank you.
16 Q. Mr. Bjelosevic, entries 137, 138, and 140 in the column for the
17 place, all read "Orasije Doboj".
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Can you first explain whether Orasije belongs to the Doboj
20 municipality and why, according to you, this can be found in this
22 A. Orasije is a populated place in the suburbs of Doboj, or, rather,
23 a neighbourhood. And it belongings to the town of Doboj.
24 Q. Does this have anything to do with the Orasije municipality in
25 the north of Bosnia-Herzegovina which belongs to the Samac SJB?
1 A. No. It is totally unrelated. This is part of Doboj.
2 Q. Thank you very much.
3 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Could the witness please be shown
4 document 65 ter 20100. It's tab 104 in the OTP binder.
5 JUDGE DELVOIE: [Microphone not activated] While we are waiting
6 for that document, the last document you showed the witness before the
7 break, Prosecutor's binder tab 105.
8 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes.
9 JUDGE DELVOIE: The daily event log-book has not been tendered.
10 Not by -- not by you, not by the OTP. If that's how it should be ... ?
11 MR. ZECEVIC: Well, this is one of the fresh documents, the fresh
12 evidence. That is why I don't intend to tender or rely on this document.
13 JUDGE DELVOIE: Okay. Thank you.
14 MR. ZECEVIC:
15 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Bjelosevic, do you remember that this
16 document, too, was shown to you by Ms. Korner? Unfortunately, we can
17 only see it on the screens.
18 A. Yes. I remember it by this torn label.
19 Q. I believe that during the cross-examination you commented on this
20 label and what it says but it wasn't recorded. Could you please tell us
21 more about this.
22 A. It says "crime register for," and then there's a list of years,
23 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995 with the addition "until
25 Q. And in the upper left corner of the label we see something. Can
1 you read it and explain to us what this is about?
2 A. Although it's damaged, I can see that it says OSUP Doboj, which
3 stands for Municipal Secretariat of Internal Affairs, Doboj. That was
4 the old name of the SJB. It's synonymous.
5 Q. Is this a document of the Doboj SJB?
6 A. Yes. In the meantime, the name was changed. It was no longer
7 the OSUP but it became the SJB. Territorially, however, the same
8 territory was covered.
9 Q. Thank you. Mr. Bjelosevic, I'll move onto another topic.
10 On page 21.014 and 15 of the transcript, Ms. Korner commented on
11 the situation concerning Mr. Karlo Grgic with you. Do you remember?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. And on the following page, I believe, 21.015, she asked you:
14 "Did you talk to Predrag Radulovic about Karlo Grgic?"
15 And your answer was: "Predrag Radulovic, I don't know if I ever
16 met him during the war."
17 Then she interrupted you so that the rest of your reply was not
19 Let me ask you, Mr. Bjelosevic: You confirm that you saw
20 Radulovic in Teslic on 1 July 1992, so that is not in dispute. Did you
21 see Predrag Radulovic before the 1st of July, 1992? But only in 1992,
22 not before?
23 A. During the war - that is, from the beginning of May till the end
24 of June - I don't think that I met him at all.
25 Q. Could the document Ms. Korner showed to you be shown again.
1 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] That's P1337, which is under tab 20
2 in the OTP binder.
3 Q. Mr. Bjelosevic, do you remember that Ms. Korner showed you this
4 document, which is a report?
5 A. Yes.
6 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Let's turn the page, please.
7 Q. This report is dated 17 May 1992.
8 A. Yes, that's what it says.
9 Q. Once she showed you this report, Ms. Korner quoted
10 Mr. Radulovic's assertions to you, which he made during his testimony
11 before this Court on the 26th of May.
12 If you remember, we were unable to establish the time-period --
13 the relevant time-period. I must ask you once more: When did you
14 learn - if you remember, of course - of the death of Karlo Grgic and
15 Ilija Tipura?
16 A. I think I learned of these two deaths on two separate occasions,
17 but I could not give you the exact dates. I'm really making an effort to
18 give you at least an approximate date, but I seem unable to.
19 Q. Let me ask you the following question. Did you know about these
20 events in May 1992?
21 A. No. I think that I didn't know either in May or in June. I
22 think I only learned of this later, but I don't know exactly when.
23 Q. Sir, on page 10.000 -- no. 10.800 of the transcript of the 26th
24 of May, 2010, there's a reference and I'll ask you about some things that
25 the witness said in his testimony.
1 Do you know a person by the name of Mile Bosnjak?
2 A. I remember some people with that last name, but I'm not sure that
3 anybody's first name was Mile.
4 Q. Mile Bosnjak should be an old and experienced police officer.
5 A. Oh, then that's the one who worked in Bijeljina, if I remember
6 well. I think that he was on operative duty.
7 Q. And where did he work, did you say?
8 A. In Bijeljina.
9 Q. Did he work in Doboj?
10 A. I cannot remember a man by that name and surname in Doboj.
11 Q. Ms. Korner put to you something that we can -- something that we
12 can find on page 21.015 that you met Radulovic in the latter half of
13 May 1992 and that Mr. Radulovic informed you of his alleged knowledge of
14 the deaths of Karlo Grgic and Ilija Tipura.
15 Let me introduce you to the context. You said a minute ago that
16 you do not remember meeting Mr. Radulovic. But Mr. Radulovic said on
17 that day when he met you at the CSB Doboj in your office, that he was
18 stopped --
19 MR. HANNIS: [Previous translation continues] ... Your Honour, I
20 object. I think this is contrary to your previous order on the -- the
21 rules that we deal with in asking questions and this is not a proper form
22 of asking a question, to comment on something some other witness has said
24 I object to the form of the question. It needs to be put to him
25 in a different manner.
1 JUDGE HALL: You can rephrase, Mr. Zecevic.
2 MR. ZECEVIC: Sure.
3 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Bjelosevic, do you know that Mile Bosnjak
4 was in Doboj in May?
5 A. No, I really cannot remember who Mile Bosnjak is. But when you
6 said that he was an experienced police officer, then I remembered that I
7 saw an older, experienced police officer in Bijeljina. But I don't
8 remember anybody by that name in Doboj.
9 Q. Sir, on page 10.801, which records Mr. Radulovic's testimony
10 given on 26th May, 2010, the name of Milan Maric is mentioned. Do you
11 know that name?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Did you meet Milan Maric in May 1992 in your office?
14 A. No. Most certainly not. Milan Maric was secretary of the OSUP.
15 But, as far as I know, in the month of May, and even the -- the months
16 before and after May, he wasn't even in Doboj.
17 Q. Mr. Bjelosevic, do you know a person by the name of
18 Drago Paravac?
19 A. No. I know a number of people whose last name is Paravac, but I
20 don't remember who Drago Paravac could be.
21 Q. Drago Paravac should be a politician from Doboj. Do you know
23 A. No. There was no such politician in Doboj.
24 Q. Page 10.802, the testimony given on 26th May 2010. This is for
1 "Do you know Drago Paravac, who had his office in the building
2 across the road from the SUP and was a politician from Doboj?"
3 A. I cannot even suppose where an office across the road from the
4 SUP could be, because there was a residential building -- or, rather,
5 several buildings. They also had some shops, there was some shops in
6 those buildings but those shops were not offices.
7 Q. Do you know that Drago Paravac was ever the president of the
8 Executive Board of Doboj?
9 A. No. That was Boro Paravac, not Drago Paravac.
10 Q. All right. Boro Paravac. Did he have an office opposite the CSB
11 Doboj SUP building in May 1992?
12 A. No. The municipality building is in a completely different
13 street. Behind the park out there. It's about 200 metres away, I think,
14 from the police building.
15 Q. Mr. Bjelosevic, it was asserted here that during that meeting
16 that you do not recall -- just a moment, please. When you were told that
17 Karlo Grgic was killed, and Professor Dr. Ilija Tipura, it was alleged
18 that you had said, I cannot do anything about that. Is that correct?
19 A. No way. Had there been that kind of a discussion, I certainly
20 would have remembered it. No.
21 Q. Mr. Bjelosevic, after what happened on the 1st of July in Teslic,
22 you said that you did not talk to Mr. Radulovic for a while, because, if
23 I understood you correctly, you were angry at him. How long was it that
24 you were not on speaking terms with him?
25 A. A few years. I cannot be more specific than that. But perhaps
1 even up until 2000, 2001, something like that.
2 Q. After 2001, did you talk to him?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. During these conversations, was this discussion from May 1992
5 ever mentioned to you?
6 A. No.
7 Q. Thank you. Sir, since we've touched upon Teslic briefly, let us
8 clarify that as well. 839 is the P number. The tab is -- I don't know.
9 I assume that it's Prosecution tab 251.
10 MR. HANNIS: [Previous translation continues] ... I'm sorry.
11 MR. ZECEVIC:
12 Q. [Interpretation] Do you know --
13 MR. HANNIS: Your Honours, this was a document that was not on
14 the Defence list of documents to be used until I got an e-mail yesterday
15 afternoon about 2.45 after court was over. I want to reiterate my
16 objection to this late addition; this is something the Defence must have
17 known about before then that they'd want to use with the witness. Also,
18 I need a reference now as to what part of the cross-examination this
19 arises from.
20 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Just a moment, please.
21 [Defence counsel confer]
22 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] I have just been informed that it
23 is 21161. That's the reference. Ms. Korner was commenting on the
24 situation in Teslic with the witness. In that context, she mentions that
25 this document, P839; that is, Mr. Markocevic's statement.
1 Q. Mr. Bjelosevic, it was asserted that -- it was asserted by
2 Ms. Korner that as one reads this statement -- actually, do you know,
3 Mr. Bjelosevic, that Mr. Markocevic and another person came to see you
4 one evening in Doboj but they didn't find you. This was sometime in
5 mid-June 1992.
6 A. I cannot remember. It is possible that someone was looking for
7 me and that I wasn't there, but I do not remember having received that
8 kind of information.
9 Q. Do you know that Markocevic and another person had a meeting with
10 Savic and Culibrk because you were not there?
11 A. I don't know. I know -- actually, later on I heard that the
12 president of the municipality from Teslic came at some point and some MPs
13 as well and they were the commanders of the operations group. I was not
14 there at that time. I know that on one occasion, again the president of
15 the municipality, Mr. Perisic came, and I cannot remember who was with
16 him, and I know that we met up and they asked me, because I think they
17 knew that I was at the forward command post of the 1st Krajina Corps,
18 whether I could help them with regard to the following. To having the
19 Teslic military brigade be assigned to logistics of the Logistics Base of
20 the 1st Krajina Corps. I promised that I would help them with that, that
21 I would talk to General Talic, and I told them to address General Talic
23 Q. On that occasion, did you talk about the Mice and about the
24 situation in Teslic at all?
25 A. No. On that occasion nothing was mentioned with regard to that
1 particular topic.
2 Q. Thank you, Mr. Bjelosevic. You were shown document -- MFI
3 document from tab 57, 2342. You confirmed that it was your document from
4 the 8th of September, 1992. You're going to get it now. You'll see it
5 on your screen.
6 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Page 2, please.
7 Q. You remember that this document was shown to you. This is a
8 proposal for the appointment of chief, commander and head of the crime
9 investigation service. It was sent to the ministry, and
10 Dusan Kuzmanovic, Predrag Markocevic and Marinko Djukic were your
11 proposed candidates for these posts.
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Tell us, Mr. Bjelosevic, what was the reason for you to make this
14 proposal to the Ministry of Interior?
15 MR. HANNIS: [Previous translation continues] ... Objection,
16 Your Honour. I'm not sure how this arises out of cross-examination.
17 MR. ZECEVIC: Well, Your Honours, the suggestion by Ms. Korner
18 was that -- can the witness take the headphones off.
19 The suggestion by Ms. Korner was that these people -- these
20 persons who were proposed by Mr. Bjelosevic for these posts have been
21 involved in the -- in a Mice incident and all the incidents in Teslic.
22 And she showed the document. He confirmed it is his document. I'm just
23 inquiring why did he propose these people to the posts.
24 JUDGE HALL: Yes, Mr. Zecevic.
25 MR. ZECEVIC:
1 Q. [Interpretation] If you can, could you please explain to us what
2 your -- you were motivated by to put up these candidates for these posts
3 in the Ministry of Interior?
4 A. These three persons who were proposed for these posts; namely,
5 chief, commander and head of the crime investigation service, held those
6 positions up until those events that occurred concerning the Mices in
8 Let me just say one thing. After that incident, on that same
9 day, when I asked Kuzmanovic why he had not reported about what had
10 happened there, he said that that was for reasons pertaining to personal
11 safety. And both Markocevic and Djukic agreed with that.
12 After all of these things that had happened, they came to speak
13 to me. They also wrote a note, a rather extensive one explaining what
14 had happened there. They were jobless. They were motivated - at least
15 that's what they stated - to help to a maximum in shedding more light on
16 what had happened in that period of time in Teslic. And, on the basis of
17 that, I made my decision, since formally, according to the law, the
18 Teslic station was supposed to be within the CSB of Doboj, I decided to
19 make this proposal that they be appointed to these posts and that they
20 really help shed more light on what had happened.
21 May I note that they were not involved in the investigation that
22 had taken place until then in any way. They were not to be blamed in any
24 May I add one more thing. Afterwards, I proposed
25 Mr. Marinko Djukic to be appointed inspector in the police in Doboj.
1 Later on, he was appointed to that position. And I assess the results he
2 achieved in that period of time as exceptional. His performance during
3 that period of time was exceptional, in my view.
4 Q. Thank you, Mr. Bjelosevic.
5 MR. HANNIS: Your Honour, in light of that, may this exhibit now
6 have the MFI removed?
7 JUDGE HALL: Do you have an observation -- [Microphone not
9 MR. ZECEVIC: Well, Your Honours, I'm perfectly accepting this
10 document to be admitted into evidence. However, I'm not sure if this
11 document should be given a P number, which he already has, in light of
12 our submissions in the future.
13 So if -- if that is okay with -- with my learned friend, I would
14 propose that this document be admitted as one 1D document and I can offer
15 it for its admission.
16 I know it's -- it might be too formalistic but what I'm afraid is
17 that we might be creating an exception in this respect. But on the -- on
18 reflection, if I do not object, then -- then surely there is no -- there
19 is no point that this -- that this stays MFI'd. I understand, I'm sorry.
20 So it can be removed.
21 MR. HANNIS: Yeah, I would ask the MFI be removed and it keep the
22 P number. In the Prosecution case we had a number of documents that were
23 presented by the Prosecution [Overlapping speakers] ...
24 JUDGE HALL: [Overlapping speakers] ... yes.
25 MR. HANNIS: [Overlapping speakers] ... and had 1D numbers.
1 MR. ZECEVIC: I'm sorry, I was caught off guard.
2 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, just for the record, this is
3 Exhibit P2342.
4 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you.
5 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Bjelosevic, just two more things briefly and
6 then we'll be done.
7 65 ter 20018 was shown to you. That is Prosecution tab 65,
8 although this document had been announced by the Defence as well. You
9 will see it in a moment or two on your screen.
10 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Can we have page 2.
11 Q. Remember that you commented on this document, and Ms. Korner was
12 suggesting certain things in relation to your attitude towards the
13 military and the police. Remember that?
14 A. Yes, I remember that.
15 Q. Mr. Bjelosevic, during 1992, was there a competition for vacant
16 posts in the Serb police?
17 A. Yes. People were supposed to apply and then they were supposed
18 to enrol in courses in order to train to become policemen.
19 Q. These persons, once they complete a course, would they become
20 employed in the Ministry of the Interior only then?
21 A. Yes. Those who would successfully complete this training would
22 then be employed as policemen.
23 Q. To the best of your recollection, these 14 persons, did they
24 apply when this vacancy was announced and that involved training for
1 A. Probably. Because that is what this document seems to show.
2 Q. On the basis of this letter, it says that selection was made
3 amongst the many persons who had applied.
4 A. That's right.
5 Q. These persons, at that time, that is to say, the end of
6 September 1992, were they serving in the armed forces? Were they members
7 of the military?
8 A. Yes. That is why this letter requested they be relieved of their
9 duties so that they could be sent to this course.
10 Q. Thank you. I am being told that this document is 1D471.
11 Mr. Bjelosevic, we've come to the very end. On page -- just a
12 moment, please.
13 Ms. Korner showed you document P2339, MFI; that's Prosecution
14 tab 84A.
15 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] The transcript reference is 21.164.
16 Q. Do you remember that you commented on this document?
17 A. Yes, yes.
18 Q. This is excerpts from the record. I believe that you pointed to
19 Ms. Korner that your diary contains the entry for the 6th of January,
20 1993 that relates to this document. Do you remember that?
21 A. Yes.
22 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Can we have 1D065464.
23 THE REGISTRAR: Could the counsel please repeat the number.
24 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] 1D065464. That was the document --
25 that was the last document to be uploaded.
1 Q. Sir, during the examination of Ms. Korner, on the page that I
2 quoted and onwards, a question arose: Who suggested that there were
3 problems in the Doboj SJB? You then requested closed session in order to
4 answer that question. Do you still stand by that? Do you think that it
5 should be answered in private session?
6 A. Yes.
7 MR. HANNIS: I'm sorry, could I ask again for a page reference,
8 since the one I heard before doesn't seem to be in the right spot.
9 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] 21180. Excuse me, 21118.
10 Your Honour, can we move to private session so that the witness
11 can answer my question.
12 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
13 JUDGE HALL: Yes. But before we do that, why do I - and my
14 memory may be entirely faulty here and you will correct me if I'm wrong.
15 But why is my recollection that when this arose when Ms. Korner was
16 cross-examining that the issue had resolved itself in such a way that it
17 was unnecessary to move into private session. Or am I confusing this
18 something with another Teslic matter?
19 MR. ZECEVIC: No, no, you're not confusing, Your Honour. That is
20 correct. Ms. Korner objected to going into private session and then we
21 did go into private session for a very short period of time, witness gave
22 the answer, and then Ms. Korner said, I don't want to pursue this
23 anymore. Mr. Zecevic will take over in his re-direct. And then you can
24 provide the answers. I am fine with your answer as it is. And then
25 Ms. Korner asked that we return back to the open session.
1 But now, as we are returning to the subject matter which the
2 witness suggested needs the private session because the mentioning of
3 some families --
4 JUDGE HALL: I remember the reason given. Yes. So we go into
5 private session.
6 [Private session]
11 Pages 21296-21303 redacted. Private session.
7 [Open session]
8 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honours.
9 JUDGE HALL: And we take the break, to return in 20 minutes.
10 [The witness stands down]
11 --- Recess taken at 12.08 p.m.
12 --- On resuming at 12.32 p.m.
13 JUDGE HALL: So, Mr. Zecevic, you have completed your
14 re-examination of this witness.
15 MR. ZECEVIC: That's correct, Your Honours. And I do have
16 objection but I'm waiting for --
17 JUDGE HALL: [Microphone not activated] -- sorry. Microphone
18 wasn't on.
19 I was about do ask Mr. Hannis whether he wishes to expand on the
20 objection that he began to formulate just before the break.
21 MR. HANNIS: Thank you, Your Honour.
22 Yes, I would make a request. It's primarily a follow-up on a
23 question that Judge Delvoie asked in relation to the private session
24 testimony about this document. It's certainly I think something within
25 your ability to permit. And it relates also to the position I take about
1 this document which is currently marked MFI. I may seek to remove the
2 MFI, but my questions relate to that too because it goes to the
3 authenticity of this document and the truthfulness of this document, and
4 for that reason, I would ask to be permitted to ask about five minutes'
5 worth of questions about it.
6 MR. ZECEVIC: Well, Your Honours, if I may make things easier for
7 Mr. Hannis, we do not challenge the authenticity of this document. And
8 the provenance of the document. Ms. Korner explained where they got the
9 document. I explained to --
10 JUDGE HALL: Could you remind me, please.
11 MR. ZECEVIC: Well, Ms. Korner said that they received the
12 document on Monday and it was brought by the investigator of the Office
13 of the Prosecutor. I confirmed --
14 JUDGE HALL: [Microphone not activated] Sorry, the witness can be
15 brought in.
16 MR. ZECEVIC: I brought to Your Honours' attention that I
17 discussed the document previously with the witness. So there is no
18 problem whatsoever in that respect concerning the document.
19 [The witness takes the stand]
20 MR. ZECEVIC: I oppose to the document being introduced
21 because -- because I think that's a fresh evidence, and that -- it is
22 MFI'd pending our submissions which I understand will happen on Thursday,
23 when Ms. Korner arrives, about the -- the fresh -- the fresh evidence,
24 which was -- which was MFI'd during the cross-examination of Ms. Korner.
25 Now, as concerning the request to re-open the cross-examination
1 by Mr. Hannis, I would like to remind Your Honours of what Ms. Korner
2 said on the transcript on the 23rd. Line -- page 21124:
3 "Q. Now, Mr. Bjelosevic, in one sentence why do you want to
4 explain this in private at the suggestion, I note, of Mr. Zecevic?
5 "A. Because it will have to do with private matters" and so on
6 and so on.
7 "Q. The only question I want to ask you, Mr. Petrovic" - and it
8 was a mistake - "I have already asked you was it you that said it was
9 objectionable for him to have retained two Muslim workers. That's all I
10 want to know; nothing else. What requires you to go into private
12 Now, any further explanation -- now the witness says, "No. But I
13 wish to explain this, how things went at the meeting, in private session.
14 But it seems to me that that is not being allowed, how this wording came
15 to be --
16 "Q. Right, well ... any further explanation," that's Ms. Korner,
17 "Mr. Zecevic who wants to take it from you, can in-chief [sic]. My
18 question is simply that: Are you prepared to say who it was who made that
19 remark in open session?
20 "A. I would leave this for private session."
21 Therefore, Ms. Korner specifically had the opportunity to ask the
22 witness, but she said no, I don't need. I just want this answer and
23 nothing else.
24 Therefore, that -- that is it -- that is the gist of my
1 Thank you.
2 JUDGE HALL: Thank you, Mr. Zecevic.
3 Mr. Hannis, although you have formulated -- I should say
4 reformulated your application premised on the question asked by the
5 Bench, the -- it really arises out of this area that came out in the
6 re-examination. And as Mr. Zecevic has correctly pointed out, the
7 Prosecution, in the person of Ms. Korner, although probably she had no
8 idea what this evidence could have been, having had the opportunity,
9 chose not to pursue it.
10 So procedurally, we do have a concern as to whether the
11 Prosecution can properly be permitted to now explore this area, which it
12 tactically chose not to, for whatever reason, when the opportunity arose.
13 MR. HANNIS: Well, Your Honour, I could -- I could make an
14 argument that Ms. Korner perhaps, given her experience with this witness
15 up to that point, felt she'd rather not go into an area where she didn't
16 know what the answer might be but I guess I would fall back on the second
17 part of my application where I say that what I want to do is follow up on
18 a question raised by the Bench.
19 Now, in one of the other trials I was in the standard practice
20 was for the Judges to wait until all the examination was done and then
21 ask their questions. Of course, I think we lawyers find it helpful for
22 the judges to intervene whenever they want, because they can clarify
23 something as it's happening. But when the Judges ask questions at the
24 end, if it raises something new, then parties on both sides typically are
25 given the opportunity to expand.
1 This came at the very end of his testimony, and Judge Delvoie
2 asks a question which, I think, raises an issue that I think bears
3 touching on with this witness while he's here.
4 And if Your Honours have no more questions, and you decide you're
5 not going to allow me to ask anything further, I have to live with that.
6 If you have any further questions, I may be able to tie it with your
7 remaining questions. I'll abide by your ruling, of course.
8 [Trial Chamber confers]
9 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Hannis --
10 MR. HANNIS: Yes.
11 JUDGE HALL: -- the answers which the explanation of the
12 statement which, as I recall the witness's acceptance is, at best
13 infelicitous, are such that the -- it does strongly invite some further
14 explanation than we have had heretofore and we would permit you to ask
15 further questions on that. But, of course, Mr. Zecevic would have a
16 right to come back on that.
17 So please proceed.
18 MR. HANNIS: Thank you.
19 MR. ZECEVIC: But, just one matter. I think we need to go back
20 to the private session and --
21 JUDGE HALL: Insofar as it is possible, it seems to me, to
22 explore the area without calling name, I don't know if that is necessary.
23 Mr. Hannis, can you avoid using names.
24 MR. HANNIS: I did not intend to use the names of -- that were
25 the reason that we went into private session for. I will refer to the
1 name of the SJB chief in Doboj, but ...
2 [Trial Chamber confers]
3 JUDGE HALL: To be on the safe side perhaps we go into private
5 [Private session]
11 Pages 21310-21319 redacted. Private session.
6 [Open session]
7 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honours.
8 [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]
9 Questioned by the Court:
10 JUDGE DELVOIE: Mr. Bjelosevic, I want to go back to something
11 you told us on Thursday, last Thursday, if I'm not wrong. It's 19 May,
12 page 3422. It's about the war station in Osinja, if I pronounce that
13 correctly in the Derventa municipality and you were asked by the
14 Prosecutor, in April, was that police station entirely manned by Serb
15 members of the MUP or reserve MUP?
16 And your answer was: "I don't know, but because Osinja, and
17 neighbouring villages are inhabited only by Serbs, I assume that probably
18 the manpower was also of Serb ethnicity. That's my assumption."
19 You remember that answer?
20 So if I got you right, what you're saying here is that the
21 mono-ethnic composition of that war station was a coincidence resulting
22 from the ethnic composition of the population. Is that right?
23 A. Yes, exactly.
24 JUDGE DELVOIE: That was not the case in the Doboj SJB, I
25 suppose. There were -- that's -- that's a mixed population, and -- I
1 mean the territory is mixed. And the police station then was manned by
2 Serbs and Muslims alike; is that right?
3 A. Yes. And other ethnicities as well.
4 JUDGE DELVOIE: [Previous translation continues] ... Other
5 ethnicities as well. Indeed.
6 But that didn't prevent that station to be -- or that SJB to be
7 mono-ethnic somewhere in April -- in April, didn't it?
8 A. Not in April.
9 JUDGE DELVOIE: [Previous translation continues] ... when was it
10 then? When did all the Serb employees, except for those who had
11 extramarital affairs within the service, left? When did they left --
12 when did they leave? Sorry.
13 MR. ZECEVIC: I think Your Honour made a slip of the tongue.
14 You're referring not to Serb employees; you're referring to Muslim
15 employees [Overlapping speakers] ...
16 JUDGE DELVOIE: Yes, of course. Yes.
17 MR. ZECEVIC: It was recorded 68, 6, Serb employees.
18 JUDGE DELVOIE: I'm sorry about that.
19 A. The differentiation was carried out sometime at the beginning of
21 JUDGE DELVOIE: Okay. And they left, you told us. Is that a
22 general term, in respect of the reason why they left? Was it -- did they
23 leave out of their free will?
24 A. Please, we should be clear about this. Let me explain.
25 A number of people left the service already in April, and I'm
1 talking about all ethnicities here. They saw that the war came to the
2 area, and a number of them left out of fear already in April.
3 At the beginning of May, a number of the members of the service
4 left deliberately towards the area of Tesanj, the area of Gracanica,
5 et cetera. I want to emphasise that one mobile communications centre, in
6 a car, was driven away before the 1st of May by a reserve member who had
7 been activated by the state security. I think his name was Mirzo Kunalic
8 [phoen]. So a certain kind of differentiation was already going on. The
9 equipment was already being taken away. And the preparations were
10 already under way for the new system of functioning.
11 However, after the 3rd of May, as far as I know, members of the
12 service simply did not come to work in the public security station or the
13 centre. And I already explain when this process began, how it went, and
14 what was the purpose of it.
15 JUDGE DELVOIE: Nobody was forced out -- was forced to leave the
17 A. I do not know of a single decision terminating employment for
18 someone in this way. Or that somebody was turned away from -- turned
19 away when he or she appeared for work. I know of not a single case like
21 JUDGE DELVOIE: Or being arrested while still in the service.
22 A. As far as I know, people were arrested or brought, not when they
23 were at the official premises, because that's not where they were, as far
24 as I know. People were arrested elsewhere, in the street, or in their
1 [Trial Chamber confers]
2 JUDGE DELVOIE: So including policemen? No policemen were
3 arrested on the premises, or because of they were still in the service?
4 A. Probably a number of them were arrested in the night between the
5 2nd and the 3rd of May. And according to what I heard about later on,
6 about the persons who were detained and who had been members of the
7 service before, it's not that they arrived for work and then they were
8 arrested. Rather, it happened outside official premises. They were
9 various reasons for that. I used to inquire about the reasons, and, for
10 instance, they were cases when people were called to return the keys, or
11 some of them took part in organisation of paramilitary formations. These
12 are the things that I learned when I was informed that some members of
13 the service were detained.
14 JUDGE DELVOIE: But then I -- if -- if nobody was forced out and
15 particularly nobody of non-Serb ethnicity, I still have difficulty to
16 understand, even if it is a cover-up, why the reason -- the criticism to
17 a station commander, or chief, could officially be covering up what
18 really happened but -- could officially be that he retained Muslim
19 employees within the -- within the force, within the service. Because it
20 sounds a little bit like calling somebody a murderer to cover up that he
21 is a thief.
22 Don't you agree?
23 A. I don't know if I understood your comparison.
24 I attempted to explain the essence of this case and to say that,
25 in the end, it simply amounted to rather unfortunate wording that was
1 used to explain something that had nothing to do with it. And I remind
2 you that three persons were involved in this, not two.
3 JUDGE DELVOIE: Okay. Thank you.
4 Now I want to come back to General Talic's order, two orders,
5 about Derventa, and more, in particular, his order to another station to
6 send policemen to Derventa to do the policing over there.
7 You remember that?
8 A. Yes. However, you misquoted the name. It wasn't General Talic.
9 It was Colonel Lisica, if I understood the topic that you are referring
11 JUDGE DELVOIE: Okay. That could very well be. We'll see.
12 Asked by Mr. Zecevic, you answered that this particular order --
13 it could very well be Colonel Lisica.
14 That this particular order was given in accordance with his
16 Could you be more precise? In accordance with what law would
17 that be? The Law on Resubordination?
18 A. It's the Law on All People's Defence. And the Law on Armed
19 Forces. They are the two laws, and both of them contain grounds and
20 bestow such powers on the commanders of this and higher rank.
21 JUDGE DELVOIE: Does that mean that this -- such an order would
22 be considered as an order to -- resubordination order and, therefore, an
23 order to carry out combat activities?
24 A. Yes. That's the order to carry out combat activities for a
25 particular segment of the police station in Derventa.
1 However, since the commander has the power to engage all the
2 forces in his zone of responsibility, he ensured that Derventa would be
3 supplied with some other forces as well. And that's when he ordered that
4 police forces from Prnjavor should be engaged as well.
5 I assumed had there not been this urgency, that he would not have
6 sent the police forces from Prnjavor to the front line and since it took
7 some time for them to arrive, he decided to engage also those who were
8 closer to the line of hostilities. And then, subsequently, the first
9 group was engaged in carrying out security-related tasks.
10 MR. ZECEVIC: I'm sorry. Just an intervention in the transcript
11 for the clarity. It is recorded 72, 1 that he would not. In fact the
12 witness said that he would have. Had not been the matter of this urgency
13 he would have sent the police forces from Prnjavor to the front line.
14 But since it took them some time to arrive he decided to engage those who
15 were close to the line of hostilities.
16 May the witness can slowly again repeat his answer, because it's
17 not -- it's not clear.
18 JUDGE DELVOIE: Would you do that, Mr. Bjelosevic?
19 A. As I said, I assume that because of the urgency of the situation,
20 Colonel Lisica decided to engage the police from Derventa at the front
21 line, because they were closer to the front line. I also assume that he
22 would have decided to engage the police from Prnjavor at the front line
23 if he had more time -- if he had had more time. I think that it was
24 exactly the urgency of the situation that made him do what he did.
25 However, he also wanted to ensure that Derventa would not be left
1 without any police, and that's why he ordered that the Prnjavor police
2 should arrive in Derventa, and carry out security-related tasks there.
3 JUDGE DELVOIE: Well, that's -- that's precisely my question,
4 that second -- that second order, the order for the Prnjavor policemen to
5 go to Derventa to do police work, can that be considered as a
6 resubordination order to carry out combat activities; and, if not, could
7 Colonel Lisica give such an order?
8 A. He did have the powers to do that. It wouldn't be considered a
9 resubordination. It would be considered engagement, this thing related
10 to the police from Prnjavor. And if he needed to do that, he would
11 probably have used them at the front line as well.
12 JUDGE DELVOIE: Thank you.
13 My last question is this: During the war, lots of people were --
14 who had performed their military duty before the war were mobilised and
15 served in the army during the war. That's what war is more or less
16 about, isn't it?
17 Now, my question is: Would the information about the service
18 during wartime be reflected in their military booklet?
19 A. The information is entered into the military booklet, according
20 to the wartime assignment. Which means, if somebody had a wartime
21 assignment in the military, then this wartime assignment, in this
22 particular unit is entered into the booklet. If somebody had his wartime
23 assignment in the Republic of police force, then that's what is entered
24 into the booklet.
25 At the same time, there was work obligation. So people who had
1 work obligation in certain companies, for them, the information entered
2 was the job that they performed.
3 Am I being clear enough? I'm not quite sure.
4 JUDGE DELVOIE: Yes, yes. Thank you. But then I wonder why
5 don't we see anything of this reflected in your military booklet? Unless
6 I got it wrong.
7 A. My wartime assignment was in the MUP organs.
8 JUDGE DELVOIE: [Previous translation continues] ... So we should
9 see it.
10 A. And this wartime assignment remained throughout.
11 JUDGE DELVOIE: So we should find that in your military booklet.
12 Because that's what you just told us.
13 A. Yes.
14 JUDGE DELVOIE: And is it in your military booklet?
15 A. Yes, it is.
16 MR. ZECEVIC: Perhaps, Your Honours, I could be of assistance.
17 It's -- it's the last page of his military booklet.
18 JUDGE DELVOIE: Was it showed to us? Not yet?
19 MR. ZECEVIC: [Overlapping speakers] ... I'm afraid not.
20 JUDGE DELVOIE: [Overlapping speakers] ...
21 MR. ZECEVIC: I failed to do that.
22 JUDGE DELVOIE: So my question is not as stupid as it looked.
23 MR. ZECEVIC: No, no, it's not stupid at all. It's my failure,
24 I'm sorry.
25 JUDGE DELVOIE: So if I understand it well now, what you're
1 saying is your wartime, one's wartime assignment is in the booklet and if
2 that wartime assignment is something else than the military, for
3 instance, the MUP, police, and within that wartime assignment, there is,
4 for a certain period of time, resubordination, you are -- one is
5 resubordinated to the military for combat activities, then you will not
6 find that in one's military booklet.
7 Is that right?
8 A. Yes. If it is about the principle of resubordination, of being
9 engaged there, then nothing changes here on this side. The wartime
10 assignment remains as it was originally assigned. But that is not an
11 obstacle for a person to be engaged in defence activities.
12 JUDGE DELVOIE: Okay. Seems a little bit odd to me, because you
13 can be the most heroic soldier within that period that is not reflected
14 in your military booklet. But so be it, and now I understand what you're
15 telling us. Thank you very much.
16 [Trial Chamber confers]
17 JUDGE HALL: Yes, Mr. Hannis.
18 MR. HANNIS: If Your Honours have no further questions I have one
19 question based on one of Judge Delvoie's questions about whether any
20 police were arrested.
21 JUDGE HALL: Yes.
22 MR. HANNIS: Thank you.
23 Further Cross-examination by Mr. Hannis:
24 Q. Witness, at page 69, Judge Delvoie, line 17 was asking you about
25 whether any non-Serbs were arrested, any -- any policemen. I want to ask
1 you, do you remember a policeman named Mirza Lisinovic and whether or not
2 he was arrested?
3 A. I think that Mirza Lisinovic was performing the duty of the
4 operative duty officer in the night between the 2nd and the 3rd of May,
5 and that's when he was detained. However, he was released immediately
6 the day after.
7 Q. You're sure he wasn't detained for two weeks and that you were
8 the ones to whom he was told to hand over his papers and keys?
9 A. Definitely not. I certainly did not say that to him.
10 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... Okay.
11 A. I'm not sure, however, how long he spent in the detention. I
12 spoke to Mirza Lisinovic later on. I don't know how many days after
14 Q. Thank you.
15 MR. HANNIS: No further questions.
16 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Bjelosevic, we thank you for your attendance
17 before the Tribunal. You are now released as a witness, and we wish you
18 a safe journey back to your home.
19 The Court has some other matters with which to deal, so the usher
20 will escort you from the courtroom at this point. Thank you.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. I would be
22 glad if my testimony would help you to reach the right decision.
23 [The witness withdrew]
24 JUDGE HALL: The Chamber has a very short oral ruling to deliver
25 and then it has a question to pose to counsel for the accused Stanisic.
1 The ruling is as follows. On the 19th of May, the Stanisic
2 Defence orally requested the Trial Chamber to preclude the Prosecution
3 from introducing fresh evidence during the course of the Defence case,
4 the Prosecution having already had the opportunity to do so during its
5 own case. The Defence relied for its request on the decision dated 26
6 February 2009 by the Appeals Chamber at the Prlic et al case. The
7 Prosecution asserted that the Defence was re-arguing the point.
8 Having considered the jurisprudence, and independent of how the
9 Chamber may rule on the other pending matter before it on the application
10 of Rule 66(B) in due course, the Trial Chamber sees no reason to
11 distinguish this situation from that in Prlic and will follow the
12 Appeals Chamber on this matter by evaluating any such fresh evidence on a
13 case-by-case basis.
14 The Defence motion is therefore denied.
15 The question that we have for counsel for Stanisic is this, and
16 isn't a question in which we are expecting an answer immediately but at
17 some point, possibly as early as tomorrow, counsel may wish to address
18 it, and it is this. And because we are in open session I'm not going to
19 give the details what I'm saying but, referring to the proofing note that
20 we have received in respect of the witness who is about to -- to give
21 evidence, and the very last paragraph indicating an application about the
22 mode of testimony of the witness, insofar as, on the face of it, it
23 appears to what is indicated at paragraph 18 of the proofing note, we
24 wonder what is the -- how -- how -- how this issue -- how the application
25 would arise because, on the face of it, it is something which is not
2 As I have said, we have alerted counsel and no doubt we will get
3 the response tomorrow or at some future time.
4 MR. ZECEVIC: By all means, Your Honours.
5 JUDGE HALL: Yes.
6 So we take the adjournment, to reconvene in this courtroom
7 tomorrow morning at 9.00.
8 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.38 p.m.,
9 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 26th day of May,
10 2011, at 9.00 a.m.