1 Friday, 18 November 2011
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.02 a.m.
5 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. Good morning
6 everyone in and around the courtroom. This is case number IT-08-91-T.
7 The Prosecutor versus Mico Stanisic and Stojan Zupljanin.
8 JUDGE HALL: Thank you, Madam Registrar. May we have the
9 appearances today, please.
10 MS. KORNER: Morning, Your Honours. Joanna Korner and
11 Sebastiaan van Hooydonk as cases manager this morning.
12 MR. ZECEVIC: Good morning, Your Honours. Slobodan Zecevic,
13 Slobodan Cvijetic and Ms. Annemarie McNulty appearing for Stanisic
14 Defence this morning. Thank you very much.
15 MR. KRGOVIC: Good morning, Your Honours. Dragan Krgovic and
16 Miroslav Cuskic appearing for Zupljanin Defence.
17 JUDGE HALL: Do counsel have any preliminary matters to raise
18 before we deal with the next witness?
19 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, no. It seems to me wholly unlikely
20 that the witness will take the whole of this morning's hearings so there
21 are a number of administrative matters which I've alerted the Defence to
22 and I would like to raise when he is finished. And I hope Your Honours
23 are aware of them. I did send an e-mail it to the Legal Officer. Or,
24 rather, she was on the same e-mail.
25 MR. ZECEVIC: I have a matter, because Ms. Korner will take it at
1 the end of the session, I propose that I raise it as well at the end of
2 the session so we can finish with the witness.
3 JUDGE HALL: Thank you. So could we go into closed session so
4 the witness can be escorted into court.
5 MS. KORNER: I understood the witness didn't want protective
6 measures any longer.
7 JUDGE HALL: The Chamber has to satisfy itself of that. So we
8 are going to take this step by step.
9 MS. KORNER: Your Honour is quite right, I'm sorry.
10 [Closed session]
23 [Open session]
24 THE REGISTRAR: We are in open session, Your Honours.
25 JUDGE HALL: Now that we are in open session, I repeat what I
1 said a short while ago because the public is now able to hear the
2 proceedings. They are still not able to recognise your face or identify
3 your voice because of the existing protective measures which had been
4 sought on your behalf and granted. Since that time, we have been
5 informed that you no longer wish to have those protective measures in
6 place. Would you be so kind as to confirm to the Chamber that this --
7 that our understanding -- whether our understanding is correct?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The Trial Chamber has understood my
9 application well. Let me explain. In August earlier this year when the
10 investigators in Banja Luka told me that I was to appear in this trial
11 and asked me if I wanted any protective measures, I expressed my wishes
12 for protective measures on the spur of the moment. Later on as I gave it
13 some thought, I concluded that I may have spoken hastily because there
14 isn't anything that I would like to conceal from the public or that I
15 would fear, and I would wish these protective measures to be rescinded.
16 JUDGE HALL: Thank you, sir.
17 The Chamber, therefore, makes the following order: During the
18 proofing session of witness SZ-020, the witness present on the stand, it
19 emerges that the witness decided he no longer needs any protective
20 measures in order to testify, although he had previously had requested
21 protective measures. In its decision of the 6th of December, 2011, the
22 Chamber had granted him the use of pseudonym, image and voice distortion.
23 In light of the fact that the witness has given his consent to testifying
24 publicly, pursuant to Rule 75(K), the Trial Chamber rescinds the
25 protective measures granted to him after duly noting the requirements of
1 Rule 75(J). He will now be referred to by his name in the course of the
2 trials and other related proceedings. And that order takes effect
4 Thank you, usher. Would you please now hand the card to the
5 witness so that he might make the solemn declaration.
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will
7 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
8 WITNESS: NIJAZ SMAJLOVIC
9 [Witness answered through interpreter]
10 JUDGE HALL: Thank you, sir. You may resume your seat.
11 The solemn declaration that you have just made imposes upon you
12 an obligation to give evidence truthfully and should you fail to do so,
13 this Chamber is -- this Tribunal is empowered by its statute and rules of
14 procedure to impose the penalties for perjury, should you give false or
15 misleading testimony. Would you begin by telling us your name, please.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Nijaz Smajlovic.
17 JUDGE HALL: And what is your date of birth, ethnicity, and
18 present or former profession?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The 10th of June, 1954. Bosniak.
20 Bosnian. Currently deputy director of the police, of the Ministry of the
21 Interior therefore, of Republika Srpska.
22 JUDGE HALL: Thank you. Have you testified previously before
23 this Tribunal or before any of the courts in the countries that comprise
24 the former Yugoslavia?
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Not in these cases, no.
1 JUDGE HALL: You have been called by counsel representing one of
2 the two accused on trial before this Chamber, that is counsel for the
3 accused Mr. Zupljanin. It is expected that your testimony will be
4 completed by the time the -- by the time the Chamber rises for the day at
5 1.45 and counsel for Mr. Zupljanin will begin by asking you questions,
6 then counsel for his co-accused will have an opportunity to cross-examine
7 you, followed by counsel for the Prosecution, and then counsel calling
8 you would have the right to re-examine. The Bench itself may at that
9 stage or, indeed, at any earlier stage have -- also be able to ask
10 questions and unless there's something -- some question which you have
11 which I may be able to answer by way of explanation I would invite,
12 counsel for Mr. Zupljanin, I think it's Mr. Krgovic, to begin his
14 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
15 Examination by Mr. Krgovic:
16 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Smajlovic.
17 A. Good morning.
18 Q. In answer to the questions put to you by the Chamber, you gave us
19 some personal background. Now I'd like to hear from you certain
20 information about your professional background. What degrees do you
22 A. I have a degree in law and I graduated from the law school in
23 Banja Luka in 1992 and I had some also undergraduate studies that I
24 completed in 1990.
25 Q. Can you tell us when you began working for the police?
1 A. It was on the 1st of November, 1999 [as interpreted].
2 Q. I apologise, can you just repeat the year?
3 A. The 1st of November, 1990.
4 Q. And what were your initial duties in the police?
5 A. I started working as deputy commander of the police station
6 charged with traffic safety in Gradiska.
7 Q. Did you ever perform any other duties, and if so, which year was
9 A. I stayed in that job until May of 1993, I believe. At that point
10 I was inspector for crimes in traffic, infractions in traffic. And then
11 in 1995 I worked as assistant commander of the police station charged
12 with general duties. In other words, I moved from the traffic department
13 to the general duty department, as it were, in Bosanska Gradiska.
14 Subsequently, in 1999 in the spring of 1999, always in the same
15 station, I became deputy commander of the general duty police station
16 where I stayed until June of 2001 when I was assigned to be assistant
17 commander of the Security Services Centre in Banja Luka, and that was
18 until 2003, and in that same centre, I became deputy chief of a public
19 security centre. That was until October of 2004 when I became chief of
20 the police administration of the Ministry of Interior of
21 Republika Srpska.
22 Last year I was chosen and selected as -- to be deputy director
23 of the police of the MUP of Republika Srpska in a public competition and
24 that's the duty that I'm currently performing.
25 Q. One clarification. In reference to 2001 there's the
1 Security Services Centre mentioned in Banja Luka. What was it called in
3 A. Public security centre.
4 Q. And do you know which year was it renamed public security centre?
5 A. I don't know exactly.
6 Q. In relation to the war-time period?
7 A. Well, several years after the war it must have been. At the time
8 when state security was taken out of the organisation of the Ministry of
9 the Interior by law.
10 Q. Mr. Smajlovic, or rather --
11 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Can the witness be given a hard
12 copy of his statement because I wanted to elicit certain clarifications.
13 And can we call up in e-court 65 ter --
14 MS. KORNER: Sorry, I'm not clear on the basis in which the
15 witness can just have his statement in front of him. He has been called
16 live, I understand it. Not 92 ter.
17 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] No, he is called as a 92 bis
18 witness and I'd like him to clarify certain issues that he gave in his
20 MS. KORNER: Sorry, he is not a 92 bis witness. He is a 92
21 bis -- you applied for 92 bis, he was ordered to be called. I mean, I
22 don't have any strong feelings, Your Honour, but at the moment it's my
23 view that as the witness is giving evidence live, he should give his
24 evidence and not just have his statement, but it's a matter for
25 Your Honours.
1 [Trial Chamber confers]
2 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] If I may add, this witness has been
3 called as a 92 ter witness, so I should actually ask him if he would give
4 the same answers if asked the same questions, so he has to confirm his
5 statement, that's why I misunderstood what Ms. Korner had to say.
6 JUDGE HALL: Of course, Mr. Krgovic. Please proceed.
7 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] 65 ter 8D2 in e-court.
8 Q. Sir, you were able to have a look at this statement. Is that the
9 statement that you signed?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Do you stand by the statement you signed?
12 A. Yes, I do.
13 Q. I will have several questions for you. Can you tell me, when was
14 it the first time that Stojan Zupljanin's Defence got in touch with you
15 with a view to you giving your evidence?
16 A. It was in January earlier this year that I was first contacted by
17 investigators in Banja Luka.
18 Q. Who contacted you specifically?
19 A. It was Mirko Bojnovic, specifically.
20 Q. And what did Mr. Bojnovic have to ask of you?
21 A. Well, he told me the commonly known fact that there's a trial
22 against Stojan Zupljanin conducted here and that in 1991, 1992, 1993 when
23 I used to work in the police station in Bosanska Gradiska, he was
24 performing his duties and he wanted to know if we had ever been in any
25 dealings formerly, at various meetings, and my answer was affirmative,
1 that, yes, as assistant commander, I attended these meetings. Therefore,
2 he asked if I would be willing to testify about his character as it were
3 and his treatment of the various employees of the MUP and I agreed.
4 Q. When did Zupljanin's Defence contact you next?
5 A. I think it was in late January or early February of this year.
6 As agreed with investigators, a written statement was drawn up. It's the
7 statement that is before me now. And I signed it.
8 Q. Were you given a chance to review the statement at the time?
9 A. Yes. My words were translated into this written statement. I
10 read it and signed it. That's it.
11 Q. Did you then confirm or authenticate the statement?
12 A. Yes, by affixing my signature. It happened in late March and it
13 does say here specifically on the 22nd of March that a lady arrived from
14 The Hague, from this Tribunal, in other words, and it was in her presence
15 that I authenticated the statement.
16 Q. Were you then again contacted by the Defence for Stojan Zupljanin
17 in the course of the summer?
18 A. Yes, sometime in July we had another meeting where I was told
19 that the Prosecution of this Tribunal found my statement interesting and
20 that they would like to get in touch with me on these issues. I inquired
21 and was told that it was up to me to decide freely if I wanted to meet up
22 with them, and then under those circumstances, I decided that I would not
23 get in touch with them.
24 Q. Did investigators of the Zupljanin Defence get in touch with you
25 at a later date concerning protective measures?
1 A. Yes. In August I was told that I would have to appear before the
2 Chamber in person, and that I could opt for protective measures, which I
3 chose at the time. Though, as I say, subsequently I realised that there
4 was no need for that because I don't have to hide behind my statement.
5 And it was in August, I think, that a written statement on these issues
6 was made, or a note.
7 Q. You mean the investigator made a note of this?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. After that were you contacted by the Zupljanin Defence in this
10 autumn concerning your interview to the OTP?
11 A. Yes, in early October I was on a business trip and it so happened
12 that I was in the Netherlands but I had to return and couldn't do it
13 then. Upon my return I asked Mr. Bojnovic what this was about and he
14 told me that the OTP insisted on interviewing me, but since I wasn't
15 obliged to agree, I declined. There was an official note made about this
16 and the next thing that happened was the summons to come here on the 15th
17 or the 16th so that nothing in writing was ever produced because of the
18 shortage of time, I suppose.
19 Q. Upon your arrival in The Hague, did you talk to me the day before
21 A. Yes. On the day when I arrived, on Monday, you again pointed out
22 this possibility to me and I can only repeat I don't consider it very
23 important and I declined once more.
24 Q. Did you ask whether you should meet the Stanisic Defence?
25 A. Oh, yes, you told me that the Stanisic Defence also wanted to
1 talk to me and I declined again.
2 Q. Mr. Smajlovic, in your statement you mention the structure, or
3 rather, the ethnic composition of the Gradiska police station. And in
4 paragraph 3 you gave the details, so I need not go into that. But I
5 would like to clarify something. Do tell us before that when you
6 arrived, it was noted here that you arrived on Monday. When did you
7 really arrive?
8 A. Oh, yes, I am sorry, it was Wednesday. On Monday I was contacted
9 by somebody from The Hague and I left on Wednesday and arrived on the
10 same day.
11 Q. You were speaking about the ethnic composition of the police in
12 April 1992. Did the ethnic composition of the MUP change? Did any
13 colleagues of other ethnicities leave? I'm not interested in a very
14 detailed account but only whether there was a change in the ethnic
16 A. At the traffic police station there were some 26 to 28 officers,
17 including the senior officers. There were very few non-Serbs but I was
18 one. There were three more police officers, so that would make a total
19 of four. Throughout these ugly events, I mean the war, one more police
20 officer remained and in the meantime people were leaving. If you are
21 asking about the overall ethnic makeup of the police in Gradiska,
22 including the general duty police station which has the premise -- its
23 premises in the same building and has jurisdiction in the Gradiska
24 municipality, I am not sure how many non-Serb officers there were, but
25 maybe up to 20 per cent according to my estimate. And the total number
1 of police officers of that station was around 60. Certainly during the
2 year that number dwindled.
3 Q. In paragraph 4 you speak about Mr. Zupljanin. These meetings,
4 collegiums or whatever they were called, when did you begin to attend
5 these meetings and during which period and until which time did you go
7 A. Well, let me explain. I said that I began to work for the police
8 on the 1st of November, 1990 as deputy commander. A police station is
9 headed by the commander. Whenever a commander for any reason cannot do
10 something, it is my duty as deputy to step in. If you are asking me
11 about the meetings of the senior officers of the security services, in
12 1991 I went to these meetings too and in 1992 not more than twice. It
13 was in the first half of 1992.
14 Q. The event you described when Mr. Zupljanin spoke to you and told
15 you that nobody must harm you, was it before or after that meeting?
16 A. I think that must have been in late April 1992. There was a
17 meeting about the general security situation and other technical matters.
18 This was an informal conversation after a meeting. The then chief of the
19 public security station, Mr. Vesic, was also present. The statement was
20 Mr. Zupljanin's reaction to my conduct in the police and everything I was
21 saying when the MUP of the Serbian Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina was
22 being established, which today is the MUP of the RS.
23 I don't know if a more detailed explanation is required, what
24 kind of conversations these were.
25 Q. Well, tell us what kind of conversation did you have in the field
1 or at the station?
2 A. Well, on that day - I'm not sure about the date - there was a
3 meeting of all public security staff in Gradiska, and we were informed
4 that I think as of the 1st of April, 1992, and the meeting was
5 immediately after that, a decision was passed to establish the
6 Ministry of the Interior of the Serbian Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina
7 which was a consequence of political events and talks in
8 Bosnia-Herzegovina and beyond about the fate of Bosnia-Herzegovina and
9 its people.
10 And since everything functioned, everything worked. The
11 authorities both at municipal level and in Bosnia-Herzegovina and the
12 first significant changes were those in the police. My attitude and what
13 I also stated publicly was that we, in Gradiska, should not divide along
14 ethnic lines because if that happened unwanted consequences would
15 probably come about as we were -- had already been able to see in some
16 parts of Eastern Bosnia. And I was appealing to my friends, neighbours,
17 and everybody who lived in town to behave accordingly.
18 The leadership of the station gave the choice to everybody in the
19 station, Serbs and non-Serbs alike, what they would opt for. We were
20 still wearing the red star on our uniform hats and the only change at
21 that moment was to substitute that red star with the colours of
22 Republika Srpska. And all staff were given ten days or so whether they
23 would accept that or not, and the regulations required us to give a
24 solemn declaration to continue working for the Ministry of the Interior
25 of the Serbian Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina. It's much like the one I
1 made this morning. And that was it.
2 After that the commander of the police station, the general duty
3 police station, Dragoljub Novakovic and the commander of the traffic
4 police station where I worked, Momir Topic, and I as his deputy, and the
5 general duty police station didn't have a deputy at the time. The three
6 of us, in agreement with the chief of the station, Vesic, had made a plan
7 to talk to our staff, especially non-Serbs, and ask them to remain in the
8 police because it's never too late for divisions and problems. We tried
9 to calm down the situation and wanted to avoid the citizens of Gradiska,
10 irrespective of their ethnicity, to feel unsafe, and that's what we did.
11 We talked to people, sometimes they did it on their own, sometimes I did
12 it on their own and sometimes we did it together. And those were all
13 fair conversations. Some staff remained, others didn't.
14 Q. When did you talk to these people to ask them to stay with the
16 A. I remember that I went to see some five or six at their homes and
17 with others I talked to at the station.
18 Q. Do you know whether there were any pressures on these people to
19 leave the MUP of the RS?
20 A. Believe me, I don't know. I never cared much for politics. I
21 never sided with any party. Although the police wasn't allowed to
22 affiliate itself politically, I still don't know who had sympathy for
24 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I have no more
25 questions of this witness. Your Honours, I would just like to tender
1 this statement after the OTP's cross-examination.
2 MR. ZECEVIC: No cross-examination for this witness. Thank you.
3 JUDGE HALL: Thank you.
4 Yes, Ms. Korner.
5 Cross-examination by Ms. Korner:
6 Q. When Mr. Bojnovic came to speak to you, was he somebody you knew
7 from the time when he worked for the CSB in Banja Luka?
8 A. I met Mr. Bojnovic when I began to work at the CSB, which means
9 in 2001 or 2002.
10 Q. And did Mr. Bojnovic explain to you why he had come to see you?
11 Why you in particular, to give evidence?
12 A. He didn't explain much. I've just told you when I first met him.
13 At the time he was chief of one of the departments. In our official and
14 private contacts we probably spoke about the time before the war and it
15 is possible that he came to see me due to these conversations that we had
16 had before.
17 Q. Did you have any direct contact by telephone with Mr. Zupljanin?
18 A. Never.
19 Q. Did you hesitate at all before you agreed to give evidence about
20 Mr. Zupljanin?
21 A. I didn't hesitate at all.
22 Q. Why? Is that a because he was a good friend of yours or because
23 he protected you during the war, or for whatever other reason?
24 A. Mr. Zupljanin was chief of the centre which means that he was not
25 a friend of mine. We didn't know each other personally. We had official
1 contacts. He had a register of his people in the field and he may have
2 noticed me at one of the meetings. When he said what he said, I don't
3 think that he would have recognised me on that occasion. He was actually
4 talking to Mr. Vesic, but given the opportunity I introduced myself.
5 However, there is -- we don't really know each other directly, either
6 privately or officially, because I was one of many senior officers.
7 Q. All right. The reason -- I'll explain why I'm asking you whether
8 you hesitated. You come from Sanski Most, don't you?
9 A. Yes, I do.
10 Q. And Sanski Most was one of the areas which came under the area of
11 responsibility of the CSB Banja Luka in 1992, wasn't it?
12 A. I think so.
13 Q. So you spent your whole life since 1990 in the police. Are you
14 saying you didn't realise that Sanski Most comes within the area of
15 responsibility of the CSB Banja Luka?
16 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Could Ms. Korner please specify the
17 period she is referring to in her question. She did say 1992 earlier on
18 but is 1992 still the period referred to in the second question because
19 there were changes.
20 MS. KORNER: I really would be grateful if I didn't have
21 objections such as this.
22 Q. So I'll repeat the question. You are aware, aren't you, fully,
23 that in 1992 Sanski Most came under the responsibility, the authority, of
24 the CSB in Banja Luka?
25 A. In 1978 I left Sanski Most and have since lived in Gradiska. I
1 was a football player. I lived there with my wife and family until 2001
2 or 2002 when I moved to Banja Luka. I got a job there. The fact that I
3 was born in Sanski Most has nothing to do with my professional work, I
4 believe. That's why I gave this answer. I have links with
5 Bosanska Gradiska.
6 Q. Yes. When you attended meetings, as you've told the Court you
7 did, up until about May of 1992 at the CSB Banja Luka, and that's how you
8 met Mr. Zupljanin, were you not aware that at these collegiums the
9 representatives of Sanski Most were attending as well?
10 A. Those were meetings at which 50 to 60 people were present. The
11 invitation to a meeting only came to the organisational unit that was to
12 respond. That's why I don't see any problem with my statement. I said I
13 think so, but I might as well say, yes. But I did not know the people
14 from the field who belonged to other organisational units, so that is who
15 were from other towns. Until 1990, I did something else altogether. In
16 late 1990, I joined the police force and I literally had no time to get
17 acquainted even with the hierarchy in traffic safety, let alone the
18 personnel structure in other municipalities. The centre covered
19 Bosanska Krajina, which is an extensive area, with many organisational
21 Q. When the investigator came to see you about whether you want
22 protective measures -- wanted protective measures in August, you told
23 him, didn't you, that you were born in Sanski Most, you still owned
24 property in Sanski Most, and you go there occasionally to visit family
25 and friends; is that right? Was that a correct statement by you?
1 A. I have two sisters and a brother in Sanski Most and my wife's
2 family is there, and it's true that I go there occasionally. Well,
3 simply speaking, you know, I took a decision rashly but why back out now
4 because I think that it isn't important in the least because there's no
5 danger to me or my immediate or extended family. I could have stayed but
6 there are no problems, really.
7 Q. I'm not at the moment dealing with why you wanted the protective
8 measures rescinded. I'm simply dealing with you and your knowledge of
9 Sanski Most. You are, are you not, I aware of what happened to your
10 Muslim and non-Serb colleagues generally in Sanski Most in 1992?
11 A. I do not know, madam.
12 Q. Really? You've not heard about any of the events that took place
13 in Sanski Most in 1992? Is that what you are telling the Court?
14 A. Not at the time. That is, in 1992 and so on I didn't have such
15 contacts. After the war, yes, informal -- or through informal
16 conversations, but I have a very superficial knowledge.
17 Q. Really. So you know nothing about Bajtonika [sic], is that what
18 you are saying? It's no good looking at counsel.
19 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] The last thing you said was not
20 interpreted. I apologise.
21 MS. KORNER: Well, I saw him looking over as Defence counsel.
22 Q. Are you telling the Court, sir, you know nothing about Bajtonika,
23 the prison?
24 MR. ZECEVIC: Betonirka prison, Betonirka.
25 MS. KORNER:
1 MR. ZECEVIC: I was trying to be helpful because I see that the
2 interpreters didn't understand what you meant.
3 MS. KORNER: Well I'm surprised after all this time and the
4 number of times I've said it, but never mind.
5 Q. Sir, is that what you are telling the Court?
6 A. I can say to this Trial Chamber that my contacts with the
7 citizens of Sanski Most are limited to my family. My relatives, close or
8 distant, didn't go to Betonirka and I personally never investigated,
9 privately or officially. And for your information, I only went to
10 Sanski Most around 2000 after the war. All my family had lived abroad
11 from before the war in Germany, Switzerland, and a number -- or more
12 specifically, a sister and a brother of the six of us also left
13 Bosnia-Herzegovina in 1992. And my wife's family did as well. And there
14 was no need for me --
15 Q. Sir, it may be there was no need for you, but I'm asking you as a
16 matter of record, are you telling the Court that you are unaware of the
17 shelling of M ahala in Sanski Most?
18 A. I am unaware. You can believe me. At the time in 1992, the
19 phone lines between towns and municipalities in Bosnia-Herzegovina were
20 disrupted. I'm talking to you about my feelings and my experience. My
21 mother was in Sanski Most at the time and so was my brother and my sister
22 and my wife's family and I couldn't contact them, or only very rarely.
23 And I don't even remember how we managed to do that.
24 Q. Yes.
25 A. And when they were leaving --
1 Q. All right. I'm not asking -- I'm now asking you whether you are
2 telling the Court that after the end of the conflict, you heard nothing
3 about the events that happened in Sanski Most as it affected the non-Serb
4 population? Is that what you are telling the Court?
5 A. Well, I'm trying to say that I first went there, to Sanski Most
6 that is, five or six years later and we didn't discuss these things then.
7 The people I talked to then -- well, and finally, it isn't anything that
8 I take interest in. I didn't feel it or experience it the way you are
9 trying to present it. I lived in Gradiska with my family, with my wife
10 and children, with my neighbours and friends and so on.
11 Q. Well, sir, the reason I've been asking you about this is going
12 back to my original question, whether you felt any hesitation in
13 testifying on behalf of Stojan Zupljanin who was in charge of the police
14 area in Sanski Most, and you told me you didn't, so none of these events,
15 you say you knew about?
16 A. Mr. Zupljanin was not just in charge of Sanski Most. He was the
17 chief of the centre that covered a large geographic area, including
18 Bosanska Gradiska where I was working. What I know, what I saw, what I
19 felt, what I heard at meetings, that means objectively and anything that
20 I was told directly, the reaction I had to this was as such, and,
21 therefore, I did not hesitate.
22 Q. Could you tell us why you declined when you were asked to speak
23 to the Prosecution as a high-ranking member of the Republika Srpska
25 A. I did so because I didn't have the need to do that. It was not
1 obligatory, I didn't want to dwell on years that I don't want to
2 remember. I don't want to relive the stress just as I'm now. You are
3 asking very problematic questions that I have nothing to do with.
4 Q. But you were going to relive the stress by giving the evidence
5 that you gave to the Defence and I'm asking you why you didn't want to
6 talk to us.
7 A. A smaller dose of stress then talking to the
8 Defence [as interpreted].
9 Q. Did you speak to any of your superiors in the Republika Srpska
10 police, for example, Mr. Milosevic, about whether you should refuse to
11 speak to the Prosecution? Or Mr. Vasic?
12 A. No, Mr. Milosevic is not my superior, if you are talking about
13 Dragomir Milosevic.
14 Q. Yes.
15 A. I am the deputy director and he is my superior. As with
16 Mr. Vasic, to, certainly not, there was no need to.
17 Q. But you knew that Mr. Vasic had testified here, didn't you, in
18 this trial?
19 A. Yes, I knew.
20 Q. And he -- did you know -- did you ask him whether he had spoken
21 to both the Prosecution and the Defence?
22 A. No.
23 Q. So you never took any advice on this at all?
24 A. I didn't think there was any need to.
25 Q. And you had no reason, other than you say, stress for not wishing
1 to speak to the Prosecution?
2 A. No other reason.
3 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, I see there's an apparent conflict
4 between the answer at 10 and 13.
5 Q. You said first of all -- 8, sorry 10. You said Mr. Milosevic was
6 not your superior and then you went on to say if you are talking about
7 Dragomir Milosevic, I'm the deputy director and he is my superior. Which
8 is it?
9 A. He is not the superior, I'm not talking about Drago but Dragomir,
10 I don't know how it was interpreted that it was said that Drago Milosevic
11 is the deputy chief of the police and I am the deputy director and my
12 position is above the chief of crime police or deputy chief of police,
13 not underneath it.
14 Q. Right. So the reality is that from 1992 until today the whole of
15 your police career has been spent in the Republika Srpska police? That's
16 right, isn't it?
17 A. Yes, it is.
18 Q. Well, I want to look at some of the events in Bosanska Gradiska
19 now, to give the context of your remaining with the police during this
20 period. Can we first of all establish, let's have a look at the map,
21 exactly where Gradiska is.
22 MS. KORNER: Can we have up, please, 10137.1. And it's tab 16 of
23 the binder.
24 Q. Gradiska is the border municipality, is it not, if one looks, one
25 focuses where Banja Luka is, if we can, yes, go in a bit there. Thank
1 you. Bosanska Gradiska is right on the border with Croatia; is that
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. And indeed still has one of the major crossings from Bosnia into
5 Croatia; that's right, isn't it?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. And we see Banja Luka, the town, and the municipality, and on the
8 other side Prijedor; is that right?
9 A. Correct.
10 Q. And then Bosanska Dubica. Right, now, let's look at the ethnic
11 makeup, please, of Bosanska Gradiska.
12 MS. KORNER: Can we have up, please, 65 ter --
13 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I object. This is a
14 character witness and the Prosecution now wants to talk about ethnic
15 composition of Bosanska Gradiska and this is not the subject of -- this
16 is a wide-ranging line of questioning and as far as I understood the
17 Court, the Prosecution can ask character questions of the witness and not
18 to present evidence and not to ask him about things in Bosanska Gradiska
19 that have nothing to do with this indictment. I think this should not be
21 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, it has nothing to do with this
22 indictment. However, there are two things. First of all, the witness
23 has gone beyond character in his account of the break-up of the police in
24 Bosanska Gradiska. Second, it is not possible, we would submit, to
25 assess the credibility of the evidence this witness is going to give
1 without looking at the background of the events to which he was a party.
2 And the fact that the Defence have decided to call this witness purely
3 for character, but as I say going further, is not the point. In any
4 event, the assessment Your Honours have to make has to be based on the
5 evidence that there is surrounding his testimony. I didn't propose to
6 belabour this but I'm entitled to do this in my submission.
7 JUDGE HALL: I seem to recall us having to rule on a like
8 objection probably in the last setting whereas the -- under the -- the
9 rules with which Ms. Korner and I would be familiar that
10 cross-examination is at large does not really apply at the Tribunal in
11 that cross-examination is not confined but certainly must relate to the
12 evidence led in chief. But on the other hand, the matters which
13 obviously touch on the witness's credibility or ability, really, to give
14 evidence on which the Chamber must place reliance, that leeway must be
15 allowed. So provided Ms. Korner so confines herself, I see no
16 objection -- no reason not to permit her to proceed along that line.
17 MS. KORNER: Yes. Could we have up, please, 65 ter 20376. Can
18 we just, please, highlight the breakdown of the population that we can
19 see at the top.
20 Q. Bosanska Gradiska was an overwhelmingly Serb municipality -
21 wasn't it? - had a total majority over any of the other ethnicities.
22 A. You are asking me?
23 Q. I'm asking you. Were you aware of those figures?
24 A. I must say in the system in which I lived, in which all of us
25 lived, and the education we had at home or generally did not focus us on
1 these figures and these figures didn't mean anything to ordinary people.
2 They didn't mean anything to me. I don't feel even today, not to say
3 then, who was who or divisions as to who belongs to what group as stated
4 here. So believe me, these numbers, I did not know these numbers at that
5 time. Later, of course, after what we went through, had we wanted to or
6 not, just from general information and all the suffering we went through
7 and the current situation in Bosnia-Herzegovina after the war that lasts
8 even today where people want to group themselves into various groups, I
9 know these, but at the time in 1991, 1992, when things began, nobody was
10 thinking about this, at least I was not thinking about this.
11 Q. You may not personally, but I can assure you, sir, numbers of
12 people are able to quote these figures. But, however, do you accept that
13 Bosanska Gradiska, this is the 1991 census, had an overwhelming majority
14 of Serb population, people who declared themselves to be Serbs?
15 A. Of course I accept this.
16 Q. But there were some 15.000 odd Muslims and 3.000 odd Croats. Do
17 those figures sound right to you?
18 A. Well, okay.
19 Q. I'm asking you, sir. You told us you'd been in Gradiska from
20 1991 onwards?
21 A. It's all right. As I said, I didn't deal with these things but
22 it's an official census and it certainly must have been like that.
23 Q. Now, it's right, isn't it, sir, that from the outbreak of the
24 conflict in Croatia itself, there were problems starting, because
25 Gradiska is so close to the border, against other ethnicities, non-Serbs?
1 A. I must say this: I worked at the traffic security police
2 station. As far as matters such as these are concerned and verification
3 of such information, I cannot answer them with yes or no or make certain
4 claims. I will try to contribute and try to answer from my general
5 knowledge. Of course, I lived in Gradiska and had family and friends
7 Q. Okay. Sorry, I am going to stop you, sir. I'm going to ask you
8 about specific events and matters.
9 MS. KORNER: Could we have up, please, now, on the screen,
10 document 20380.
11 Q. You knew who Bishop Komarica was, didn't you?
12 MS. KORNER: Sorry, tab 18.
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I know about Bishop Komarica from
14 the period after the war, but before the war, no, no, I didn't know who
15 he was, what his -- what religious dignitary function this had. I know
16 of him from after the war. Believe me, the time up to the was, the
17 beginning of the war, as things heated up, I simply was not interested in
18 this area. I did not know religious dignitaries, any others, or those of
19 a lesser degree.
20 Q. I want you to consider this: This is a letter from him addressed
21 to the chief, Mr. Vesic of your SJB. And he is complaining in February
22 of 1992 about attacks on nuns in Nova Topola. Do you know where
23 Nova Topola is?
24 A. I know.
25 Q. Did your chief Mr. Vesic tell you that apparently members of the
1 Catholic religious orders were being attacked?
2 A. My chief, Mr. Vesic, the chief -- organisationally, he was not my
3 chief, my immediate superior was Commander Momir Topic. Functionally,
4 Commander Momir Topic was connected with the SJB, specifically to the
5 police sector. At the head of the sector was Mr. Stevan Markovic, the
6 late Stevan Markovic --
7 Q. I'm sorry, sir, I'm going to stop you, we all want to finish as
8 soon as we can today. I really asked you a very simple question to he
9 which the answer is either yes or no. Did Mr. Vesic at any stage --
10 A. No.
11 Q. Thank you. Let's move on then shall we.
12 A. [Previous translation continues] ... I had to -- I had to explain
13 because you said your superior Vesic and this is why I gave this
14 explanation. The answer in connection with this specific document is no,
15 he didn't have the need to do so nor was I in charge of security of this
16 type in Bosanska Gradiska municipality.
17 Q. Well, let's continue to what started to happen after the outbreak
18 of the conflict. Could you have a look, please, at a report on the
19 1st Krajina Corps.
20 MS. KORNER: And the number is, it's at tab 3, and it's 2 -- 65
21 ter 20371.
22 Q. I'm not suggesting for one moment, sir, that you had ever seen a
23 report like this but I want to ask you about the incident that's
24 described in there. And paragraph 3, we can bring that up, thank you.
25 MS. KORNER: We'll have to go to the next page, I think, in
1 B/C/S. Could we go to the next page in B/C/S because we can see it in
2 English but not B/C/S.
3 Q. Do you see that they are recording on the 21st of April:
4 "In Bosanska Gradiska citizens of Muslim ethnicity started
5 assembling in the evening hours of the 20th of April, but the gathering
6 broke up quietly after the police intervened."
7 Do you recall gatherings -- a gathering of Muslims being broken
8 up by the police very early on in the conflict?
9 A. I really don't remember.
10 Q. But it's right, isn't it, that the Muslims in Bosanska Gradiska
11 posed absolutely no threat to anybody?
12 A. Of course. None of the ethnic groups represented any type of
14 Q. Well, we'll see what happened now. Now, let's look, please, at
15 the 5th of May.
16 MS. KORNER: Could we have up, please, P367. Tab 4. Sorry,
17 wrong -- I'm so sorry, wrong one, my fault, it's tab 4, 65 ter 10006.
18 Q. Now, Bosanska Gradiska had a Territorial Defence unit, didn't it?
19 A. I think so. Although, I don't understand these things. I don't
20 understand military organisation. I think so.
21 Q. Didn't you do military service, sir, at some stage?
22 A. Yes, in 1980.
23 Q. So you are saying that your -- you think they had a
24 Territorial Defence. Were you aware that the Territorial Defence that
25 was being supplied arms by the Banja Luka corps, 1st Krajina Corps?
1 A. No.
2 Q. Actually, it's still the 5th Corps. Now, let's consider what
3 happened after that. A programme of disarmament went on, didn't it, of
4 non-Serbs in Bosanska Gradiska from late May onwards? Sir? Did you hear
5 the question? It's right, isn't it, sir, there was a programme of
6 disarming the non-Serbs in Bosanska Gradiska which was being carried out
7 by the police in Bosanska Gradiska?
8 A. I didn't hear about the programme. I don't know about it. As
9 far as disarming, yes, there was disarming.
10 Q. Disarming of non-Serbs?
11 A. I say disarming. According to the laws in effect today and even
12 then, military weapons cannot be in the possession of citizens,
13 civilians. Within that context, we can view it officially for disarming,
14 for taking away illegal [Realtime transcript read in error "legal"]
15 weapons, this was something that was done. This was done by the general
16 police station, not the police station where I worked. I don't want to
17 limit this only to Muslim citizens.
18 Q. We, well I'm going to show you a document --
19 MR. ZECEVIC: Sorry, line 29/11 says "for taking away legal
20 weapons". I don't think that that is what the witness said.
21 MS. KORNER: Line 29?
22 MR. ZECEVIC: Page 29, line 11.
23 MS. KORNER: Line 11, sorry.
24 MR. ZECEVIC: "For taking away legal weapons," I think he said
25 something opposite.
1 MS. KORNER:
2 Q. What did you say, sir?
3 A. I don't have this here, I have some kind of dispatch in front of
5 Q. Did you say -- sorry, it's all right, I'll repeat the question.
6 There seems to be a mistranslation. Did you say that there was
7 officially a disarmament of taking away of legal weapons or illegal
9 A. Illegal, therefore, the police, the police workers of the general
10 police took away illegal weapons.
11 Q. What they were doing, sir, was taking away legally owned or
12 taking away or making the owners hand in legally-owned hunting rifles,
13 weren't they?
14 A. To tell you the truth, I don't know. Possible. It's possible.
15 Q. Well, sir, we are not talking -- Bosanska Gradiska SJB wasn't a
16 huge SJB, was it? It was quite a small one.
17 A. Correct.
18 Q. Are you saying that in your time working there full time, and
19 I'll come back in a moment to how you came to be doing that, you heard
20 nothing about the disarmament, the taking away of hunting rifles and the
21 like from what were described, in the report I'll show you in a minute,
22 as the Muslim and Croat, Croatian extremists?
23 A. No.
24 Q. You see, again if we look, please -- oh, I see the time,
25 Your Honours.
1 A. Hunting rifles are being taken away even today. Who uses such
2 weapons illegally even if he possesses them legally are taken away by
3 various procedure whether criminal, misdemeanor, administrative. If
4 these things did happen, then there was probably some kind of assessment
5 of this and it was probably an administrative matter. What I want to
6 tell you is that, yes, I lived there, but my position and the work I did,
7 for which I was responsible, they cannot be brought into context with
8 what you are asking about. These were difficult times, let me tell you,
9 very difficult times. Everyone tried to protect himself, above all his
10 family. Who did anything -- those who did anything illegal, it was their
11 decision, it was up to them. They are the ones who will be held liable
12 for this sooner or later. Please understand that my name, my position,
13 my conduct, my life philosophy cannot be brought into this context. I
14 had my own family and I took care to do my task professionally. And all
15 of these terrible times that are now behind us, I want it to end and
16 preserve our lives, preserve our friends and so on.
17 Perhaps this is a bit broad but please understand, please
18 understand the context of everything that happened. I want to tell you
19 what I am saying was really like that. I was really not interested in
20 anything except for what I was responsible before myself, before the
21 people, before God.
22 Q. Did you feel --
23 JUDGE HALL: Well, Ms. -- Mr. Smajlovic, we are about to take a
24 break. We have to break at intervals in order for the tapes to be
25 changed. So we will continue your testimony in 20 minutes.
1 [The witness stands down]
2 --- Recess taken at 10.30 a.m.
3 --- On resuming at 10.54 a.m.
4 [The witness takes the stand]
5 MS. KORNER:
6 Q. Sir, I just want to finish very quickly the topic -- [Microphone
7 not activated]?
8 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone.
9 MS. KORNER: Two documents relating to the disarmament, please.
10 The first is at tab 6 and is P411.29. Can we go, please, it's -- it's
11 1st Krajina Corps report of the 1st of June. Can we go to the third page
12 in English, please, and the same in B/C/S. And it's the top part in
13 English and B/C/S it's the beginning of the third paragraph.
14 Q. "The municipalities of Bosanska Gradiska" and then gives the
15 other ones, "are stable..." pause there. Do you agree in June of 1992
16 the municipality was a stable one?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. And "Muslim and Croatian extremists," as it's written here, "have
19 started handing in their weapons." And do you agree that weapons were
20 being collected from the Muslim and Croatian population?
21 A. I did say population.
22 Q. Yes. Sorry, do you agree that the people being disarmed were not
23 the Serbs, but the Muslims and the Croats?
24 A. I cannot agree with that statement only.
25 Q. All right.
1 MS. KORNER: Let's have a look, please, at another document on
2 this topic which shows the list, and that's, please, the document at tab
3 11 which is 65 ter 20378. Sorry, yes, I have, 20374. 74, sorry.
4 Q. Sir, I don't know whether you saw that. It's an official
5 dispatch from your SJB. Go to the last page, you'll see it's apparently
6 signed by Mr. Vesic. And we see -- do you agree -- is that Mr. Vesic's
8 A. I suppose so.
9 Q. Well, are you saying you never saw any signatures by him?
10 A. Yes, I did, and I, therefore, said I suppose so. Let me repeat,
11 Vesic was not my immediate superior and I did not need to necessarily see
12 his signature, but I did and this one appears to be his.
13 Q. Right. Thank you.
14 MS. KORNER: Let's go to the first page, please.
15 Q. This is Mr. Vesic apparently replying to a request from the CSB
16 about the weaponry seized, illegally procured or held. 36 automatic
17 rifles and so on and so forth we can see. And the weapons were
18 confiscated in the period from the 13th of July to the 20th of August and
19 then at the bottom of page, licensing hunting weapons seized.
20 MS. KORNER: And we need to go to the next page in English.
21 Q. These are hunting rifles, hunting carbines and sniping rifles.
22 There's a long list. And it would appear that all of those were
24 MS. KORNER: I think we need to go to the next page, please, in
1 Q. The above weapons, do you see the paragraph, were confiscated
2 from July to September for preventative and security reasons. Receipts
3 were issued.
4 We wish to point out we will send you information subsequently
5 about an even larger quantity of hunting weapons confiscated in the same
6 manner ... and then pistols.
7 So it would appear that -- if we go down, sorry to the next
8 paragraph short-barrelled weapons confiscated 1 September 1992, the same
9 reason, for licensing hunting weapons. When we say the 1st of September,
10 1992 we mean that the operation of confiscating weapons is still
11 underway, continue to inform the centre as there are a large number of
12 weapons registered owned by Croat or Muslims. Do you agree, sir, that it
13 would appear that certainly until the end of September there was a
14 disarmament operation going on in respect of Muslims and Croats in
16 A. Well, I truly cannot remember from which date to which date it
17 went on. Yes, there was this activity and weapons were taken off the
18 population but I can't speak to the details. It's been 20 years.
19 Q. You see there's no mention of any illegally-owned weapons being
20 taken off Serbs in this document, is there.
21 A. I haven't yet even got to the point of reading who the weapons
22 were seized off, if the document states that at all. Is there any
23 mention of ethnicity at all?
24 Q. Yes, I've just read you the paragraph: "... as there are large
25 numbers of weapons registered in the area of Gradiska public security
1 station, owned by Croatian or Muslim citizens." Do you see that? It's
2 the penultimate paragraph on the page.
3 A. Yes, yes, I can see it now. Well, if that's what the document
4 states, then I suppose that was the case. I suppose the person who
5 signed the document was aware of what he was signing.
6 Q. In addition to disarming the population, Muslims and Croats were
7 removed, weren't they, from the jobs that they held during this period of
8 time between May and September 1992?
9 A. They were not in the station where I worked.
10 Q. Well, anybody who declined to take the -- to make the declaration
11 was removed, weren't they?
12 A. I don't think so. Nobody was removed. I presume that those who
13 failed to report to work would have their employment contracts terminated
14 by law. Still today our legislation provides for a termination of
15 employment where the incumbent fails to appear for work for up to -- for
16 three days.
17 Q. Let's have a look at one your own reports from Gradiska, please.
18 13th of January, 1993.
19 MS. KORNER: Sorry, tab 12, 3512. 65 ter 3512. This is all to
20 do with the communications in Bosanska Gradiska. If we can go, please,
21 to, in English page 2 and in B/C/S to page 2 as well. Second paragraph
22 in B/C/S, the bottom in English.
23 Q. During 1992 staff member Meho Kovacevic, did you know him?
24 A. Yes. I am sorry, I can't find this.
25 Q. I am sorry, it's the top, if you look at the second paragraph in
1 your language.
2 A. Very well.
3 Q. It's now disappeared entirely from the screen: "... left his
4 position because he did not sign the pledge of loyalty and went abroad
5 with his family." Most of the officers didn't sign, did they? Most of
6 the non-Serbs? You were one of the very very few?
7 A. Well, in view of the number of non-Serb workers, I don't know if
8 it was many or few. Everybody had the right to make their own decision.
9 I explained my own choice at the start and, as I say, it proved correct.
10 Those who have some sense in their mind would, of course, be in favour of
11 not waging a war, and after all, for the past 15 or 16 years,
12 Bosnia-Herzegovina is functioning, well, the way it is. Therefore,
13 political choices made in respect of the political organisation for the
14 future are taken by politicians. We were ordinary people and we had to
15 make sure as human beings, neighbours, and citizens not to divide and to
16 make sure that we stick together. Had this happened thousands upon
17 thousands of people would not have been killed. Unfortunately, not all
18 of us are of the same mind and, as I say, this specific decision had to
19 be taken by each and every individual of his own free will and based on
20 his own convictions, and they should not have gone in favour of divisions
21 but Meho Kovacevic made his choice and followed it.
22 Q. You said they had to make that decision of their own free will.
23 Did you personally have pressure put on you to sign the declaration by
24 Mr. Vesic and other Serbs or, indeed, even Mr. Zupljanin?
25 A. That's simply impossible.
1 Q. Did you bring pressure to bear on the people you visited at their
2 homes, the non-Serbs, to sign?
3 A. A friendly conversation cannot be qualified as pressure;
4 therefore, I did not exert any pressure.
5 Q. I'm now going to ask you to look, please, at the document which
6 is at tab 14, 20375. [Microphone not activated] Now this is a statement
7 that was made --
8 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
9 MS. KORNER:
10 Q. That was made to the Ministry of the Interior in Sarajevo in
11 1994. It's by a gentleman named Abid Jugo, did you know him?
12 A. Very well. He is a neighbour of mine. A friend. We were on
13 visiting terms before the war and during the war all the way up to the
14 time when he relocated to Visoko, he exchanged his home for a home there.
15 I even visited him in Visoko when I was on a business trip to Sarajevo,
16 and as of a few years ago, Abid Jugo went to live in Norway because his
17 children are there, so I know the man very well.
18 Q. Therefore, you have no reason to think that he would say things
19 about you which were untrue?
20 A. That's right.
21 Q. Now, let's just go through this.
22 MS. KORNER: If we could move it up, please, in English. He
23 gives the rough breakdown of the ethnicity. Then can we go to the next
24 page in English.
25 Q. Now, he describes the political events until Mr. Ivastanjin
1 became president of the Municipal Assembly. Then he describes who the
2 other government bodies were and that in the SDS. And can you see the
3 bit that says: "The chief of the SUP in Bosanska Gradiska is
4 Vladan Vesic who had been chief before the war and whose mandate was then
5 extended by the SDS. Apart from him in the SUP there were the following
6 extremists, Mr. Novakovic, the station commander; Dragoje Samardzija, a
7 deputy commander; and Mr. Zivkovic; and also Mr. Polic."
8 Then this: "In the police station there's also a certain
9 Nijaz Smajlovic in Sanski Most who is carrying out the duty of deputy
10 commander in the station and who still holds that duty. I heard that
11 when the Serbs were taking over power, Smajlovic put pressure on the
12 Muslims who were in the SUP."
13 Was that true?
14 A. You see, I was following closely and reading, I'm a bit taken
15 aback by this. Some of the functions and positions he listed here are
16 incorrect, but this term, "one Nijaz Smajlovic from Sanski Most," I don't
17 know about English but in our language when you say one Mr. So and so,
18 that would mean a certain person, that would mean somebody you didn't
19 know, whereas he was a friend of mine, a neighbour. One whose house I
20 would visit and he would visit mine. So I'm sure he would not have used
21 this term one Nijaz or certain Nijaz. He told me he had problems when he
22 arrived in Visoko and that was in 1994 from what was a Serb entity so
23 what he must have been asked a great deal of questions and I know he had
24 enormous difficulties, a year or more, before he could actually take
25 possession of the house that he was supposed to live in. So I'm really
1 taken aback by this because Abid, whom I know, if he were to come here, I
2 am sure would not have said this. As the sentence stands, "certain
3 Nijaz Smajlovic" tells me that somebody must have pushed him to give this
4 sort of statement to the police.
5 Q. Well, I'll ask you the question again. Is it true, as he says,
6 that you put pressure on people to remain?
7 A. Of course it is not true. I said that a moment ago. It's just
8 that I am a bit distressed now that I've read this document, and I wonder
9 if he was able to read what they made of his words. What I said that
10 there had been were friendly conversations with people of Muslim
11 ethnicity because I lived in a neighbourhood, now that I have to say it,
12 where most of the population were Muslims. And there were questions
13 asked as to why not everyone stayed behind when a certain number of
14 non-Serb workers stayed behind, whereas a certain number left. And
15 people realised at a later date that they perhaps lacked courage to do
16 this and that and then questions were asked about why some people decided
17 to leave and why not all of them stayed behind. Because you know that
18 care was always taken of the ethnic makeup. It is still the case today.
19 Q. Yes. It may well be the case today. I'm suggesting to you, I'm
20 going to come on to that, that what when on in Gradiska in 1992, with
21 your connivance, sir, I'm afraid to say, was ethnic cleansing. Can we
22 just finish this statement, please.
23 MS. KORNER: Can we go to the next page in English, please.
24 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honours, if I may briefly just interrupt.
25 Your Honours, I didn't want to object earlier before the witness gave his
1 answer in order that I would not be coaching a witness or anything like
3 MS. KORNER: Can we have the witness with his earphones off, if
4 he doesn't speak English, please. Can we confirm, perhaps you can
5 confirm whether the witness speaks English or understands English.
6 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Smajlovic, can you understand English? Sorry,
7 yes. Can you understand spoken English?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.
9 JUDGE HALL: Thank you. You may take your headphones off again,
11 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honours, in this situation, Ms. Korner is
12 producing a witness statement and challenging the witness credibility
13 based on the statement of some third person, and we don't have the
14 confirmation that this person actually gave this statement. How do we
15 know that? Was it -- was this statement taken out of his own free will?
16 Perhaps yes, perhaps not. Has the contents of the statement where what
17 he actually said or perhaps somebody added some things, because we have
18 heard a number of testimonies where the witnesses were saying that the
19 officials of the Bosnia-Herzegovina have added certain qualifications or
20 certain events in some of their statements.
21 Now, if Your Honours will recall, during the -- during the
22 Prosecutor's case, we wanted to show the -- we wanted to show to the
23 witnesses the statements given by some of the -- of the persons who were
24 detained or interviewed during the -- during the interviewing process,
25 for example, in Prijedor and elsewhere. And then the opposition by the
1 Office of the Prosecutor was that we cannot establish that these
2 statements were given by their own free will. And that is precisely the
3 same situation as over here. And that is why I have -- I have to object
4 at this point that Ms. Korner uses these documents for these purposes.
5 Thank you very much.
6 JUDGE HALL: It seems to me, Mr. Zecevic, that I fully understand
7 what you are saying in terms of weight of this document having regard to
8 its remoteness from the witness. We are dealing with multiple levels of
9 hearsay and if I were sitting in a common law court, I would have no
10 hesitation about excluding the use of the document. But as I understand
11 the more liberal rules of the Tribunal, Ms. Korner is entitled to use it
12 in the manner that she is, but she would appreciate that the -- for the
13 reasons that you have identified and I've just echoed, that there's only
14 so far that this would go but it's left at the end of the day for
16 MR. ZECEVIC: I understand. Thank you very much, Your Honours.
17 I am sorry.
18 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, can I say the objection and indeed
19 what Your Honours just said is quite remarkable, if Your Honours will
20 recall exactly that, we took objection to the statements coming from
21 people who have been interviewed in Omarska and we said that we objected
22 to it for a number of reasons and we received a ruling from Your Honours
23 which I can get which admitted each and every one of those statements
24 with the caveat that, later, Your Honours would give it such weight as
25 they deserved given that the person hadn't turned up to explain the
1 circumstances. I'm proposing to ask Your Honours on that very basis to
2 admit this statement into evidence as an exhibit when I finish going
3 through it. And, indeed, we even have here a close connection. It's the
4 hearsay element that I find surprising, Your Honour, because he says he
5 knows this man, whereas the witnesses doing these endless Omarska
6 statements, where it will show, a goodly number of which were admitted by
7 Your Honours in the teeth of our strong objections and an application for
8 reconsideration on it, this is exactly as I say, as I warned at the time,
9 what is good for the goose is equally good for the gander and so I'm
10 putting it to the witness, I'm going to ask for it be admitted because he
11 knows the man indeed at the end of my examination on it, on the same
12 basis as the Omarska statements and others were admitted.
13 JUDGE HALL: Thank you, Ms. Korner, I'm personally relieved that
14 my instinctive conforms to what we have, in fact, formally ruled.
15 Mr. Krgovic.
16 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I just have one
17 comment to what Ms. Korner said about this being hearsay evidence. This
18 is not even hearsay evidence because if you take a more careful look at
19 what this man here states, he says I heard from so and so. So in other
20 words, not the one giving the statement heard it but heard it for
21 somebody else, so this is twice or three times removed from the one
22 making the statement. This doesn't even fulfill the criteria for hearsay
24 JUDGE HALL: I think that is what our American friends call
25 totem-pole hearsay. Yes, please proceed, Ms. Korner.
1 MS. KORNER: He then lists -- sorry, you can put your earphones
2 on, sir.
3 Q. He then lists the various people who were in charge of companies.
4 MS. KORNER: And can we go to the next page, please, in B/C/S.
5 Q. He asserts that Mr. Ivastanjin, Mr. Barac and others including
6 Mr. Vesic, together with the JNA, Banja Luka corps specifically, fully
7 armed the Serbian population during 1990 to 1991, and, indeed, the SDS
8 then carried out training. And deals with the weapons. Were you aware
9 of that, sir?
10 A. No.
11 Q. Never heard anything about the SDS, the Banja Luka corps, and
12 arming Serbs in Gradiska at all?
13 A. No.
14 Q. Did you know --just departing for a moment from the statement -
15 did you know a police officer in the SUP called Husret Mujadic [phoen]?
16 A. Of the SUP.
17 Q. The SJB in Bosanska Gradiska?
18 A. We didn't have such one there as far as I remember. I don't know
19 if a man by that name ever worked at that station.
20 Q. All right. Was there ever a time when members of the SJB were
21 sent to attend, whilst you were there, courses in Belgrade before the
22 conflict broke out on explosive devices, et cetera?
23 A. I don't know of anybody being sent to Belgrade.
24 Q. All right. Let's just finish then, please, with the statement
25 that was made by this gentleman. He goes on to describe the crime that
1 was committed in August of 1992. And do you remember when there was an
2 incident where members of either the -- they were called the Skorpions or
3 something to do with the police were actually killed by the other side,
4 either Muslims or Croats?
5 A. There were no Skorpions members in the police, nor were any
6 police officers killed in August. But maybe you are referring to the
7 events on the 8th and 9th of August. They involved army members, I
8 think. There was a Gradiska Brigade, or whatever it was called. It was
9 an incident when 16 young men were killed. They were from Gradiska. So
10 this is not about the police but about army members.
11 Q. Well, that is exactly the incident I'm referring to and I'll come
12 back to that but I just want to complete this statement.
13 MS. KORNER: Could we go, please, to page 5 in English, and I
14 think it is in page 3 in B/C/S.
15 Q. Do you see there he says: "The torture and persecution of
16 Muslims and Croats started when the war broke out. The main terror was
17 carried out by the police, the so-called Serbian SUP headed by the chief
18 Vladan Vesic and Ostoja Novakovic the commander of the police station.
19 By Zivko Zivkovic, Drago Samardzija, the chief of the SUP formed a group
20 of policemen led by the policeman Nikic who was the body-guard of the SUP
22 Now, before I go on to what is alleged here, were all these men
23 that he names members of the SJB during 1992?
24 A. Some information is wrong. Vladan Vesic was chief of the SJB but
25 this also mentions Ostoja Novakovic, the commander of the police station
1 but it's not Ostoja, it's Dragoljub Novakovic. Ostoja was the name of an
2 assistant, but Ostoja Balaban. Zivkovic was a chief of the crime police
3 department and not an inspector at the time. And Samardzija did not have
4 an executive function at the station then, I think. And down there
5 policeman Nikic but I'm fully certain that there was no police officer by
6 that name. You said it was a small station and it was, but I don't know
7 anybody by the name of Nikic. And especially since this states that he
8 was a body-guard of the SUP chief.
9 Q. Right. They go on to say:
10 "During this day the group searched the homes of the Muslims and
11 Croats because they were allegedly looking for weapons and at night the
12 same houses and flats would be looted, set on fire, and mined. Some
13 people were killed and some were taken to prison."
14 Is that true?
15 A. Of course not. Or, actually, I cannot join in this. I'm unaware
16 of such information. It certainly was not this way. I don't know where
17 this gentleman, my neighbour and friend, got this from. I really
18 couldn't say. I tried to read as much as possible from this document
19 during the break but you need a major organisational unit to collect this
20 amount of information. I don't know how he could have done that himself.
21 I'm convinced that all these things were put in his mouth for him to
22 simply sign off. I totally disagree with what he says here.
23 Q. Did you watch the case against Radoslav Brdjanin at all, any of
24 the court proceedings there?
25 A. I don't remember. I don't think so. But the reports are very
1 concise. I don't think I followed Brdjanin, I did watch some though.
2 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... Yes, but -- so you weren't
3 aware that your municipality, Bosanska Gradiska formed part of that case
4 and that evidence was led about what happened there? You didn't know
6 A. No, I haven't heard that before.
7 Q. Are you saying that no one, to your knowledge, was arrested,
8 brought to the police station, and then beaten up while they were being
10 A. There were arrests, people were brought in, but about the
11 treatment, I cannot comment. You are putting to me that people were
12 being beaten and who knows what but I, personally, wasn't present,
13 haven't seen anything, haven't heard anything and wasn't responsible for
14 it. Neither me nor my organisational unit were not involved in such
15 actions and I cannot confirm any of this.
16 Q. Well, let's just look at a bit more of what he says.
17 MS. KORNER: Can we look, please, at page 6 in English, and it's
18 the bottom of page 3 in the B/C/S version.
19 Q. I asked you earlier about the outbreak of war in Croatia. Did,
20 as he allege, criminals come into Gradiska?
21 A. From where? I apologise.
22 Q. From -- Serbs from Croatia? Martic's men? The Krajina.
23 A. I would say that I haven't heard of -- or if I were to say that I
24 haven't heard of anybody crossing over, it would be a lie. Of course I
25 heard of that, but as a human being and as a police officer, I cannot
1 speak about specific instances because I really don't know. Yes, I heard
2 general information that they were coming, crossing the border. I mean,
3 criminals. That's the word -- rather, that's a term that I wouldn't
4 accept either.
5 Q. All right.
6 MS. KORNER: Well, let's, go, please then to page 7 in English
7 and it's the next page in B/C/S, page 4.
8 Q. He says there that -- he deals with the August action but I want
9 to look at a different document for that. "In 1992 around 8.000 Muslims
10 were moved out of Bosanska Gradiska and around 100 of them were killed."
11 Would you accept those figures?
12 A. Of course not. I think that nobody in their right mind would
13 agree with these figures because nobody was in a position to count. I
14 don't think that people moved out in such numbers in 1992. Of course,
15 people were leaving, but how many, especially the part that says how many
16 were killed, I mean, this is absurd. This is mere guess-work. I
17 simply --
18 Q. [Overlapping speakers] I understand you don't agree with it. I'm
19 going to show you another document later about that.
20 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, I think that's all I want to ask on the
21 document but I do ask it be made for an exhibit. It goes to the
22 credibility of the witness, no other purpose than that. And it has the
23 same status at the Omarska statements that were admitted when the Defence
24 asked for them.
25 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I think that this
1 situation differs essentially from the one when the official notes, not
2 statements, from Omarska were admitted because we had a witness here who
3 took those statements and he was familiar with them and they were led
4 through him and that was the nexus. The witness was in a position to
5 speak about the circumstances under which they were taken and everything
6 else. Here the situation is very different. There's no such nexus nor
7 or can we go into the circumstances under which they were taken or probe
8 their reliability, so we cannot apply the same standard as when the
9 statement from Omarska were admitted. To my mind this is an essential
11 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honours, I most certainly object as I stated
12 before. Now, I'm not sure I follow Ms. Korner's argument because what I
13 found on the pages transcript 16883 through 16888 is the following -- I'm
14 quoting now:
15 "The Chamber would like to clarify one issue that was raised by
16 Mr. Hannis just before the break, namely, the purpose for which these
17 notes are being sought admitted into evidence.
18 "The Chamber is of the view that they cannot and should not be
19 admitted as statements proper for the simple reason that they don't
20 fulfill the requirements of 92 bis. So they will consider not only the
21 procedure that these notes seem to establish, but also the contents of
22 the findings ..." and so on and so forth.
23 The Chamber will consider these official notes both from the form
24 and for the contents and thus not consider them as statements.
25 Therefore, I don't see any relationship between the Chamber's
1 ruling and Ms. Korner's request.
2 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, it's not that -- there was a long
3 written motion about all this and Your Honours in the end admitted them.
4 I haven't got them with me. I'll get them so that we have them after the
5 break and I'll leave my application for the moment is that it is admitted
6 as an exhibit. I'll come back with the motions but it's on the same
7 basis as they were admitted. The Omarska statements were not all
8 admitted through a witness who had taken them but I will get the
9 documents after the break and can I move on.
10 [Trial Chamber confers]
11 JUDGE HALL: The application by Ms. Korner is that this document
12 be admitted solely for the purposes of the challenging the credibility of
13 the witness on the stand, and taking on board what counsel for the
14 Defence, both counsel have said about the inherent deficiencies, for want
15 of a better word, in this document which the witness himself didn't make
16 and he disputes the contents, having regard to the limited purposes for
17 which sought to be admitted, the Chamber so admits it and it is
18 accordingly admitted and marked.
19 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P2419, Your Honours.
20 MS. KORNER:
21 Q. Now, I want to deal very quickly, please, with what was one of
22 the major incidents in Bosanska Gradiska in August, which you've referred
23 to. If I can just find it. Yes.
24 MS. KORNER: Could we look, please, at -- it's document number 8,
25 20373. Tab 8.
1 Q. This is a report dated the 12th of August of 1992, and under 3,
2 "Situation in the territory":
3 "Following a clash with an Ustasha unit in the Bosanska Gradiska
4 region in the greater Gradiska region, reprisals were taken against the
5 Muslim population and several buildings were destroyed and six people
7 That's what happened, wasn't it, after members of whatever they
8 were, the police, the Skorpions, the army were killed, reprisals were
9 taken against the civilian population?
10 A. That is correct. After these 16 youths were buried, I think it
11 was on a Monday, that is on the night between Monday and Tuesday these
12 incidents happened. And it was terrible. I personally stayed with my
13 family at my home during that night as everybody else or most everybody.
14 Later we heard the news that some people had been killed, that there was
15 shooting or explosions in some buildings, and that certainly is true.
16 Nobody can deny that. But I was in no position to know about the scope
17 of these events.
18 Q. But you were in a position to see, weren't you, that of the 17
19 mosques in Bosanska Gradiska during this period, 15 of them were blown
21 A. My house was 50 metres from the nearest mosque and it certainly
22 was not blown up, and the period you are referring to and when this
23 conversation took place cannot be linked to the destruction of these
24 mosques. We have to approach it on a case-to-case basis. I know about
25 these things very well, because my house was very near one of these
2 Q. I don't know, there may have been a mistranslation, I don't know
3 what conversation you were talking about. I'm just simply asking you,
4 are you saying that all the mosques in Bosanska Gradiska including the
5 one nearest your house remained intact during 1992?
6 A. No, of course I cannot be sure about that, but the immediate
7 consequence certainly wasn't the destruction of all mosques. Maybe one
8 was destroyed on that night or two, or, I don't know. I'm sure that
9 there are documents about it because on-site investigations were made and
10 it is easy to reconstruct what happened when but the event I'm referring
11 to was not a consequence of that. I believe it only happened in the
12 spring of 1993. That's what I want to say. There is no direct link
13 between this incident and the destruction of the mosques but it is true
14 that they were destroyed.
15 Q. Thank you. I am sorry, it's my fault, I accept not necessarily
16 there was the link between the August incident, but overall, all the
17 mosques bar two, I suggest, were blown up during this period; would you
19 A. Okay.
20 Q. Does that mean yes?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. All right. Finally, then I'm going to turn very shortly after
23 the break to what you said about Stojan Zupljanin. As a result of
24 everything that went on, I put certain figures to you. I want to put two
25 other documents that come from, as it so happens, police sources.
1 MS. KORNER: Could you have a look, please, first of all at
2 document 20381, which is at tab 19.
3 Q. This is a report from a gentleman named Milos, that the Court
4 knows all about, about the events in Gradiska, and it's dated the 22nd of
5 August, 1992, so not long after the incident. And he says more and more
6 citizens, primarily of Croatian and Muslim nationality wish to
7 voluntarily emigrate from the area of Bosanska Gradiska pursuant to the
8 conditions stipulated by the Municipal Assembly decision dated the
9 31st of July. Are you aware of that decision, sir?
10 A. I have never seen this document before.
11 Q. No, I'm asking you -- I appreciate you probably haven't. I'm
12 asking you whether the Municipal Assembly in July made a decision about
13 the conditions under which people could emigrate?
14 A. Well, I'm saying that I hear this for the first time.
15 Q. So you weren't aware that people were told that they could leave
16 if they signed over their property to the municipality and so on and so
17 forth? Didn't know that from any of your friends?
18 A. No. No, I haven't heard about it but I know that people left.
19 Q. Right. And then it goes on to describe the talks that have gone
20 on with Nova Gradiska which is in Croatia, is it not?
21 A. That's correct.
22 Q. And the Croats should move and then at the bottom:
23 "According to fully verified information, Banja Luka Bishop of
24 the Roman Catholic church, Komarica, opposes this and filed a protest
25 with the president of Bosanska Gradiska Municipal Assembly and the public
1 security service chief requesting that the emigration comes to an end
2 'because it causes damage to the Croatian people.'"
3 Now did Mr. Vesic ever tell you that, yet again, Bishop Komarica
4 was objecting to what was going on to members of his flock, the Roman
5 Catholic Croats?
6 A. He never told me, nor did he have the opportunity or nor was I
7 ever present during discussions or meetings of this. My position, I will
8 repeat it again, my position did not require my presence at such
9 discussions. Of course, I did not know nor did Mr. Vesic ever tell me.
10 Q. Well --
11 A. I will say once again, I see this for the first time, hear about
12 it for the first time. As far as I can see, these are informal
13 representatives of the Croatian people. I've heard of their names as
14 citizens of Gradiska.
15 Q. Well, finally on this topic of those who moved out, can you have
16 a look, please at a document, which is already an exhibit.
17 MS. KORNER: P425, tab 13. No, that's not it. P425. Thank you.
18 Q. This was, I suppose, an unofficial assessment made by the
19 Banja Luka CSB in May of 1993 of a list of citizens who have moved out
20 into the area covered by the sector.
21 MS. KORNER: And can we go, please, in English to the fourth page
22 and in B/C/S, I believe it is also the fourth page.
23 Q. The police made virtually the same assessment as did the
24 gentleman who gave the statement to Sarajevo police which you described
25 as rubbish: Moved out Muslims, 9.500 to 10.000 Gradiska; Croats 1.000;
1 and Serbs 1.000. And then Serbs had moved in, presumably from other
2 areas. So by May of 1993, two-thirds of the Muslim population of
3 Gradiska had moved out, hadn't it?
4 A. That's what it says.
5 Q. And you knew what was happening, didn't you? You knew all along
6 as you sat there in Bosanska Gradiska what was going on there?
7 A. I don't understand the question.
8 Q. You knew, I suggest, sir, because you were a member of the
9 police, even if only the traffic police?
10 A. What?
11 Q. That, first of all --
12 A. What did I know?
13 Q. Yes. Just wait, I'm going to enumerate, sir, what I say you
14 knew. First of all, that people had been removed from their jobs because
15 of their ethnicity? Do you agree?
16 A. People were removed from their jobs, dismissed, but I don't know
17 the reasons why.
18 Q. Wasn't it obvious to you, sir?
19 A. I said I didn't know the reasons.
20 Q. Second, that from at least July a programme of disarming the
21 non-Serbs was carried out by the police?
22 A. I don't know about the programme but as far as the basic work in
23 the field is concerned, yes, the locals were disarmed. Those who
24 possessed illegal weapons. Certainly most of them were non-Serbs.
25 That's generally known. Again, I say the townspeople and illegal
1 possession of weapons.
2 Q. Third, that harassment, arson -- well, let's take this one by
3 one. That the non-Serb population were, to put it at its lowest,
4 harassed by the Serbs and the Serb authorities?
5 A. It can't be put that way. The Serbs helped Muslims and Croats
6 and vice-versa. You cannot generalize these things in this particular
8 Q. I suggest further to you, sir, that to your knowledge houses were
9 being attacked and people were being attacked by Serbs?
10 A. I cannot say as you do, the Serbs. It is correct that people
11 were attacked, houses were attacked. I don't know.
12 Q. The houses and the people were all non-Serbs, weren't they, sir?
13 A. Shots were fired at my house. A bullet came in through a window
14 of my house that faced the street and it hit the ceiling and the wall
15 where my wife and children were. I cannot claim who fired the shot but
16 that is the truth. The house faced the street, there was shooting, there
17 was shooting every night. Those that had weapons fired the shots. Some
18 things could not be controlled. Unfortunately that was how things were
19 based on my experience. I could have been a victim, my family could have
20 been a victim of such shootings.
21 And this mosque that was mentioned, let me just tell you, this
22 mosque that was destroyed, parts of that mosque could have come into my
23 house. All the windows of my house were broken. This did not happen to
24 my friend and neighbour and I would never write or sign what he has done.
25 Everyone knows who I am in Gradiska and they know my conduct, I must say
1 this with emotion and hopefully he will hear about this and will never be
2 able to face me again.
3 Q. First, sir --
4 A. My apologies to you, to the Court for the emotion.
5 Q. Sir, can I say, I fully accept everything that you've described
6 that happened to you. Do I understand you to say that when the mosque
7 was blown-up next to your house, parts of it came into your house?
8 A. They could have, I said they could have. Had this happened, it
9 would have killed us. All the windows, all the glass in my house was
10 broken. This is in the context of this story, let me say this, there
11 were horrible scenes, horrible moments. The disappearance of one state.
12 Viewed from this position, a very chaotic state of matters. It was up to
13 each individual how they will conduct themselves, will they leave or not.
14 Specific pressure to leave, everyone came to understand this as they did,
15 and everyone experienced it in their own way. The contact I had with
16 people, I was saddened when people left Gradiska or any other part of
17 Bosnia. If these were normal, well-mannered, civilised people and they
18 had to leave. But these conversations, this information that I had
19 through conversations, and my family, everyone left for about three
20 months until the situation settles in Bosnia-Herzegovina, until it calms
21 down. However, things happened as they did. It wasn't three months, it
22 was for three or four years, unfortunately.
23 Q. Well, sir, really, didn't you just stay with the police even
24 though you could see what was happening to Muslims because you were
25 terrified, absolutely terrified?
1 A. I did not. I was not terrified. I was lucky enough to have
2 associates, to have colleagues who were normal people. That's my
3 opinion. All the people in charge, the police, that worked under the
4 other system and that continued to work in these initial war
5 circumstances, relations between us were proper, between us within the
6 station and with the centre. Unfortunately, as days, months, years went
7 by, the situation became more complex. Certain people could not have a
8 bearing on certain events either circumstances that were directly or
9 indirectly tied to this. Therefore, I did not just once again --
10 Q. Okay.
11 A. Okay.
12 Q. Sorry, sir, if you want to say one more thing, it's actually
13 we've gone beyond the time we need to break. If you want to say
14 something else, say it.
15 A. I just wanted to confirm once again that there was no fear. If I
16 had been afraid, I would have left. But that was my principle. In the
17 lack of indivisibility, not recognising any divisions between people in
18 Bosnia and Herzegovina or in the state of Yugoslavia as it existed at the
20 Q. I think finally, sir, did you feel any kind of moral -- on this
21 topic, I've got two or three questions after the break. Did you feel any
22 kind of moral responsibility for staying in a service that was
23 oppressing, again using the lowest term I can think of, people who were
24 non-Serbs in Gradiska?
25 A. Let me say that I wouldn't agree with your statement. I think
1 it's actually two or three different questions. I didn't feel any moral
2 responsibility because I, myself, my wife helped a lot of people, I won't
3 say people of which nationality. But believe me, in my house from my
4 birthplace, Sanski Most, there were ten or 11 people from there who were
5 on their way abroad and that could happen and last for days. Any person
6 officially or unofficially who came to me, I never turned my head away
7 from anyone, but within my abilities as a person and my professional
8 ability, I assisted people whether in this or that way, through someone,
9 or I personally, therefore I feel no moral responsibility.
10 My position, in fact, and the fact that I remained, if we must
11 discuss it, by saying me as Smajlovic, remained with the Serbian police
12 in Republika Srpska which today exists as in the form it is, whether I
13 have anything to say I think I contributed, exemplary, I acted properly
14 towards people, I acted properly towards the workers, towards my
15 colleagues, my superiors as well. My propriety was valued and no one had
16 any objections to tell me, none of them because I was helping my friends,
17 my relatives in this or that manner. The Court must know this. I was
18 not known as a police employee. Before the police I was an active
19 athlete. I was known to the public throughout Bosnia-Herzegovina and
20 Yugoslavia and particularly in Sanski Most, Gradiska, Banja Luka as an
21 athlete and people knew me as such. Circumstances were that I began to
22 work in the police in the 1990s and there I contributed as a person, as a
23 professional as much as I could, and I think I did quite enough.
24 Unfortunately, I must add to this, this was never returned to me. It
25 never came back. What Mr. Jugo signed is just unbelievable as far as I'm
1 concerned and I think it is for him as well.
2 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, I have about five minute's worth after
3 the break and then I'll be completed.
4 JUDGE HALL: So we return in 20 minutes.
5 [The witness stands down]
6 --- Recess taken at 12.13 p.m.
7 --- On resuming at 12.37 p.m.
8 JUDGE HALL: We reconvene for this last session under
9 Rule 15 bis, Judge Delvoie being absent.
10 [The witness takes the stand]
11 MS. KORNER:
12 Q. Sir, I only have a very few further questions for you. You said
13 just before we broke that you were an active athlete known to the public
14 throughout Bosnia, Yugoslavia, and particularly in Sanski Most, Gradiska,
15 and Banja Luka. Was that as a footballer, as you told us earlier today?
16 A. That's right.
17 Q. And is it right that Mr. Zupljanin was a very keen footballer as
18 well, not in the same class as you?
19 A. I never heard about it.
20 Q. You never played football with him or against him?
21 A. No, no.
22 Q. Now, you told the Court in your statement which is now an
23 exhibit, and in your evidence, that you never heard Mr. Zupljanin say
24 anything negative about Muslims or Croats, or anything negative or
25 discriminatory about anything ethnic or nationality. Do I understand
1 what you are saying the only times that you actually met him were between
2 1990 and May of 1992 when you went to collegiums to stand in for the
3 commander of the traffic division?
4 A. That's correct.
5 Q. And you did not socialise with him at all?
6 A. I did not.
7 Q. In which case, I take it, sir, you weren't aware of a letter that
8 he wrote to Biljana Plavsic in July of 1991 about what he described as
9 the dominance of the Muslims in this important ministry?
10 A. I am not aware of it.
11 Q. And you told us that one of these last meetings he said that
12 nothing bad should ever happen to you?
13 A. That's right. That was the reaction to what I was talking about;
14 my contributions, my activities, my position, my work, the fact that I
15 was against divisions, that we should work, that there was always time
16 for a conflict later on, if necessary.
17 Q. Yes. But didn't it strike that you it was a rather odd thing to
19 A. Truth be told, at the time I didn't really understand it. My
20 philosophy, the way I thought, how I lived, naturally everything that I
21 said, everything I did was normal and natural. It's universal, natural
22 thing that's respected throughout the world. Do everything you can so
23 that there are no divisions, no arguments. Use everything you have
24 available to you. I assumed that Mr. Zupljanin, as the chief of the
25 centre, later when I thought about it, he probably had other examples,
1 negative examples, and perhaps my example, he made the comments he did
2 about my example as he did.
3 Q. But did it ever strike you, when you thought about it, as you
4 say, you didn't really understand it, that it seemed to suggest that bad
5 things could happen to other Muslims who were in the police? Did that
6 ever strike you?
7 A. No. No.
8 MS. KORNER: All right. Thank you, sir.
9 JUDGE HALL: Re-examination.
10 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honours. Just a few
11 questions, please.
12 Re-examination by Mr. Krgovic:
13 Q. Sir, you were shown a statement by this citizen which was given
14 to the aid organs in Sarajevo, citizen Abid Jugo. I wanted to ask you
15 about it. When he were talking to these policemen, when you were talking
16 about them remaining to work in the police, was he present?
17 A. Of course he was not.
18 Q. In this statement you said -- you saw that there was a lot of
19 information, your name was mentioned, was mentioned in that context.
20 Since you knew this man, was it possible for him to present so much
22 A. I didn't have the opportunity to read his entire statement which
23 was several pages long, but what was shown on the screen, while during
24 the break I was able to read quite a bit of it, I think that the
25 information presented there he would need an entire organisation to come
1 to such information. Knowing him personally, let me say again, he signed
2 what he signed, knowing him. Today I still have the same opinion of him.
3 He is a very honest man, that he had problems, that was certain. He had
4 them. He couldn't enter his own house for a year and a half, the house
5 he had exchanged, but I didn't know about this, he never told me about
6 this. I assume that he was under some kind of pressure to sign this.
7 Whether he, in fact, even read this, I don't know. The relationship
8 remains the same, you understand. We'll meet one day and he will tell me
9 if there was need for the Court, if we were lucky enough for the Court to
10 summon him here, there are things there that don't pertain to me, that I
11 don't think are correct.
12 Q. Mr. Smajlovic, you are in a very high office in the police and
13 have been in the past, did you go through certain checks by the police of
15 A. Of course I did and all members of the police of
16 Bosnia-Herzegovina went through certain checks, checks by the IPTF, the
17 international police force, and finally, I think in 2002 we were
18 certified to continue working. We also underwent checks by our security
19 services in Bosnia-Herzegovina, which was in accordance with legal
20 regulations in force there, and there, too, I passed all the checks and
21 there were no problems as far as I was concerned.
22 Q. If this information in the statement was correct, would you be in
23 this office?
24 A. Certainly not.
25 Q. Finally, you gave us a detail that you assisted this citizen,
1 this Abid. What was the assistance about, you said this on page 58?
2 A. Let me say, it's a private matter. I don't know if I should
3 recount this. I said we were neighbours, we visited each other's houses
4 and, finally, if I must say, I will say it, when he exchanged his house
5 the gentleman who continues to own the house today moved in. Abid had to
6 move out of his house, what had been his house until then, and he had to
7 move into a room that was not adapted for living. I went and saw him
8 there. It was within the -- within my capability to move him into the
9 house of a relative of mine and he stayed in that house where I put him
10 until he went to Visoko. And Abid and Biser [phoen], his wife, I took
11 them to Visoko and visited them once again there. That's why I was so
12 surprised by what he had said here, what he had signed here.
13 Q. Sir, Mrs. Prosecutor asked you about how your fellow policemen
14 viewed these events that were to the detriment of the non-Serbs. The
15 colleagues who worked with you, including Mr. Vesic, what was their view
16 of such developments?
17 A. Well, again, I can't give you a specific answer. I can only give
18 you an answer in general terms. Bearing in mind that the situation was
19 out of the ordinary, any military authority, or rather, a mixed military
20 and civilian authority or whatnot, if that is in place, then it is not
21 within the capabilities of the police to have the situation under their
22 control, rather it is the military and that was that. Of course, all the
23 attempts invested by the police to enforce a rule of law was impeded by
24 the fact that there was this mixed civilian and military authority in
25 place. However, as human beings, Mr. Vesic and all the other colleagues,
1 the managerial staff and ordinary policemen did, of course, condemn such
2 practices and there were certain responses to that as well. But I don't
3 know if I can explain anything further.
4 Q. Well, finally, the incident you referred to, the shooting that
5 happened in the month of August, do you know whose response was this?
6 Who reacted to these killings? Were they soldiers, policemen, or
7 somebody else?
8 A. Well, let me tell you this: As I answered the Prosecutor, I
9 don't know who exactly it was. I know for a fact that it was not
10 policemen. Presumably they were either soldiers or rogue paramilitary
11 structures. Personally, I truly don't know. I don't know that it had
12 ever been uncovered, really.
13 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, sir. I have no more
14 questions of you.
15 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Smajlovic, we thank you for coming to the
16 Tribunal to give your testimony. You are now released and we wish you a
17 safe journey back to your home. The usher would escort you out of the
18 courtroom because we are not rising immediately. We have certain
19 procedural matters with which to deal. Thank you again, sir.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.
21 [The witness withdrew]
22 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, while the witness is
23 being taken out of the courtroom, I would like officially to tender the
24 65 ter 8D2 into evidence.
25 JUDGE HALL: Admitted and marked.
1 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit 2D187, Your Honours. Thank you.
2 JUDGE HALL: Counsel have admitted that they have a number of
3 procedural matters with which to raise but before I call on counsel, I
4 would alert you to the fact when you see the next revision of the
5 calendar, we have decided to transfer the third session of Friday the
6 9th of December to the day before, so in other words, he would have an
7 extended sitting on Thursday and have two sessions on the Friday.
8 Yes, Ms. Korner.
9 MR. ZECEVIC: Sorry, perhaps I can deal with my matter first
10 because we would need to go in private session for that, if it pleases
11 the Court.
12 JUDGE HALL: We go into private session.
13 [Private session]
11 Pages 26074-26075 redacted. Private session.
14 [Open session]
15 THE REGISTRAR: We are in open session, Your Honours.
16 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, I sent an e-mail which I hope I
17 entitled properly as forewarned is forearmed to various members of the
18 Defence team and to your Legal Officer about the matters I wanted to
19 raise today. Your Honours, we are coming towards the end of the sittings
20 for this year and the end of the Defence case now. It will be completed
21 in the first week of sitting possibly with a trickle over into the second
22 week, so can I say there's some really urgent decisions that need to be
24 First of all, Your Honours, a number of outstanding rulings,
25 which are regrettably beginning to accumulate again. In particular,
1 there are three. First is from our point of view, the application we
2 made in July to re-open our case to add death certificates that we had
3 applied for as a result of the Defence objections to the proof-of-death
4 database, and which as we pointed out, have been coming in. Since we
5 originally filed that motion, I believe some 200 or so, possibly more,
6 have been supplied.
7 Now, therefore, we would -- we would have to first of all, send
8 them in for translation, I'll come back to translation which has already
9 been ordered and then apply to add those as well. But we don't want to
10 waste anybody's time if Your Honours are not going to allow us to re-open
11 our case to add these death certificates. So we are really asking that
12 we may have, as a matter of real urgency now, a ruling on whether we can
13 re-open our case to put in those death certificates. Because I say it
14 has --
15 JUDGE HALL: The -- as we would -- as the Chamber always is
16 constrained to say when counsel reminds us of what appears to them to be
17 our delinquency in terms of the progress of these rulings, they are all
18 they haven't been lost in our system but they are all in various stages
19 of the progress. But in terms of the proof of -- these death
20 certificates, that is and this may sound very cryptic to you, as I am
21 expressing it now, very simple but also very complicated, and the
22 complication, what you've just touched on underlies a part of the
23 complication that this is almost a moving application and to the extent
24 that we have not yet pronounced on it is connected with addressing that
1 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, I perfectly understand. I mean, it's
2 a principle of whether we are allowed to re-open our case for this
3 effect. I can I say straightaway, I do understand that all of
4 Your Honours are engaged in other matters which are obviously taking up
5 time. The trouble is that the Defence for Zupljanin will close its case
6 and there's a question of what happens after that and I want to come on
7 to that in a minute. Your Honour, can I deal with a question of
8 translations. Your Honours ordered us, by the close of the Defence case,
9 to get translated the underlying documents for the POD. We've put in a
10 total of 607 requests for the underlying documents have to be translated
11 with the dead-line to be the end of the Defence case, which as I say is
12 likely to be if not the first week that we sit in December, the second
13 week. We gave them, therefore, a dead-line of the 30th -- CLSS a
14 dead-line of the 30th of November months ago, I may say, we didn't give
15 an arbitrary one like that. Of the 607 requests, we've had 372 completed
16 and 235 remain outstanding and we are told by CLSS - we've sought an
17 update this morning - there's no prospect of them finalizing those
18 translations by the 30th of November. We'll wait and see what happens by
19 the, what is it, the 19th of December, I think it is. Or the 17th. But
20 that's the reality. We haven't filed them at the moment because we
21 didn't want to file endless little motions; we want to do the whole thing
22 together. That I am afraid is the state of play at present and we may
23 need to take further guidance from the Trial Chamber on what you would
24 like us to do.
25 Your Honours, rebuttal evidence for Stanisic. It's really linked
1 with one of the other matters which is trial scheduling in January.
2 Originally, as I raise before Your Honours, Rasic was due to be heard by
3 two of Your Honours from the 8th of January, we start or 7th. A
4 Scheduling Order came out, I understand, either today or yesterday,
5 moving Rasic to the end of January, I think it's the 23rd. So not the
6 end. So there's two weeks. And obviously it doesn't make it clear in
7 that decision whether it's Your Honours' intention to sit on this case or
8 the Haradinaj case in January.
9 JUDGE HALL: Let me put you at ease. We intend when we
10 reconvene -- when we take the adjournment at the winter recess to
11 reconvene on Tuesday the 10th in this case, Stanisic.
12 MS. KORNER: Right. Well, thank you very much, Your Honours.
13 Well, that's of assistance because as I said, I raise the question of the
14 rebuttal evidence. We really do need to have a ruling on that and also
15 when it would be scheduled. Whether if you rule that we make or one or
16 more of the witnesses we have applied, whether we should have one
17 available for what remains of the last week of December. You heard from
18 Mr. Zecevic that he objects to that. Because he wants to do
20 JUDGE HALL: Well, we are about, of course, to go into the what
21 is an hiatus in this case while Judge Delvoie and I sit in the other case
22 which we are sitting, but during that -- when we reconvene in this case
23 on the 5th of December, we fully expect, and for obvious reasons, I'm
24 reluctant to crawl out on a limb lest I have to undergo the embarrassment
25 of having to come back in, but the time we reconvene on the 5th of
1 December, you would have these matters. We would have rendered our
2 decision on these matters.
3 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, that's very, as I say, it was really
4 just to bring it all back to mind, as it were.
5 The next matter is this: We do intend at the moment to apply to
6 recall rebuttal evidence in respect of the evidence called by the
7 Zupljanin Defence and, therefore, it would be helpful to know when
8 Your Honours would expect us to file that application, and indeed when it
9 would be intended to start, if again Your Honours grant leave, that
10 evidence. Clearly it can't be before the Christmas break because we've
11 got to file. We still haven't got to the end of the Zupljanin evidence.
12 And one of the -- part of the request is whether we have made a decision
13 about certain witnesses that we would apply to call, not necessarily the
14 final because as I say, the case hasn't yet been completed. But whether
15 Your Honours would wish us to file, as it were, piecemeal, as we did with
16 the Stanisic Defence. Effectively, we filed one motion and then filed a
18 JUDGE HALL: Could you remind me as it to whether you had done it
19 in that manner because the Chamber had asked you to do so?
20 MS. KORNER: No, we did it because we couldn't get the seconds
21 witness that we applied to call in respect of Stanisic, we hadn't got the
22 statement at the time. I think what happened was we gave Mr. Zecevic an
23 undertaking that we wouldn't waited until the end of his case or
24 something like that, or end of September and we would file what we wanted
25 to call. But clearly with the Christmas break coming up, it may well be
1 that the best way of dealing with it is to file a motion about the
2 persons that we already know that we want to apply to call and wait to
3 see if there's anything else.
4 [Trial Chamber confers]
5 JUDGE HALL: Well, provided of course that there is no direct
6 prohibition in the rules against it, you would continue, you should
7 continue to proceed in the manner that you did with Stanisic.
8 MS. KORNER: In other words once we made a decision --
9 JUDGE HALL: Yes.
10 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, certainly we are prepared to do that.
11 Your Honours, then the next question again I'm just raising all
12 these matters for Your Honours to consider at this stage, is the scope of
13 rebuttal evidence. The Prosecution have -- in Stanisic case said these
14 are the matters which were raised by the Stanisic Defence, here is the
15 evidence we want to call. But we are calling witnesses, if we are
16 allowed, who clearly can give other evidence. Is Your Honour going to
17 give the Defence leave to go outside the rebuttal aspects because
18 obviously from scheduling point of view, that would mean they take
19 longer, and so that is a matter I say that I'm raising. I've given
20 advance notice for Your Honours to consider.
21 Your Honours, witnesses to be called by Your Honours, if any.
22 Your Honours, we would want to use the break and the time in between
23 other cases being scheduled to prepare for those. So if, I think all
24 sides would want to do that. If Your Honours do intend to call witnesses
25 yourselves, it would be very helpful if we could know that before the
1 Christmas break.
2 [Trial Chamber confers]
3 JUDGE HALL: That again is something that we have given thought
4 to and would seek to have that order out in due time to allow you to
5 prepare for it.
6 MS. KORNER: Yes.
7 Your Honours, finally, sorry to keep going back to this,
8 Your Honours made an order two days ago about the proofing note for the
9 next witness whose number I forget that the Defence are calling, but
10 Your Honours, Your Honours made an order that it should be Wednesday
11 before the Monday that he testifies. Your Honours, at the moment we have
12 eight lines, vague in the extreme, in a 65 ter summary of what this
13 witness is going to say. Your Honours saw from the last witness that
14 when he was actually seen by lawyers, a whole load of new evidence came
15 out which could well have occasioned the Prosecution having to say we
16 need to investigate what he says. As it turns out, his source of
17 information was so bad that it didn't require any further time to be
18 asked for. But, Your Honours, we would ask because otherwise it just
19 gives us two working days, effectively, to investigate that the proofing
20 note for the next witness who is coming on Monday the 5th of December,
21 should be given to us a full week in advance. That gives the Defence a
22 week to go and interview him and see what he is going to say.
23 JUDGE HALL: Of course, our decision about Wednesday was -- was a
24 decision taking everything into consideration and if to the extent that
25 it's necessary, I repeat that we expect the proofing notes be something
1 which are helpful to the Chamber and to the side opposite. It is of no
2 assistance to put in a pro forma, to quote Ms. Korner, eight-line
3 document which doesn't tell persons anything. And to the extent it's
4 necessary to repeat it, we repeat it.
5 MS. KORNER: No, Your Honour, sorry, I'm asking for two days
6 before the order because as I say, because we didn't know what he is
7 going to say, what areas he is going to cover, in depth, we -- and we may
8 want to when we get the full account of, as full as the Defence are
9 prepared to give us, what he says we may want to investigate as we would
10 have wanted to rather more fully with the last witness. I'm asking that
11 the order be varied from the Wednesday the 30th to Monday the 28th of
13 JUDGE HALL: I didn't misunderstand you, Ms. Korner, but as I
14 recall, although I confess that today I cannot remember the full
15 reasoning why we came up with Wednesday rather than Friday, which the
16 Prosecution had asked for, but the, I think it was Mr. Aleksic who was
17 explaining the -- between the time allowed to -- for investigations that
18 they could conduct where the witness resides and then the time that the
19 witness would be travelling to The Hague is how we came --
20 MS. KORNER: I am sorry, yes, I know, Your Honour, I know I heard
21 Mr. Aleksic say this. The point that I'm trying to make is this: We
22 asked for the Friday ten days in advance and Your Honours said the
23 following Wednesday. It really is not incumbent on the Defence not to
24 have taken proper statements in advance and they can and are, indeed, as
25 I understand it, intending to go to Banja Luka. So the witness coming
1 here has got nothing to do with it. All of this should have been done a
2 long time ago, but all right, given particularly the Zupljanin Defence
3 who have a number of investigators.
4 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Krgovic, do you have a difficulty with
5 accommodating the Prosecution in this regard by two days? Wednesday, of
6 course, is the absolute outer limit, but if, of course, you are in a
7 position do it before then.
8 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, may I first say that
9 I'm surprised that the Prosecution, eight months after having received a
10 summary on this witness which was given in keeping with the 65 ter rule
11 to give basic facts to which the witness would testify, and in view of
12 the enormous resources they have and numerous investigators they have, to
13 now say that they were unable to collect any sort of information. So
14 first of all, may I say that I'm utterly surprised to hear this.
15 On the one hand, it seems, well, not to say ridiculous, but it
16 does seem a bit odd and unrealistic. On the other hand, this coming
17 witness will speak of a specific period and about his specific duties and
18 conditions under which he worked. His testimony will not go beyond that.
19 And, of course, we will send proofing notes, if any, as soon as we have
20 them. I do not believe that he will be testifying beyond what is
21 contained in the 65 ter summary.
22 On the other hand, I would like to remind the Trial Chamber that
23 the situations as described by Ms. Korner were ones that we faced at
24 least on 30 occasions during their presentation of case where we would,
25 all at once, have information about members of the police who had never
1 featured in any of the earlier testimonies. We did our best in view of
2 the time that -- and the resources we had in our disposal to make do and
3 do the work over several days. So I think that what Ms. Korner said
4 about the fact that they were not able to prepare for witnesses does not
5 hold true. I think that the same practice was, therefore, Prosecution
6 witnesses in respect of some of whom we did not even receive proofing
8 As regards our schedule, we will be going out to Banja Luka on
9 Monday only. Because of my duties in the Gvero trial and Mr. Aleksic is
10 in the Pavkovic trial, we plan to make the trip in the week of 28. Only
11 thereafter will we be able to present proofing notes, if any. For this
12 reason, I don't think that the dead-line should be taken back.
13 MS. KORNER: [Overlapping speakers] Your Honours, that's not what
14 Mr. Krgovic told Mr. Aleksic. He said they were going out next week.
15 However, Mr. Krgovic keeps going back to this inaccurate description of
16 the witnesses that we called. Each and every one of the witnesses that
17 we called there were statements or interviews conducted with them. They
18 said occasionally from time to time a little that was not in there, but
19 not for 30 times that Mr. Krgovic refers to. The difference is that all
20 we have -- it's no good Mr. Krgovic saying we've got six lines. We
21 simply do not know the detail, at all, of what the witness is going to
22 say. And equally, as Mr. Krgovic well knows, I haven't waited eight
23 months to make these, I have made repeated applications, repeated
24 applications to Your Honours to order proper statements to be given to us
25 from the beginning. Your Honours, I'm sorry, I do ask that Your Honours
1 make the order. There's no reason Mr. Aleksic can't go to Banja Luka
2 next week, there's no reason by any the three investigators in Banja Luka
3 that are employed by the Zupljanin Defence cannot take a proper
5 JUDGE HALL: Thank you, Ms. Korner, we've heard you. We don't
6 propose to revise our order. Our order stands. Wednesday.
7 MS. KORNER: Well, Your Honours, I just think that I should say
8 that equality of arms does apply equally to the Prosecution. But I've
9 heard what Your Honours say.
10 JUDGE HALL: Are there any other matters which counsel wish to
12 MS. KORNER: Yes, there are. Your Honours may have noticed that
13 Mr. Dobbyn joined me in court at the last break. The reason for that is
14 this will be his last appearance before Your Honours because regrettably
15 from all our points of view, he is leaving the Tribunal to go to practice
16 elsewhere. So I thought it was worth recognising in open, public his
17 contribution to the Prosecution team.
18 JUDGE HALL: Thank you, Ms. Korner.
19 And the Chamber thanks Mr. Dobbyn for the assistance that he
20 would have provided. As I would have had occasion to say in the past,
21 although these are adversarial proceedings, they can only work if there
22 is co-operation between everyone concerned, between and among everyone
23 concerned. And we certainly thank Mr. Dobbyn for the assistance that he
24 has provided us over the years that he has been with the Chamber and we
25 wish him all the best in his future pursuits.
1 MR. DOBBYN: Your Honours, if I could just say briefly that it
2 has been a privilege for me to be working on this trial and to appear in
3 front of Your Honours and I'd like to thank Your Honours and my
4 colleagues in the OTP and my learned friends for Defence and everyone
5 else who has been working in an around the courtroom over the past three
6 years or so for helping make this a very special experience for me and
7 I'd like to wish you all the best, both for the rest of the trial and for
8 whatever comes after that.
9 JUDGE HALL: Thank you. So if there are no other matters we take
10 the adjournment in this case to reconvene on the Monday the 5th of
11 December. Thank you.
12 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.25 p.m.
13 to be reconvened on Monday, the 5th day of
14 December, 2011, at 9.00 a.m.