Public Redacted Version of Prosecution Final Trial Brief
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
IT-03-69-T 48575 D48575 - D48137 01 March 2013 MB UNITED NATIONS International Tribunal for the Case No.: IT-03-69-T Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Serious Violations of Date: 28 February 2013 International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of the former Yugoslavia since 1991 IN TRIAL CHAMBER I Before: Judge Alphons Orie, Presiding Judge Michèle Picard Judge Elizabeth Gwaunza Registrar: Mr. John Hocking THE PROSECUTOR v. JOVICA STANIŠIĆ and FRANKO SIMATOVIĆ Public with Public Annexes A-E P U B L I C R E D A C T E D V E R S I O N O F P ROSECUTION F I N A L T R I A L B RIEF The Office of the Prosecutor: Mr. Dermot Groome Ms. Maxine Marcus Mr. Travis Farr Ms. Rachel Friedman Ms. Grace Harbour Mr. Adam Weber Mr. Kyle Wood Counsel for Jovica Stani{i}: Mr. Wayne Jordash Mr. Scott Martin Counsel for Franko Simatovi}: Mr. Mihajlo Bakrač Mr. Vladimir Petrovi} 48574 THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIBUNAL FOR THE FORMER YUGOSLAVIA IT-03-69-T THE PROSECUTOR v. JOVICA STANIŠIĆ and FRANKO SIMATOVIĆ Public with Public Annexes A-E P U B L I C R E D A C T E D V E R S I O N O F P ROSECUTION F I N A L T R I A L B RIEF On 14 December 2012 the Prosecution filed its Final Trial Brief and five annexes ∗ confidentially. The following is a public redacted copy of this filing. Pursuant to Rule 86 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence the Prosecution submits its Final Trial Brief with the following Annexes: i. Public Redacted Annex A: Index of Persons with a Significant Relationship to the State Security Service of Serbia. ii. Public Redacted Annex B: Payments Made by the Serbian State Security Service iii. Public Redacted Annex C: Index of the Prosecution Final Trial Brief iv. Public Annex D: Glossary of Terms and Abbreviations v. Public Annex E: Table of Authorities ∗ The Prosecution has redacted the following types of material: 1. References to protected witnesses upon whose evidence a particular assertion in the brief relies. 2. Passages of text containing quoted or paraphrased material from testimony and documents that are confidential. The Prosecution has not redacted assertions that are based on confidential evidence unless such is necessary to protect the interest and purpose underlying the confidential status. The Prosecution has not redacted public testimony that is formally confidential but for which public versions will be filed in compliance with orders of the Chamber (“PPCE” material). 3. In Annexes A and B the entries for individuals whose relationship with the SMUP-DB was only established with confidential evidence have been redacted in full. 4. Index entries for all Prosecution and Defence witnesses and exhibits. IT-03-69-T 2 28 February 2013 48573 Conventions Used in the Prosecution Final Trial Brief 1. At the heart of this case lies a complex and covert network of the Serbian State Security Service presided over by Jovica STANIŠIĆ and Franko SIMATOVIĆ. They used this network to secretly pour men, materiel and know-how into Croatia and BiH to execute crimes in furtherance of the criminal plan they shared with others. 2. To assist the reader in better understanding this, the Prosecution throughout this Brief identifies those who were either paid by or were under the command of the SMUP-DB by placing “DB” in subscript after the person’s name. For example Zoran RAIĆ(DB) will be indicated as RAIĆ(DB) when he is referred to in the brief. Annex A contains an index of all of these relevant persons and summarises their relationship to the SMUP-DB and their particular role in the events as well as cross references to where in the brief their role is discussed in greater detail. Annex B is a table which summarises the exhibits demonstrating payments to many of these individuals. This list is not exhaustive, but an enumeration of people who meet this criteria and are discussed in this Brief. 3. This brief employs a similar convention to identify the members of the Joint Criminal Enterprise alleged in the indictment. These individuals will be identified by placing a “JCE” in subscript after the person’s name. For example, Veljko KADIJEVIĆ will be indicated as KADIJEVIĆ(JCE). This designation will be dropped in passages that contain frequent references to the same person. 4. The phrase “the Accused” when used in this brief, refers to both Jovica STANIŠIĆ and Franko SIMATOVIĆ collectively. 5. The structure of footnotes is intended to provide the reader with information that may assist in understanding the evidence. The witness who gave particular evidence will appear at the beginning of a string cite in bold with a “:” to indicate which exhibits a particular witness addressed. Individual exhibits are separated by a “;” and a “.” indicates the end of exhibits related to a particular witness. This brief identifies whether evidence is public or confidential. In those cases in which the evidence consists of publicly available evidence placed under seal by the Chamber the Prosecution will indicate this in footnotes as public portions of confidential evidence (PPCE).1 To avoid repetition the Prosecution has made use of cross-references. These are indicated in the footnotes by underline. 1 The Trial Chamber by its Citation Decision granted the Prosecution permission to cite this category of evidence publicly. IT-03-69-T 3 28 February 2013 48572 6. Orders of the Chamber required the Prosecution to assign and refer to protected witnesses who gave live testimony by pseudonyms unique to this case. In many cases the Prosecution has adduced evidence provided by these witnesses in earlier trials in which they were assigned different pseudonyms. The Prosecution recalls its filing of 23 February 2010 which enumerates these witnesses and their several pseudonyms which may assist the Defence and the Chambers.2 To indicate that certain testimonial evidence was given in a prior trial without identifying the particular trial the Prosecution will identify such evidence using “PriorT.####”. 7. An SMUP-DB employee with the name Zoran RAIĆ features prominently in the evidence in this case. The correct spelling of his name, as reflected in his official identification card is “RAIĆ.”3 Some of the documentary evidence in the case has RAIĆ’s name spelled phonetically and incorrectly as “RAJIĆ.” The transcript of the trial also uses this incorrect spelling, an error the Prosecution did not appreciate before it received a copy of Zoran RAIĆ’s official identification card. Whenever the Prosecution refers to RAIĆ in this brief it is referring to person recorded as RAJIĆ in the transcript and documentary evidence. Words (including Annex A)4: 112,989 Respectfully submitted, ______________________ Dermot Groome Senior Trial Attorney Dated this 28th day of February, 2013 At The Hague, The Netherlands 2 Witnesses: C-015, C-1118, B1108 and B-1048, who testified prior to this date are referred to by their previous pseudonyms. 3 See, P2978, p.4 (public). 4 The word count includes all of the text in the main body of the brief as well as in Annex A. Practice Direction IT/184.2 (16 September 2005) directs what text should be included and what text should be excluded from a word count. Pursuant to the practice direction, the text in Annexes B-E have not been included in the word count of the brief. IT-03-69-T 4 28 February 2013 48571 S U M M A R Y O F C ONTENTS Introduction........................................................................................................................................17 Summary of the Facts ................................................................................................................................17 Summary of the Charges ...........................................................................................................................20 Section 1: The Accused Were Part of a JCE to Forcibly and Permanently Remove the Majority of Non-Serbs from Parts of Croatia and BiH..................................................................................23 Overview......................................................................................................................................................23 Implementation of the JCE in SAO-Krajina ...........................................................................................25 Implementation of the JCE in SAO-SBWS..............................................................................................35 Continued Implementation of the JCE after the RSK was formed.......................................................48 Implementation of the JCE in BiH ...........................................................................................................51 Membership of the Joint Criminal Enterprise ........................................................................................71 The JCE Was a Single Criminal Enterprise Spanning Several Years and Several Regions...............80 Section 2: The Accused and the Special Units of the Serbian State Security Service .................82 Jovica STANIŠIĆ........................................................................................................................................82 Franko SIMATOVIĆ aka FRENKI .........................................................................................................84 The Special Units of the SMUP-DB ..........................................................................................................87 Section 3: The Charged Crimes Were Committed in Furtherance of the Common Criminal Purpose..............................................................................................................................................169