IT-08-91-T 18146 D18146 - D17672 12 July 2012 SF THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIBUNAL FOR THE FORMER YUGOSLAVIA Case No. IT-08-91-T IN TRIAL CHAMBER 11 Before: Judge Burton Hall, Presiding Judge Guy Delvoie Judge Frederik Harhoff Registrar: Mr. John Hocking Date filed: 12 July 2012 PROSECUTOR v. Mico STANISIC Stojan ZUPLJANIN PUBLIC PROSECUTION'S NOTICE OF FILING A PUBLIC REDACTED VERSION OF THE PROSECUTION'S FINAL TRIAL BRIEF The Office of the Prosecutor: J oanna Korner Thomas Hannis Counsel for the Accused Slobodan Zecevic and Slobodan Cvijetic for Mico Stanisic Dragan Krgovic and Aleksandar Aleksic for Stojan Zupljanin IT-08-91-T 18145 THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIBUNAL FOR THE FORMER YUGOSLAVIA Case No. IT-08-91-T THE PROSECUTOR v. Mico STANISIC & Stojan ZUPLJANIN PUBLIC PROSECUTION'S NOTICE OF FILING A PUBLIC REDACTED VERSION OF THE PROSECUTION'S FINAL TRIAL BRIEF 1. The Prosecution hereby files a public red acted version of the Prosecution's Final Trial Brief,l attached at Annex A, pursuant to the Trial Chamber's 4 June 2012 "Order on filing of public red acted versions on final trial briefs,,2. 2. The Prosecution has red acted information that identifies protected witnesses,3 information that was brought into the court in private or closed session and information that reveals the content of exhibits filed under seal. 3. The corrections to the Final Trial Brief contained in the recently filed Corrigendum4 have been included in the public red acted version of the Prosecution's Final Trial Brief. Word Count: 330 Tom Hannis Senior Trial Attorney Dated this 12th day of July 2012 At The Hague, The Netherlands 1 Prosecutor v. Stanific and Zupljanin, Case No. IT-08-91-T, Prosecutor's Final Trial Brief, 14 May 2012, confidential. 2 Prosecutor v. Stanific and Zupljanin, Case No. IT-08-91-T, Order on filing of public redacted versions on final trial briefs, submitted by Trial Chamber 11,4 June 2012. 3 The Prosecutor v. Prlic et al., Case No. IT-04-74-T, Decision on Prosecution Motion for Clarification Concerning Preparation of Public Version of Final Trial Briefs, 25-Mar-20 11, public, pp.3-4. 4 Prosecutor v. Stanific and Zupljanin, Case No. IT-08-91-T, Prosecution's Corrigendum to the Prosecution's Final Trial Brief, lih July 2012, confidential. 1 Case No. IT-08-91-T 12 July 2012 IT-08-91-T 18144 ANNEXA to PROSECUTION'S NOTICE OF FILING A PUBLIC REDACTED VERSION OF THE PROSECUTION'S FINAL TRIAL BRIEF IT-08-91-T 18143 1. OVERVIEW 5 A. INJRODUCTION 5 B. STANIsIC'S INTERVIEW 7 C. INSIDER WnNEssEs 8 11. THE JOINT CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE 9 A. EMERGENCE AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE COMMON PLAN 11 1. Regionalisation 11 2. Creation of Parallel Structures (Bosnian Serb Laws and Institutions) 13 3. Climate of Fear (including propaganda) 15 4. Variant AJB 16 5. The Strategic Goals 16 13. BACKGROUND TO Hili CREATION 01,' THE RSMUP 18 C. MEMBERSIIIP OF TIlE JOINT CRIMINAL ENTERPRlSE 21 D. IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMON PLAN 23 1. Introduction 23 (a) Pattern of Attacks and Crimes 23 (i) Takeovers in each municipality 25 (ii) The Killing and Forcible Transfer of Non-Serbs 25 (b) Crimes that were the Natural and Forseeable Consequence of the Implementation of the Common Plan 28 2. Implementation of the Common plan at the Municipal Level 30 (0~ ~ (b) Bijeljina 34 (c) Banja Luka 39 i. Manjaca Camp 43 (d) Zvornik 47 (e) Gaeko 53 (t) Yisegrad 56 (g) Bosanski Samac 62 (h) Sanski Most 67 (i) Vlasenica 71 (j) Vogosca 80 (k) Prijedor (and Skender Vaknt) 85 (I) Brcko 97 (m) Doboj 102 (n) [)onji Vakur 112 (0) Kljuc 115 (p) Ilijas 122 (q) Teslic 127 (r) Kotor Yaros 134 (s) Bileca 140 (t) Uncharged Municipalities 144 3. Implementation of the Common plan at the Regional Level 149 (a) Autonomous Region of Krajina 149 (b) Northern Bosnia and CSB Doboj implemented the common plan 155 (c) Other Regions 157 (i) CSB Sarajevo 157 (ii) CSB Trebinje 159 4. Implementation of the Common Plan at the Repuhlie I .. evel 160 (a) Political Leadership 160 (h) Military 164 Case IT-08-9J-T 14 May 2012 IT-08-91-T 18142 (i) Arming and Mobilising the Serb Population 164 (ii) Creation ofthe VRS 166 (iii) Mladic 170 Ill. THE ACCUSED'S CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY UNDER .JOINT CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE LIABILITY 172 A. INJRODUCTION 172 H. ST AN ISle CONTRIBUTED SIGNIFICANT!.Y TO THE COMMON PI.AN 174 1. STANISIC contributed to the creation of the plan 174 2. ST AN IS le participated in the formation of Serh hodies and forces that implemented the forcible takeovers of the municipalities 175 3. STANISIC participated in the development of Serb policy at the leadership level in order to secure the takeovers of the municipalities and forcihle rcmoval of the non-Serh population 179 4. ST AN IS le communicated and coordinated with Serh political and military leaders 181 5. STANISIC commanded RSMUP members acting in coordination with CSs, VRS and other Serb forces and assisted in coordinating joint VRS-RSMUP operations 184 6. ST AN IS le facilitatcd the estahlishment and opcration of dctcntion facilities where non- Serb detainees were mistTeated and killed 187 (a) sTANIi'aC was awarc of, and supported, the role of the police in establishing and operating detention Pacilities at which non-Serbs were held 187 (b) STANISIC aided in the Government's "cover-up" ofthe detention facilities 191 7. STANISIC failed to take adequate measures to protect the non-Serb population and cnsurc that crimes committed against them were investigated and prosecuted 194 (a) STANISIC had the duty to act 195 (b) STAN ISIC had the ability to act 196 (c) STANTSTC failed to protect the non-Serb population 200 (i) STANTSTC focused his resources on combating looting of RS property 202 (ii) STANISIC also focused his resources on documenting and investigating war crimes against Serbs 204 (iii) STANISIC's operation against the Yellow Wasps 207 C. ZUPLJANIN CONTRlllUW!) SIGNll'1CANTLY TO THE COMMON PLAN 211 I. ZUPIJANIN was closely connected with the HSI. 212 2. ZUPLJANIN participated in the formation of Serb bodies and forces to implement takeovers 212 3. Zupljanin participatcd in the forming, financing, supplying, supporting and commanding of special police units in the ARK and SAO Northern I30snia 214 (i) CSI3 I3anja Luka Special Police Detachment 214 4. Suhsequent CS H Special Police Units 222 (i) S.lB Special Police Units 223 5. Assisted in coordination of joint VRS-RSMUP Operations 225 6. ZUPIJANIN facilitated, estahlished and oversaw detention facilities in the ARK 228 (a) Through his approving silence to information received from his subordinates, 7:UPT ..TANTN encouraged police participation in the detention facilities 230 (b) 7:UPUANTN Encouraged Police Participation in the Detention Facilities by Visiting a Number of these Pacilities 234 (c) ZUPL.TANIN's Active Support of the Detention Pacilities 235 (d) ZUPL.TANLN's Role in the Cover-Up of ARK Detention Facilities After Their International Exposure 241 7. ZUPLJANIN Failed to Take Adequate Measmes to Protect the Non-Serb Population and Ensme that Crimes Committed Against Them Were Investigated and Prosecuted 245 IV. THE ACCUSED'S CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY UNDER OTHER I<'ORMS OF ARTICLE 7(1) LIABILITY 250 A. THE ACCUSE!) A]J)E!) AN!) AllElTE!) THE CRIMES CHARGE!) IN THE INJ)]CI'MENT 250 2 Case JT-08-91-T 14 May 2012 IT-08-91-T 18141 1. STANISIC aided and abetted the crimes in the Indictment 251 (a) Though his acts and omissions, STANISIC provided practical assistance, encouragement or moral support that had a substantial effect on the crimes in the Indictment 251 (b) STANISIC was aware of the probability that the principal perpetrators would commit the crimes in the Indictment, and that his acts and omissions would assist the principal perpetrators in committing the crimes in the Indictment 252 2, ZUPLJANIN aided and abetted the crimes in the Indictment 252 (a) Though his acts and omissions, ZUPLJANIN provided practical assistance, encouragement or moral support that had a substantial effect on the crimes in the Indictment 252 (h) 7:UPT ,JANTN was aware or the prohahility that the principal perpetrators would prohahly commit the crimes in the Indictment, and that his acts and omissions would assist the principal perpetrators in committing the crimes in the Indictment 253 V. STANISIC AND ZUPLJANIN ARE CULPABLE UNDER SUPERIOR RESPONSIDILITY 253 A. THE ACCUSED HAD EFFECTIVE CONTROl. OVER THEIR SUBORDINATES 255 1. The accused exercised administrative authority over a highly-organised and hierarchical police force 257 2. The Accused exercised a high degree of control over police information 260 3. The Accused had the authority to undertake criminal and disciplinary procedures against their suhordinates 264 4. The Accused Had Resources Available to Impose Their Authority on Their Subordinates269 5. The CSs did not diminish the Accused's effective control 270 6. The VRS did not diminish the Accused's effective control 273 B. TIlE ACCUSED KNEW OR HAIl REASON TO KNOW THAT THEIR SUBORDINATES WERE COMMITTING CRIMES CHARGED IN THE INDICTMENT 277 1. The reporting system within the RSMUP provided the Accused with timely information concerning the criminal activities of subordinates 278 2. Knowledge of Suhordinates' Participation in the Unlawful Detention of the Non-Serh Population and the Mistreatment of Non-Serb Detainees 280 3. Knowledge of Suhordinates' Participation in Unlawful Attacks on Non-Serh Villages 285 4. Knowledge of Subordinates' Participation in Expulsions of Non-Serbs 286 5. Knowledge of Subordinates' Other Serious Crimes against the Non-Serb Population 287 C. THE ACCUSED FAIT ,ED TO TAKE NECESSARY AND REASONABT,E MEAS1JRES TO PREVENT OR PUNISH POLICE CRIMES 290 I.