Home
IS IT LOGICAL THAT SAO KRAJINA IS PART OF SERBIA?
The defense expert denied that a document with Franko Simatovic’s signature was authentic because the letterhead said ‘SAO Krajina – Republic of Serbia’. This was ‘not logical’, the expert said. The prosecutor then showed a decision of the Krajina authorities from May 1991 annexing Krajina to Serbia. The witness agreed that the letterhead ‘is indeed logical’
Prosecutor Marcus completed her cross-examination of Milan Milosevic, professor at the Police Academy in Belgrade, in ten minutes. Franko Simatovic’s defense took over the witness for re-examination. Milosevic was asked by Simatovic’s defense to write an expert report, Study of the Police Work and the State Security System. In his evidence, the witness repeatedly emphasized that his report was based solely on the laws, other regulations and various police documents he had inspected. The expert did not draw any conclusions about the facts.
However, during his testimony, the witness made comments about a number of documents that did pertain to the facts. The witness expressed his doubts about the authenticity of an order with Franko Simatovic’s signature of 16 June 1991. The document, an order for the weapons to be pulled out from the Golubic training center near Knin, bears the letterhead of ‘Republic of Serbia – SAO Krajina’. According to the witness, this makes the document ‘illogical and improbable’. The fact that the text is ‘illiterate’, as he said, made him doubt its authenticity even more.
As Milosevic’s evidence drew to a close, the prosecutor asked a couple of additional questions to probe the issue some more. She showed Milosevic a decision of the SAO Krajina leadership of 17 May 1991, annexing SAO Krajina to Serbia, following a referendum. When he saw the document, Professor Milosevic admitted it ‘is logical’ that the letterhead of a document drafted a month later stated that SAO Krajina was part of the Republic of Serbia. Milosevic did insist, however, that Serbia never recognized this act of ‘self-annexation’.
The witness claimed that the Anti-Terrorist Unit, also known as the Red Berets, was formed in 1993 and it didn’t have a commander until 1996. This prompted presiding judge Orie to ask Milosevic whether ‘it is logical’ for such a unit to have no commander for three whole years. It ‘isn’t illogical or strange’, Milosevic replied: the deputy commander was in charge all the time. The witness thinks that no one was appointed commander of the Red Berets because ‘nobody met the requirements for the appointment’.
The prosecution contends that Franko Simatovic was the commander of the unit and the defense denies the allegation. According to the prosecution, Franko Simatovic, as the commander of the unit, and the chief of the Serbian State Security Service, Jovica Stanisic, are responsible for crimes against non-Serbs in Croatia and BH.
After Simatovic’s defense expert completed his evidence Dejan Plahuta a/k/a Svabo, former VJ soldier, was called to the witness stand. In his brief appearance in court, Plahuta described the attack of the BH Army on the area of Skelani and Bajina Basta in 1993. Plahuta will continue his evidence on Monday.
Today, the Tribunal unsealed the decision granting Jovica Stanisic provisional leave: he has been allowed to spend a part of the trial break in April in Serbia. The judges have already granted Simatovic’s motion for provisional release.
Linked Reports
- Case : Stanisic & Simatovic
- 2012-05-09 THE ORIGINS OF ‘RED BERETS’
- 2012-05-08 SECRET POLICE DID NOT INTERFERE IN POLITICS
- 2012-05-03 STATE SECURITY PERSONNEL HAD FICTIONAL ASSIGNMENTS IN KOSOVO WHILE THEY SERVED IN KRAJINA AND BH
- 2012-05-15 PROSECUTION: SIMATOVIC INVOLVED IN SECURITY SERVICE ACTIONS IN EASTERN BOSNIA
- 2012-05-22 FRANKO SIMATOVIC ‘BURSTING WITH ENERGY’
- 2012-05-23 WITNESS: JOVICA STANISIC ‘PROTECTED THE SERVICE FROM POLITICS’