31.10.2014 Views

30 May 2013 - ICTY

30 May 2013 - ICTY

30 May 2013 - ICTY

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

49473<br />

1834. The Simatović Defence submits that Arkan was armed by the JNA from JNA depots,<br />

which General Simović enabled. 3675 The Simatović Defence argues that when Arkan<br />

established and equipped the SDG in Erdut, he closely cooperated with Radmilo Bogdanović<br />

and Tomislav Simović, and that the Serbian DB, especially Simatović, played no role in<br />

supplying the SDG with weapons, equipment, and provisions. 3676<br />

1835. The Trial Chamber recalls its findings that between August and November 1991, the<br />

SDG, JNA, and TO took over villages in the county of Vukovar-Srijem, namely Bršadin,<br />

Đeletovci, Nijemci, and Lužac in chapters 3.2.6 and 6.4.2. The Trial Chamber further recalls<br />

its findings that the SDG, JNA, and Šešelj’s men took over Vukovar on 18 November 1991 in<br />

chapter 3.2.6 and 6.4.2. Moreover, the Trial Chamber recalls its findings that numerous<br />

crimes were committed by the SDG in the area of the SAO SBWS, specifically at the Erdut<br />

training centre, in 1991 and 1992 in chapter 3.2.<br />

1836. Based on the evidence reviewed above and in chapters 3.2.6 and 6.4.2, the Trial<br />

Chamber finds that the SDG cooperated with the JNA, SNB, Šešelj’s men, and the TO in the<br />

SAO SBWS in 1991 and 1992. With regard to the supply of weapons and ammunition, the<br />

Trial Chamber finds that the SDG was supplied by the JNA/MoD, the Serbian MUP, and the<br />

TO. Businesses in the SAO SBWS and in Vojvodina (Serbia) also provided the SDG with<br />

supplies and the JNA further supplied fuel.<br />

1837. The Prosecution submits that TO commander Badža was paid by the Serbian MUP<br />

while he was in the SAO SBWS and that his later links with Stanišić show that he was<br />

subordinated to him. 3677 The Prosecution makes a similar argument about Ilija Kojić, Badža’s<br />

predecessor. 3678 The Trial Chamber is not convinced that any later associations provide for the<br />

only reasonable conclusion that such associations already existed during the SAO SBWS<br />

operations in 1991. Evidence about any links between Badža and Stanišić during the SAO<br />

SBWS operations in 1991 comes from Borislav Bogunović, the SAO SBWS Minister of<br />

Interior between <strong>May</strong> and December 1991, 3679 who testified that Hadžić told him that Stanišić<br />

was the link between Milošević and Badža. 3680 The Trial Chamber is unable to come to this<br />

same conclusion based on this evidence which lacks sufficient foundation. Evidence about<br />

3675 Simatović Defence Final Trial Brief, 14 December 2012, para. 473.<br />

3676 Simatović Defence Final Trial Brief, 14 December 2012, paras 526, 529.<br />

3677 Prosecution Final Trial Brief, 14 December 2012, para. 162; T. 20195, 20221.<br />

3678 Prosecution Final Trial Brief, 14 December 2012, para. 864.<br />

3679 P553 (Borislav Bogunović, witness statement, 6 June 2003), paras 6, 8, 73; Borislav Bogunović, T. 6005.<br />

3680 P554 (Borislav Bogunović, witness statement, 8 February 2007), para. 18; Borislav Bogunović, T. 6061-<br />

6062.<br />

Case No. IT-03-69-T 645<br />

<strong>30</strong> <strong>May</strong> <strong>2013</strong>

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!