Gotovina et al Judgement Volume I - ICTY

39211send clear operative reports to Červenko twice a day and state, inter alia, the problemsthat were emerging in the course of the operations. Based on the evidence of Repinć,Sačić, and Janić, the Trial Chamber finds that these reports were sent on Markač’sbehalf by the Internal Control Department, which operated in Gračac. When Markačwas not present in Gračac, these reports could nevertheless be sent on his behalf withhis name printed at the bottom of the report. On such instances he would be informed ofthe report on the following day by either Sačić or Janić. The Trial Chamber further findsthat Markač’s reports were in most instances identical in content to those of Sačić,which were based on the written or oral reports of the commanders of the unitsoperating on the ground.196. Based on the evidence of Rajčić, the Trial Chamber finds that pursuant to anorder of the Chief of the HV Main Staff passed on from Gotovina to Rajčić, on 3August 1995 the latter detached for operational purposes assets of the HV artillerygroup TS-5 to the Special Police. The detached artillery consisted of three 130-millimetre cannons from the Rovanksa area, three 122-millimetre Howitzers and one122-millimetre BM-21 launcher. On this basis, and considering Markač’s position asOperation Commander for the Special Police forces, the Trial Chamber finds that theseartillery assets were under Markač’s command and control.197. Based on the evidence of Repinć and Janić, the Trial Chamber finds that duringOperation Storm the Collective Special Police Forces did not have a clearly definedgeographical zone of responsibility, but operated between the areas of responsibility ofthe Gospić and Split MDs. The forces of the Gospić MD operated on the Special Policeforces’ left flank and the forces of the Split MD on its right.198. Finally, the Trial Chamber finds that, if Markač received information concerningcrimes allegedly committed by members of the Special Police, he was duty-bound toforward the information to the criminal police for further investigation. Based on theevidence of Janić and Galović, the Trial Chamber further finds that crimes committedby members of the Special Police fell under the jurisdiction of State Prosecutors. Basedon the evidence of Janić, the Trial Chamber finds that the filing of criminal charges didnot exclude the initiation of parallel disciplinary proceedings against the same SpecialPolice member. Based on the evidence of Cvrk and on P609, the Trial Chamber findsthat Markač could request the suspension of a Special Police member from his duty.104Case No.: IT-06-90-T 15 April 2011 `