Evidence on Defendants’ Involvement in War in Prijedor

With the first group of evidence, the prosecution tried to prove there was a broad and systematic attack on the territory of Prijedor.

Among the evidence was the Instruction on Organising the Activities of Serb people During the State of Emergency in Prijedor, related to taking over and forming civilian and military authorities. Also, the prosecution entered into evidence conclusions on assessment of the situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina about the way to arm Serb people in March 1992.

Also, physical evidence include minutiae from the session of the Serb Democratic Party from October, 1991, about the mobilisation and forming of separate bodies of authority, as well as details which show the finalisation of the taking over of the power and its forming.

The defence teams objected to relevancy of these pieces of evidence, especially evidence related to the party session.

The indictment specifies that on the morning of July 23, 1992, Zoran Babic and Velemir Djuric, together with persons known only to them, under orders from Dragomir Soldat, also known as Cica, led men out of houses in Carakovo and took them to the local mosque, where they executed them.

The indictment alleges that some of the men who survived the shooting died when Djuric and Babic set the mosque on fire afterwards.

In order to prove the defendants’ status in 1992, the prosecution entered registers from the interrogation of the defendants during investigation carried out by the prosecution in December 2012.

They also entered lists of army conscripts from October 1992, which include the name of defendant Dragomir Soldat, as well as the list of the reserve make-up of the police in Tukovi, which includes Velemir Djuric, and the list of members of reserve police in Prijedor, which includes defendant Zoran Babic.

Entered was the written orders by the police station in Prijedor, which includes data on participation of the defendants in the war.The defence of Velemir Djuric did not object, while the defence of defendant Soldat objected to the relevance of evidence on the status of defendant from 1992, believing it was not covered by the indictment.

The trial will resume on September 23, when an expert witness will be called to the stand.