This post is also available in: Bosnian
Presenting his findings and opinion, court expert Ramiz Dugalic said that a detention unit, which was guarded by military policemen, was situated in the former Viktor Bubanj military barracks in 1992. However, he said that, according to the laws in effect, military policemen could not perform arrests of civilians, which were mentioned in the indictment against Ramiz Avdovic and Iulian-Nicolae Vintila.
The purpose of the detention unit was to hold people, who co-operated with the aggressor. The detention unit in Viktor Bubanj barracks began functioning in June 1992, Dugalic said.
The court expert further said that, according to the laws, military policemen could not arrest the civilian population.
According to the law, they could not do it. It could only be done by members of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the court expert explained.
Also, he said that, according to some documents, Ramiz Avdovic was Security Commander.
When asked by the Defence whether he had come across a document about Avdovics appointment as Commander of Guards, the court expert answered negatively, but he said that terms security and guards meant the same thing.
Avdovic and Iulian-Nicolae Vintila are charged with crimes committed in Viktor Bubanj and the Central Prison in Sarajevo. They are charged with having participated in the establishment and maintenance of a system for abuse of Serb civilians.
The indictment alleges that Avdovic was Commander of Guards on the fifth floor of the District Prison in Sarajevo and former Viktor Bubanj military barracks, while Vintila was a cook and guard in the former barracks.
Dugalic said that, on the basis of witnesses statements, he concluded that detainees were unlawfully and inadequately interrogated in Viktor Bubanj and that mistreatment happened.
He told the Court that a detention unit existed on the fifth floor of the Central Prison as well, but he had not found documents on the basis of which he could determine which military police units guarded that facility.
When asked by the Defence whether he had found anything related to Avdovics role in the Central Prison, the expert responded negatively.
Vlado Adamovic, Defence attorney of the second indictee, objected to the inclusion of the experts findings in the case file, claiming that it contained his private opinion.
The trial is due to continue on February 21.
