Evidence about Indictee’s Function

Most of those pieces of evidence refer to the indictees’ functions, data about prisoners and the way of working of the military police in Sarajevo.

Prosecutor Dzevad Muratbegovic presented several documents with which, as he said, he wanted to prove that Avdovic was Commander of Security in the “Viktor Bubanj” military barracks. The Defence teams objected to the relevance and authenticity of most of those pieces of evidence.

The Prosecutor presented a document, which, as he said, showed that Avdovic received a salary for April and May 1992.

“I arrived in Sarajevo on April 27. How could I have received salary for April?” Avdovic asked.

Ramiz Avdovic and Iulian-Nicolae Vintila are on trial for 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 Prosecution of Bosnia and Herzegovina, BiH, alleges that detained civilians were subjected to suffering and torture, while being forced to perform hard labour. According to the charges, 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.

The Prosecutor presented certificates issued by the Military Prison related to objects confiscated from prisoners. Indictee Vintila’s Defence attorney Vlado Adamovic said that the Prosecution had not determined when and where the objects were confiscated.

“If a witness says that 100,000 Marks was confiscated from him and if that is true, a policeman could have confiscated the money somewhere else, not here,” Adamovic said.

The Prosecution presented a report on endangering Sarajevo citizens by unlawful work of military police. With this piece of evidence the Prosecution tried to prove the unlawful detention of persons in “Viktor Bubanj”. Defence attorney Adamovic said that this and other similar reports should not be introduced prior to examining the person who had made them.

“A report is never considered evidence, but an indication of evidence… Such reports cannot be introduced, must not be introduced. Invite the people, who made them,” Adamovic said.

The trial is due to continue on March 14.