THE BOMBING OF THE DUBRAVA PRISON AND THE CONTEMPT TRIAL OF KOSTA BULATOVIC
www.slobodan-milosevic.org - May 6, 2005

Written by: Andy Wilcoxson

The trial of Slobodan Milosevic was cut to only one hour on Friday because of the contempt hearing against Kosta Bulatovic. Bulatovic was charged with contempt because he refused to participate in the trial while Milosevic was absent.

It is worth noting that Milosevic wanted to be in court, but was barred from attending by the tribunal's Registrar. The Registrar said his blood-pressure was too high, and would not let him attend court in spite of his wish to attend.

Article 21 the ICTY statute bans trial in absentia. These contempt proceedings only arise because the trial chamber violated the statute, and attempted to conduct the trial in the absence of Milosevic.

The trial chamber is prosecuting this case itself, which means that the trial chamber is simultaneously acting as the prosecutor and the judge. In most judicial systems prosecutorial and judicial functions are not permitted to mix, but this is the ICTY and I’m not surprised by anything they do anymore.

Bulatovic pleaded not guilty to the contempt charges. Bulatovic’s lawyer, Mr. Stephan Bourgan argued that the case should be dropped or tried by another chamber. His submissions were denied and he was directed to proceed with his case.

Bourgan argued that Bulatovic did not willfully interfere in the administration of justice. He argued that Bulatovic wanted to testify, but he could not because he was afraid that his testimony could damage Milosevic if he was not present to correct misinterpretations or ask important questions.

Two witnesses were called in Bulatovic’s defense. The first was Dragutin Milovanovic. Mr. Milovanovic is Bulatovic’s assistant. Bulatovic is in poor health and needs Mr. Milovanovic to help him get around.

Milovanovic was with Bulatovic the whole time outside of the trial, and he testified that Bulatovic really wanted to testify, but only if Milosevic was present. He said that Kosta Bulatovic’s only desire was to testify and to tell the truth.

Mr. Milovanovic testified that Bulatovic was overjoyed when the tribunal told him that Milosevic would be back in court and that he could complete his testimony. He said that Bulatovic crossed himself and said “thank God” when he learned that he could complete his testimony.

The next witness was President Milosevic’s legal advisor and associate, professor Branko Rakic. Rakic was asked by the tribunal to meet with Bulatovic in order to explain the legal situation and to see what Bulatovic’s position was.

Rakic testified that Bulatovic really wanted to testify, but would not testify because he was afraid that Milosevic’s case could be damaged if he testified in his absence.

The transcript of the trial proves that Milosevic’s presence was necessary to rehabilitate Bulatovic’s credibility after Mr. Nice’s cross-examination.

Mr. Nice had tried to paint Bulatovic as a rabid Serb nationalist because of some things he said on a BBC videotape about the Turkish emperor from 600 years ago.

It turned out that Bulatovic was merely reciting a famous Serbian poem about the battle of Kosovo, not making any speech of his own. If not for Milosevic’s re-examination that point would have stood against Bulatovic. Mr. Kay certainly would not have known about Serbian folklore.

The trial chamber will rule on Friday, May 13th whether Bulatovic is guilty of contempt or not.

After the contempt hearing, the main trial resumed for about an hour with the testimony of Col. Radovan Paponjak, the former head of the SUP in Pec.

Col. Paponjak continued to testify about the NATO attacks on the Dubrava prison in Istok. On May 19, 21, and 24, 1999 NATO warplanes bombed the prison.

According to Paponjak’s evidence, which includes video footage, the NATO attacks killed 93 prisoners and some members of the prison staff.

The indictment alleges that Serbian police killed prisoners there by executing them. Milosevic and Paponjak claim that NATO killed the prisoners – not the Serbian police.

The videotape clearly shows that the prison was bombed. Bomb fragments could be seen on the tape. Craters where the bombs exploded could be seen. Buildings at the prison were on fire. Corpses could be seen buried in the rubble.

There was videotape of the corpses after they had been pulled out of the prison. None of the corpses on the video appeared to have been shot, they were burned and dismembered, as if killed in a bomb blast, or crushed by falling debris.

Mr. Nice does not deny that NATO bombed the prison. Mr. Nice claims that the police executed prisoners in between the bombing raids.

Part of the documentation that Col. Paponjak came to court with were post-mortem photographs and finger prints of the prisoners killed in the bombing raids. Unfortunately, the police did not have time to check the fingerprints against the records before the war ended.

The prison was bombed in late May. The bombing ended in early June and the police had to leave. They simply did not have enough time to establish the identities of the victims. Therefore, it was not possible to compare the names of the victims to the list of names on the indictment.

Col. Paponjak will continue his testimony when the trial resumes next Monday.

# # #