Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 9303

1 Wednesday, 13 February 2008

2 [Open session]

3 [The accused entered court]

4 [The witness entered court]

5 --- Upon commencing at 9.04 a.m.

6 JUDGE PARKER: Good morning.

7 And good morning to you, sir. The affirmation you made still

8 applies.

9 Mr. Saxon.


11 [Witness answered through interpreter]

12 MR. SAXON: Thank you, Your Honour.

13 Cross-examination by Mr. Saxon: [Continued]

14 Q. Mr. Stojanovski, during your direct examination at page 9155 of

15 the transcript, in response to some questions which my colleague

16 Ms. Residovic you told the Chamber that it would most probably be a lie to

17 suggest that on Saturday, the 11th of August, 2001,

18 Mr. Ljupco Bliznakovski had attended a meeting at the defence command for

19 the city of Skopje and then had ordered the chief of OVR Cair to reinforce

20 the check-points in OVR Cair.

21 Do you recall that testimony?

22 A. Yes, I remember that Mr. Ljupco Bliznakovski was in Radusa on that

23 day.

24 Q. And you also explained that you and Mr. Bliznakovski usually knew

25 what the other one was working on, right?

Page 9304

1 A. Yes, usually.

2 Q. Tell me, are you familiar with all of the details of

3 Mr. Bliznakovski's activities from the 10th to the 12th of August, 2001?

4 A. I cannot speak about all details, but I do know of some.

5 Q. Of some. All right. And so, for example, you don't know

6 whether-- let me rephrase my question.

7 Do you know who Mr. Bliznakovski spoke with on the telephone on

8 the morning of Saturday, 11th August 2001?

9 A. I don't know who he spoke with. I know that he left for Radusa.

10 Q. So it's also possible, isn't it, that Mr. Bliznakovski performed

11 some activities on that morning, Saturday, the 11th, without telling about

12 it, isn't it?

13 A. It is possible.

14 Q. Tell me, how long does it take to drive from Skopje to Radusa?

15 About half an hour?

16 A. If there are no military conditions, yes, about. Under such

17 circumstances, then perhaps more.

18 Q. Okay. And if there are, as you put it, military conditions, how

19 long approximately would that drive have been?

20 A. Radusa is about 25 kilometres away. In that period of time, the

21 first ten kilometres were more or less secure, I believe; and the rest,

22 according to my experience, the movement would have been very slow.

23 Q. So would it be fair to say that during those times of military

24 conditions, it could have taken an hour to drive from Skopje to Radusa?

25 A. If you don't look after your security, yes; but if you do, then at

Page 9305

1 least four hours, I believe.

2 Q. Four hours to drive 25 kilometres. Is that what you're saying?

3 A. Yes. When you're driving on a terrain that could be mined or

4 grounds which is susceptible to ambush.

5 Q. Even when you're trying to reach your colleagues who are

6 reportedly encircled by Albanian terrorists. You will take four hours to

7 travel those 25 kilometres to assist them?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. You testified that Mr. Bliznakovski, together with a special unit,

10 went to Radusa to help the colleagues who were surrounded by terrorists at

11 that time, and you testified that Mr. Bliznakovski tried to extract them.

12 Do you recall that testimony?

13 A. Yes, I remember that testimony and that they were not just

14 surrounded but that there was heavy fighting going on.

15 Q. And you explained that the situation in Radusa, this heavy

16 fighting, was happening in the course of the whole day and was only by

17 night-fall that the situation became calmer, and that is when

18 Mr. Bliznakovski came back to the premises of the SVR.

19 Do you recall that?

20 A. Yes, late in the night.

21 Q. And at page 9161 of the transcript you said that at -- I'm going

22 to rephrase my question.

23 It's possible, isn't it, that Mr. Bliznakovski, prior to going

24 from Skopje to Radusa on the 11th of August, also had a meeting in the

25 office of army General Sokol Mitrevski, isn't it?

Page 9306

1 A. I'm not aware of this fact.

2 Q. I didn't ask you whether you were aware of it. I asked you

3 whether it was possible. Could you answer my question?

4 A. I think it is not possible.

5 Q. And why isn't it possible? Why wasn't it possible?

6 MR. SAXON: Your Honour, my colleague is on her feet.

7 JUDGE PARKER: Ms. Residovic.

8 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, my learned friend's

9 questions, I believe are being posed for the third time and they all deal

10 with possibilities. I don't know what sort of an answer the witness can

11 give, given that he provided clear answers to the previous questions.

12 As to ask anything from the domain of possibility, I don't believe

13 it is a proper question.

14 JUDGE PARKER: I think in the context of the question something

15 quite well directed, not repetitive and reasonable.

16 Carry on, Mr. Saxon.


18 Q. Let me repeat my question, Mr. Stojanovski.

19 It's possible, isn't it, that Mr. Bliznakovski, prior to going

20 from Skopje to Radusa on the 11th of August, also had a meeting in the

21 office of army general Sokol Mitrevski, isn't it?

22 A. As are many other things which are possible.

23 Q. Okay. You also testified that it's -- it's -- you testified that

24 it's not true that Ljupco Bliznakovski would have ordered the head of OVR

25 Cair to increase the number of persons at police check-points for two

Page 9307

1 reasons.

2 Number one you said that Mr. Bliznakovski could not issue orders

3 to the head of the OVR; and, number two, you said that check-points were

4 under the competence of the OVRs.

5 Do you recall that?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. And you also said: "So I don't see a reason why someone would say

8 this."

9 Why someone would make such an assertion. Now, you recall there

10 was this mine explosion on the 10th of August, 2001, in the territory of

11 OVR Cair at a place called Ljubotenski Bacila, right?

12 A. Yes, I remember.

13 Q. Eight Macedonian soldiers were killed and others were wounded. Is

14 that right?

15 A. Unfortunately, yes.

16 Q. And members of the Ministry of Interior had strong suspicions at

17 that time that the perpetrators of this act were members of the NLA.

18 Isn't that right?

19 A. It is correct that there were information that the perpetrators of

20 this act moved towards Ljuboten.

21 Q. That's not my question, Mr. Stojanovski. I want you to answer the

22 question that I asked you.

23 The question is: Members of the Ministry of Interior had strong

24 suspicions at that time that the persons who planted the mine that killed

25 eight Macedonian soldiers were members of the NLA, right?

Page 9308

1 A. Yes, we had such information available.

2 Q. And so at that time the security situation in OVR Cair was very

3 complex, wasn't it?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Wouldn't that be a pretty good reason to suggest or to order that

6 the numbers of police officers at check-points be increased?

7 A. This is the obligation of the head of the OVR Cair.

8 Q. That's interesting, but you did not answer my question again.

9 I'll repeat my question. Wouldn't that be a pretty good reason to

10 suggest or to order that the numbers of police officers at check-points be

11 increased?

12 A. The head of OVR Cair could have thought in this manner, or he

13 could have been thinking that the number of police officers engaged at the

14 check-points was sufficient.

15 Q. Wouldn't that be a pretty good reason for someone like

16 Mr. Bliznakovski, someone working in the headquarters of SVR Skopje to

17 suggest or to order that the number of police officers at check-points be

18 increased?

19 A. There could be different opinions, but I will say once again, this

20 would be the work of the head of the OVR Cair.

21 Q. I'd like to go on to another topic, please.

22 At page 9159 of the transcript, in response to a question from

23 Ms. Residovic, you were asked about a telephone call that the head of OVR

24 Cair, Mr. Krstevski, made to you on the 12th of August, 2001; that was

25 Sunday. And you explained that Mr. Krstevski had called you because the

Page 9309

1 duty centre had told Mr. Krstevski that Minister Boskoski was going to

2 come to OVR Cair. And Mr. Krstevski asked you about how this official

3 report is given. And you told the Trial Chamber:

4 "This was rather funny, because, as civilian structures, we don't

5 deal with this issue. Reporting is not part of the tasks which we have or

6 the way we act. I suggested to him that, according to my view, it is

7 quite sufficient that he present a brief information about the situation

8 in the area."

9 Do you recall that testimony?

10 A. Yes, I remember.

11 Q. Help us understand, please. Why do you say that reporting is not

12 part of the tasks of members of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, or the

13 way that members of the Ministry of Internal Affairs act?

14 A. The term "to report," is not a mere report.

15 Q. I'm sorry, can you explain your answer a little bit more, please.

16 What do you mean by "the term 'to report,' is not a mere report"?

17 A. This report is a military term and it's usually used in military

18 units. The manner is which a report is given. According to my

19 recollection, when I was in the army about 30 years ago, it presumes a

20 procedure, and it could not be compared with briefing which, as you said,

21 is one of the obligations of the MOI employees.

22 Q. So I'm trying to understand now your testimony. Your testimony is

23 that it's not the obligation or the tasks of MOI employees to report about

24 information, but it is the obligation of MOI employees to brief their

25 superiors about information. Is that your testimony? Is that -- do I

Page 9310

1 have that clear?

2 A. The term "report," denotes a specific manner of coming on report

3 and briefing; while report in a civilian structure does not denote these

4 special military procedures or rules.

5 Q. Are you aware, Mr. Stojanovski, of an obligatory instruction of

6 the Ministry of Internal Affairs that says all authorised officials are

7 obliged to submit operative information to their superiors?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. And all authorised officials are supposed to follow this

10 instruction, right?

11 A. Of course.

12 Q. And when authorised officials submit operative information to

13 their superiors, that's one way in which they report to their superiors,

14 isn't it?

15 A. This is one way. But I don't see how you are linking this with

16 coming to report. I don't know whether the interpretation is adequate.

17 Q. Well, I'm simply trying to understand your testimony,

18 Mr. Stojanovski.

19 MR. SAXON: Perhaps we can show the witness what is Exhibit P178,

20 00178, and this would be at tab 10 of the Prosecution's binder.

21 Q. Maybe before we look at this -- at this document, Mr. Stojanovski,

22 just so I'm sure that I understand your testimony, are you suggesting that

23 when a high-ranking member of the Ministry of Internal Affairs comes to,

24 for example, the territory of the an OVR, it is not the practice of the

25 head of the OVR or other members of the OVR to report to that official

Page 9311

1 about events going on?

2 A. He informs them about the current situation and the forces

3 engaged, but he does not go on report. I don't know how else I can

4 explain this term "report." This is not the same.

5 Q. And you are referring to a specific military procedure. Is that

6 right?

7 JUDGE PARKER: Just a minute, please, Ms. Residovic.

8 Yes, Mr. Saxon.


10 Q. My question was: When you say "he does not go on report," you're

11 referring to a specific military procedure. Isn't that correct?

12 A. The term "reporting," denotes a military procedure.

13 Q. All right.

14 JUDGE PARKER: Ms. Residovic.

15 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I wanted to point

16 out an interpretation matter. It seems that the terms in English and

17 Macedonian are not fully equal. In Macedonian can you see that it says

18 operational information, whereas in English we have operational report, or

19 operative report. It is possible that this creates a degree of confusion

20 with the Prosecutor. I'm not trying to interfere with his questions or

21 the witness's answers. I just wanted to point out this may not be the

22 best example because the word "informatica" has been translated as

23 "report."

24 MR. SAXON: I'm grateful to Ms. Residovic for clarifying that

25 because obviously I don't have her linguistic skills. However, and I will

Page 9312

1 accept, I will readily accept her correction to the English translation.

2 But if you allow me, I would just like to continue to ask a question or

3 two about this document.

4 JUDGE PARKER: Please do so, Mr. Saxon.


6 Q. If you take a look at this document, Mr. Stojanovski, It's dated

7 5th of August, 2001, and it says: operative information.

8 Do you see that?

9 A. Yes, I see it.

10 Q. And the subject is: More inhabitants are moving out. It is

11 submitted by apparently a member of the Ministry of Internal Affairs named

12 Bobi Hristovski. And Mr. Hristovski explains in the first paragraph how,

13 on the 5th of August, 2001, he sees a large number of persons leaving

14 Ljuboten village and going towards Skopje and -- do you see that? A large

15 number of women and children?

16 A. Yes. The person you mentioned submitted it, an employee at the

17 police station Cair and OVR Cair and this is information containing

18 information which you just spoke about.

19 Q. And if you look at paragraph 2, Officer Hristovski says, "I shall

20 continue to gather useful information and inform the service promptly."

21 Do you see that?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. So it's true, isn't it, that it is part of the task, the tasks of

24 members of the Ministry of Internal Affairs to gather useful information

25 on the territory or place where they are working and inform their

Page 9313

1 superiors about it, right?

2 A. I never said this was an issue, outstanding issue.

3 Q. I'm asking you the question, and I'd like to you answer my

4 question, just yes or no. Can you answer my question yes or no?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. Okay.

7 If you could turn, please, to what is tab 13 in your binder.

8 MR. SAXON: Your Honours, this would be Exhibit P00159, please.

9 Q. This is an Official Note number 1185. It's dated the 11th of

10 August, 2001. And what this Official Note says that an authorised officer

11 named Goran Tenovski, who was at the Ljubanci check-point informed his

12 colleagues i in particular an officer named Venco Stanoevski that on the

13 morning of the 11th of August, the army of the Republic of Macedonia

14 opened fire with infantry weapons in the direction of Ljuboten village.

15 Do you see that?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. You mentioned that after the events in Ljuboten occurred, a number

18 of people came to speak to you trying to clarify what had happened in

19 Ljuboten. You mentioned -- I believe you mentioned Sofija Galeva, I

20 believe you mentioned Ms. Katica Jovanovska. You may have mentioned some

21 others. Tell me, please, did you tell Mrs. Galeva or Ms. Jovanovska or

22 anyone else looking into the Ljuboten case to speak with this officer

23 Goran Tenovski about what he had observed that weekend?

24 A. I had no authorisation to involve myself in the work of the

25 commission. I was charged with supplying the commission with all the

Page 9314

1 material that they would request from SVR Cair and to put it at their

2 disposal.

3 Q. You've told us about your 25 years as a police officer, many of

4 those 25 years working in operative matters in the crime police, we've

5 heard testimony in this case that people came to you for assistance in

6 finding more information about what had happened in Ljuboten on the 12th

7 of August.

8 Now, are you really going to tell the Chamber today that you had

9 no authorisation to involve yourself in the work of the commission and so

10 for that reason you would not have given this simple advice, such as,

11 Speak to this authorised official or speak to that authorised official?

12 A. If you recall what I said previously on the 13th, I believe, it

13 was, in the afternoon, I was informed by Mr. Efremov that a commission was

14 set up by Mr. Boskoski for looking into the events related to the village

15 of Ljuboten. The task which I was charged with was to serve the

16 commission as a liaison person and to assist it to carry out their

17 requests towards SVR Skopje.

18 In these discussions, of course sometimes I pointed them to OVR

19 Cair so as they could carry out their tasks. That is to say, if I was not

20 able to give them the required information or material from the head

21 office of SVR Skopje.

22 Q. All right. So I'll ask my question again.

23 Did you tell these persons who came to you from the commission or

24 commissions, since you were the liaison person, did you suggest that they

25 speak to, for example, the Officer Goran Tenovski, who is mentioned in

Page 9315

1 this Official Note, or his colleague Venco Stanoevski about what's with

2 going on around the village of Ljuboten on the 10th to 12th August, did

3 you suggest that?

4 A. I haven't suggested that they talk to Goran Tenovski, but I

5 believe that I referred them to the OVR Cair.

6 Q. And by referring these persons to the OVR Cair, for example, did

7 you suggest that they speak with police officers who had been manning

8 check-points at OVR Cair on the 12th of August, 2001?

9 A. I did not suggest it. They had their own task and they probably

10 knew best how to perform that task.

11 Q. And in this case, just so that the record is clear, when you're

12 using the pronoun "they," you're referring to the members of these

13 commissions who came to speak to you, right?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. Okay. And just by the way, this Official Note here that we're

16 looking at, this would be another example of how members of the Ministry

17 of Interior were informing their superiors about events going on in the

18 area where they worked, right?

19 A. Yes. The usual formats are operative information and Official

20 Note.

21 Q. Okay.

22 MR. SAXON: If we could provide the witness with the second binder

23 that was provided by Ms. Residovic during her direct examination. And if

24 we could turn to what is Exhibit P105, P00105 and that exhibit is at tab

25 88 of that second binder.

Page 9316

1 Q. Do you have -- this -- and, again, I hope my colleague will

2 collect the translation if there's any problems with it. This document is

3 entitled in English, operative information. I -- it is dated the 13th of

4 August, 2001. It's operative information number 1207, submitted by a

5 colleague named Dragan Surlov.

6 And, Mr. Stojanovski, the subject is telephone message, verbal

7 order transmitted. Do you see that?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. It says here: "On the 13th of August 2001 at 2230 hours, duty

10 officers Zlate from," I believe, it is the duty operation centre at SVR

11 Skopje "called the Mirkovci police station and stated that there was an

12 order from the police general not to retaliate to provocations and not to

13 misuse the radio connection (only for active misuse) and for all police to

14 be notified of the order. I informed the check-points and patrols as well

15 as receiver Borce Gjorgjievski."

16 Do you see that?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. Excuse me, I'm just looking for the right place in my questions.

19 It would be fair to say, then, doesn't it, that the

20 term "Operative Information" would also -- would extend, for example, to

21 the description of orders given, the reception of orders and the

22 dissemination of orders. Would that be fair?

23 A. No. Much more appropriate term, in accordance with our work, is

24 the term "Official Note."

25 Q. Okay. In this case --

Page 9317

1 MR. SAXON: I think Ms. Residovic has a comment to make, Your

2 Honour.

3 JUDGE PARKER: Ms. Residovic.

4 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, no comment. The

5 witness offered the approximate translation of the Macedonian original

6 literally translated it is Official Note. However, in English, we say

7 something rather different, operative information.

8 MR. SAXON: All right. Thank you for that clarification. I was

9 not aware of that.

10 Q. But, in any event, Mr. Stojanovski, this is the kind of

11 information that is often reported, or informed, transmitted by members of

12 the Ministry of Internal Affairs, right?

13 A. In principle, operative information is produced when the officer,

14 police officer or the operations officer, has received some information.

15 An Official Note is produced in cases when certain actions were undertaken

16 and a report is produced when certain actions have been undertaken upon a

17 request of the superior officer.

18 Q. All right. But as I -- as I asked, no matter what we call this

19 document, we can call it an Official Note, the point is, this information

20 needed to be communicated to the OVR Cair, Mirkovci police station, and it

21 was communicated, right?

22 A. That information was communicated, but I see that in the upper

23 right-hand corner there is the date 24 of August, 2001.

24 Q. Yes. And that someone signed off on that when he received it.

25 A. Yes. So it means that probably that was the date when this

Page 9318

1 document was received by the OVR Cair.

2 Q. Could it also mean that that was the date when this document was

3 filed away in the analytical section of OVR Cair?

4 A. No. The date is 27th of August, 2001. Obviously there is a

5 difference of three days, so after someone received it and only three days

6 later the document was filed away.

7 Q. So if this document was written on the 13th of August in 2001, but

8 apparently not received until a couple of weeks or ten day, more than

9 that, later in August -- I think I will simply move on.

10 MR. SAXON: And, Your Honours, just for your convenience for more

11 examples of -- to use the witness's term, "information" being submitted to

12 part of the Ministry of Interior, you can see tabs 15 to 21 in the

13 Prosecution's binder. These are exhibits P98, P23, under seal, P00108,

14 P00109, P00145, P00259, P00124, and there are also a number of similar

15 examples in the second binder provided by the Defence during direct

16 examination such as exhibit P00160, P0012, P00150, Exhibit 1D145, exhibit

17 114 under seal, exhibit P00111, and a number of others that are located in

18 that binder.

19 Q. Moving on to another topic, Mr. Stojanovski, during your direct

20 examination, you agreed with a proposition put to you by Ms. Residovic.

21 This is at page 9185 of the transcript. That only the investigative judge

22 is able to request data from the forensic medicine institute.

23 Do you remember that?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. So if a witness testified in this courtroom that he or she spoke

Page 9319

1 to the director of the forensic medicine institute and received

2 information about the persons who died at Ljuboten, that would be a lie?

3 A. They could discuss it. However, the official document, if I may

4 say so, is in the ownership of the investigating judge.

5 Q. All right. So now if I understand your testimony, you're saying

6 that an official document from the forensic institute would be provided to

7 the investigative judge. However, it is certainly possible for members of

8 the Forensic Institute to give verbal information to members of the

9 Ministry of Internal Affairs, right?

10 A. Yes. Although they shouldn't give information about their

11 findings.

12 Q. And when you say "they," who is they?

13 A. To the employees in the Forensic Institute.

14 Q. And if members of the Ministry of Interior are working on an

15 important case and they go speak to employees of the Forensic Institute,

16 why shouldn't the employees of the Forensic Institute provide verbal

17 information about their findings?

18 A. In my experience, this should not be proper.

19 Q. Can you cite to any law that prohibits such conversation?

20 A. I couldn't.

21 MR. SAXON: And, Your Honours, just for your convenience, the

22 testimony that I referred to a bit earlier is at page 8732 and pages 8800

23 to 8801 of the transcript.

24 Q. Mr. Stojanovski, at page 9189 of the transcript, Ms. Residovic

25 asked you: "After the burial of bodies has occurred, what is required to

Page 9320

1 answer the basic questions as to how and as a result of what the person

2 died?"

3 And you responded: "The only way to ascertain those things that

4 you mentioned was through exhumation and post-mortem."

5 Do you recall that testimony?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. Wouldn't speaking to witnesses also permit you to ascertain how a

8 person died?

9 A. In this specific case, there were no witnesses.

10 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction, we had no witnesses.


12 Q. And tell us what specific actions you took, Mr. Stojanovski, to

13 look for witnesses?

14 A. The case was in the competence of the OVR Cair, and I believe that

15 I mentioned before that I established contact with representatives of the

16 international organisations. In trying to receive certain information

17 regarding the events.

18 Q. So just so -- if I understand what you're -- the implication of

19 what you just said, are you -- you're suggesting that representatives of

20 the -- of international organisations prevented you from taking actions to

21 find witnesses to the events in Ljuboten?

22 A. We were not permitted to enter the village of Ljuboten.

23 Q. And what other -- what, if any, efforts did you make to speak to

24 persons, members of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, who had participated

25 in the events in Ljuboten on the 12th of August, 2001?

Page 9321

1 A. If you are asking me about me personally, I did not make any

2 efforts to clarify the case. The OVR Cair was working on clarifying the

3 case.

4 Q. Related to that, at page 9190 of the transcript, Ms. Residovic

5 showed you Exhibit 1D47, which was -- which is at tab 146 of the Defence

6 binders. And that was a request from the investigative judge to the

7 Ministry of Internal Affairs for more information related to possible

8 exhumations in Ljuboten village.

9 Do you remember that document?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. And then on the next page of the transcript, Ms. Residovic showed

12 you Exhibit 1D190, which is at tab 146 of the Defence binder, which was

13 the response of OVR Cair to the investigative judge. And you observed

14 that OVR Cair did not fully succeed in providing all of the information

15 requested by the judge. And you explained to the Chamber that the OVR

16 failed to obtain all of the information "primarily because the population

17 of Ljuboten village did not want to cooperate with the police at all."

18 Do you remember that testimony?

19 A. Yes.

20 MR. SAXON: If we can show the witness what is Exhibit 1D189.

21 This is at tab 99 in what is actually the second Prosecution binder. And,

22 Your Honour, I have good news and bad news. The bad new, I suppose, is

23 that I have another binder of documents to provide you; but the good news

24 is that I'm only going to refer to them. So please do not despair. So we

25 made the binders, and so we decided to distribute them.

Page 9322

1 Ms. Usher, the binder would be actually over here, I think.

2 Q. If you could turn to what is tab 99 in this binder, you should

3 find Exhibit 1D189.

4 And I am praying that the title of this document has been

5 correctly translated into English. I see my colleagues are nodding their

6 heads, so I can relax a little bit.

7 Mr. Stojanovski, you'll see that this is an Official Note, number

8 736. It's dated the 15th of November, 2001, submitted by a man named

9 Dejan Blazevski. Do you see that?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. At OVR Cair. And the subject is interview with individual Selim

12 from the village of Ljuboten.

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. And Mr. Blazevski tells us that: "On the 15th of November, 2001,

15 an interview was conducted in OVR Cair with the individual Selim from

16 Ljuboten in connection with the events of 12 August 2001 in the village,

17 during which eight individuals died as a result of fighting between the

18 security forces of the Republic of Macedonia and the terrorist groups

19 stationed in the village."

20 Are you following with me?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. And then it says: "Selim informed us that the following

23 individuals died on 12 August 2001."

24 And then we see a list of eight names, Rami Jusufi, his parents

25 names, Bajrami Sulejman, Bajrami Xhelal, Bajrami Jashari. Brothers and

Page 9323

1 cousins, Bajrami Kadri, Dalip Murati; Qaili Atulla, who died in a hospital

2 on 14 August 2001; and a six-year-old boy, and the name Isni Ali is given.

3 The identity of the persons who died at Ljuboten village on 12 August

4 2001, that's pretty important information, isn't it.

5 A. Yes, this is an important information that was produced three

6 months after the events at Ljuboten village, so a person came to OVR Cair

7 and wanted to talk to some of -- to one of the colleagues. But also there

8 is something illogical in this information so it should give rise to

9 suspicion, since in the last paragraph it is written that the burial was

10 performed on the same day, so that would mean on the 12th of August, which

11 is not correct.

12 Q. All right.

13 A. So the agenda of that person might be suspicious.

14 Q. Okay. And having said that, though, this is evidence of some

15 cooperation on very important matters from residents of Ljuboten, isn't

16 it, three months after the event. Isn't it?

17 A. The quality of cooperation is doubtful.

18 Q. And what do you base that opinion on?

19 A. Since that citizen claims that the burial had been performed on

20 the same date. According to our information the burial was carried out a

21 bit later.

22 Q. Do you have any information that the person, the eight persons

23 named in this document and identified is incorrect? Persons identified as

24 people who died at Ljuboten on the 12th of August.

25 A. I can't remember offhand. I need to look at the documents, at the

Page 9324

1 official documents from the identification.

2 Q. I will move on. I'd like you to please turn your mind to the

3 events of 12 August, that Sunday, 2001.

4 At page 9164 of the transcript, you said that on 12 August 2001 --

5 actually, I'm going to stop for a moment. I'd like to go back to that

6 document that is still in front of you, if I can.

7 If I were to tell you that there had been a lot of testimony in

8 this courtroom about persons who died in the village of Ljuboten on the

9 12th of August, and that the persons name in this document have been

10 identified by witnesses in this case, would that lay any suspicions that

11 you have about that information in this document?

12 A. I did not dispute the names. I disputed the last paragraph in the

13 information.

14 Q. All right. Okay. So just so the record is clear, the person who

15 provided this information gave some very important, accurate information

16 to members of Ministry of Interior in November 2001, right?

17 A. Useful information.

18 Q. Okay. If you can turn your mind to Sunday, the 12th of August,

19 2001, please, at page 9164 of the transcript you said that on 12 August

20 2001 you did not go to OVR Cair because: "There was no need for my

21 presence there."

22 Do you recall that?

23 A. I know that I was not in OVR Cair on the 12th of August.

24 Q. And that's because there was no need for your presence there,

25 right?

Page 9325

1 A. There was no reason.

2 Q. Why do you say there was no reason for you to go to OVR Cair on

3 the 12th of August?

4 A. Connected to my work tasks and competencies there was no reason

5 for me to be at OVR Cair on the 12th of August.

6 Q. You told the Chamber at page 9161 of the transcript that OVR Cair

7 was not, due to its limited capacities, able to control the situation

8 around Ljuboten that day. That's what you had told the Chamber in

9 response to a question from Ms. Residovic.

10 Tell us, please, were you in your office in Skopje that day?

11 A. Either in my office or in the operative headquarters.

12 Q. Tell us, please, what was going on that day in downtown Skopje

13 that was more urgent than the events in OVR Cair?

14 A. My work tasks did not require of me to be present in OVR Cair.

15 Q. Was there any shooting going on in the city of Skopje that day?

16 A. On the 12th, in the centre of the city?

17 Q. Yes.

18 A. I don't recall such event.

19 Q. Any crowds of civilians in the centre of the city of Skopje that

20 day, threatening to attack other civilians?

21 A. This happened constantly.

22 Q. I'm asking about the 12th of August.

23 A. Every day there were civilians, citizens, who protested in front

24 of the assembly of the Republic of Macedonia.

25 Q. And every day, were there ethnic Macedonian civilians, threatening

Page 9326

1 to attack ethnic Albanian citizens in Skopje?

2 A. Not every day.

3 Q. According to your knowledge, did the Macedonian security forces

4 attack a group of ethnic Albanian terrorists in the village of Ljuboten on

5 12th of August?

6 A. Yes. I think I previously said that on 12th August police and

7 army points were attacked at which point the army returned fire.

8 Q. And if I can just go back to my previous question, you said that

9 not every day there were ethnic Macedonian civilians threatening to attack

10 ethnic Albanian citizens in Skopje. How about on that Sunday, the 12th of

11 August? Do you recall whether there was a crowd of ethnic Macedonian

12 civilians in downtown -- in the centre of Skopje threatening to attack

13 ethnic Albanian civilians that day?

14 A. In the centre of Skopje? I don't remember anything of this kind.

15 This was happening in OVR Cair.

16 Q. All right. And you explained that -- you said that on the 12th of

17 August police and army points were attacked at which point the army

18 returned fire.

19 To your knowledge, then, was the purpose of the operation at

20 Ljuboten to confront and neutralize terrorists? Was that the purpose of

21 the Ljuboten operation?

22 A. I don't know the purpose. I know the information which I received

23 from OVR Cair.

24 Q. Well, what did the information that you received from OVR Cair

25 tell you about why members of the security forces of the Republic of

Page 9327

1 Macedonia entered Ljuboten on the 12th of August?

2 A. It was not conveyed to me why this -- the army entered Ljuboten on

3 the 12th of August. It was pointed out to me, it was conveyed to me, that

4 the police and army points were attacked, that the security forces

5 returned fire, and that the army undertook an operation of a kind.

6 Q. Mr. Stojanovski, we have had several witnesses come into this

7 courtroom, take the oath that have you taken, sit in that witness chair

8 and told the Trial Chamber that the members of the army of Macedonia did

9 not enter the village of Ljuboten that day, and we have some documentary

10 evidence to that effect as well. Are you suggesting that each of these

11 witnesses came into this courtroom and lied?

12 A. I'm not suggesting anything. I am just telling you what I was

13 conveyed by OVR Cair.

14 Q. Do you think that the members of the security forces who enter the

15 Ljuboten on the 12th of August were heroes, patriots?

16 A. I don't know how to -- and what to answer to this question.

17 Q. I'd like your opinion. I'd like your belief.

18 A. I believe that there were people who were carrying out their duty,

19 but as for whether there were events there which could be qualified as

20 heroic or patriotic, this I don't know.

21 Q. All right. So you believe that the members of the security forces

22 who entered Ljuboten village on the 12th of August were carrying out their

23 duty, right?

24 A. Yes. This is much closer to my view.

25 Q. And their duty, in your belief, was to protect the territory and

Page 9328

1 the people of the Republic of Macedonia, right?

2 A. Probably to establish the sovereignty.

3 Q. Okay. Because the sovereignty of Macedonia was under great

4 threat at that time, wasn't it?

5 A. Yes. The terrorists were attempting by way of force to put down

6 the constitutional order of the Republic of Macedonia.

7 Q. Mr. Stojanovski, the persons who died and were -- or were injured

8 at Ljuboten, how would you describe them? Were they terrorists?

9 A. It is possible. But this may -- need not be.

10 Q. Okay. If they were terrorists, these persons were terrorists, do

11 you feel that effectively they got what they deserved?

12 A. I don't believe that one can put it that way. It would be very

13 rough to put it in this way.

14 Q. How would you put it?

15 A. Probably they were aware that taking up arms and attacking of the

16 police and the army would entail certain risks. When someone is going

17 into a fight, one has to be aware of the fact that one might die.

18 When we're talking about who deserves what, this is usually a

19 matter of the courts.

20 Q. And since the members of the security forces who went into

21 Ljuboten village were risking their lives to do their duties, to protect

22 the sovereignty of Macedonia, the --

23 MR. SAXON: Ms. Residovic is on her feet.

24 JUDGE PARKER: Carry on, Mr. Saxon.


Page 9329

1 Q. The idea of investigating the actions of the security forces at

2 Ljuboten was actually pretty offensive to you, wasn't it?

3 A. Why would this be offensive? I don't see.

4 Q. Because your colleagues in the security forces -- the suggestion

5 was that -- or the suggestion would be that rather than doing their duty,

6 risking their lives on that day, the suggestion would be that your

7 colleagues in the security forces had actually done something very wrong.

8 Didn't you find that suggestion difficult and offensive?

9 A. I cannot understand you. Could you rephrase the question.

10 Q. Well, to you as a career member of the Ministry of Internal

11 Affairs, did you hear about allegations from groups like Human Rights

12 Watch that members of the security forces had committed abuses in Ljuboten

13 village?

14 A. Yes, there were such allegations.

15 Q. And didn't you find those allegations to be pretty offensive and

16 an insult to the honour -- members of the police and members of the army?

17 A. They were an attack on the honour and dignity of the Ministry of

18 Interior.

19 Q. And --

20 A. Because, I am convinced, that my colleagues carried out their work

21 tasks and obligations in a professional manner. And because these

22 accusations were checked, we checked these allegations, and I believe they

23 were unfounded. From that point of view, I can see them as offensive.

24 Q. And, Mr. Stojanovski, many members of the Ministry of Internal

25 Affairs felt the same way, didn't they, that these allegations were quite

Page 9330

1 offensive?

2 A. Someone was expressing lack of trust in the police. We were put

3 in a position to prove the opposite, to be proving the opposite, which

4 ultimately is fine. We have to be transparent in the work we do.

5 Q. But then the answer to my question would be yes, right?

6 A. I don't know whether things can be seen as black and white.

7 Q. I'm not asking you to paint anything as black and white.

8 Simply my question was this: Many members of the Ministry of

9 Internal Affairs also felt that these allegations against the conduct of

10 security forces in the village of Ljuboten were offensive, right?

11 A. I don't know how many members of the ministry thought. I can tell

12 you what I was thinking.

13 Q. And since the honour -- since the honour and the reputation of the

14 police of Macedonia was at stake, the purpose of the investigation into

15 the events at Ljuboten was to clear the honour and reputation of the

16 police, wasn't it?

17 A. Wrong. If you would like me to explain the purpose was to

18 establish the truth.

19 Q. And is that why you so energetically provided assistance to

20 members of the commission who were investigating the events in Ljuboten?

21 And I use the word energetically in a very ironic sense.

22 A. I take note of your irony. I don't know by what right I have

23 earned this. Thank you.

24 MR. SAXON: Your Honour, I'm about to move on to another topic.

25 JUDGE PARKER: Well, before you do, Ms. Residovic had some matters

Page 9331

1 she wished to raise, but it was at a fairly significant [Realtime

2 transcript read in error "criminal"] point of cross-examination so I

3 signalled to her to wait.

4 Ms. Residovic.

5 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, you direct the

6 proceedings, and I believe your decision was ultimately correct. However

7 the entire series of questions posed by my learned friend was unclear to

8 me regarding their relevancy. I wanted to ask why so many questions were

9 being put to the witness which go to various opinions. However, if you

10 were able to follow the thread of the questions being put, I have no

11 objections.

12 JUDGE PARKER: I didn't have the difficulty that you are

13 mentioning at all, Ms. Residovic and it seemed to me that we were at a

14 significant point in the cross-examination and it was important to allow

15 it to reach its natural conclusion.

16 Could I just mention that in line 29: 1, I had intended to say

17 critical point rather than criminal point as the transcript would have me

18 record it.

19 Thank you.

20 Now, Mr. Saxon you were signalling that you're about to move on.

21 MR. SAXON: That's correct, Your Honour.

22 JUDGE PARKER: We will then have the break and resume at 11.00.

23 --- Recess taken at 10.25 a.m.

24 --- On resuming at 11.01 a.m.

25 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, Mr. Saxon.

Page 9332


2 Q. Mr. Stojanovski, at page 9072 of the transcript - this was very

3 early on in your direct examination - you were asked about an interview

4 that you had with members of the Office of the Prosecutor, some years ago,

5 and you were asked about the statement that -- a statement that was

6 drafted at that time but ultimately not signed by you.

7 And you explained to the Judges: "I thought there were

8 misunderstandings with regards to the format in which the statement was to

9 be taken. I believe that what I am saying needs to be entered while the

10 investigators thought that they were to rephrase it, to state there what

11 they understood from what I was saying."

12 And you also explained that, further on: "There were

13 misunderstandings related to certain facts, and I can't really remember

14 that, after which they threatened me in the sense that they could indict

15 me for certain issues and their conduct went outside of the boundaries of

16 propriety. And this is why I decided to leave the room where the

17 interview was conducted."

18 Do you recall that testimony?

19 A. Yes.

20 MR. SAXON: If we could show the witness what is tab 1 of the

21 first Prosecution binder, please. And this is it Prosecution 65 ter 1150.

22 And perhaps if we could show the witness, first -- the first page in

23 English, please.

24 Q. Mr. Stojanovski, we see here what is usually referred to as the

25 cover page of a witness statement. And you see your name on this draft

Page 9333

1 statement, don't you?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. And are the details correct, as far as you can tell?

4 A. Yes, as far as I can tell.

5 Q. So we see there was one person interviewing you,

6 Mr. Matti Raatikainen and an interpreter. We see that, right?

7 A. There were two of them.

8 Q. All right. When you say "there were two of them," what do you

9 mean by that?

10 A. Two investigators and a translator.

11 Q. All right. And now perhaps if you could turn to -- we have a

12 Macedonian translation of this document. If you could turn to that,

13 please. And if you could direct your attention, please, to paragraph 5 of

14 the Macedonian version, so I think it would be on -- it would be on the

15 next page that you're looking at now.

16 And paragraph 5 tells this: "During the time I was the deputy of

17 the criminal police of Skopje," that is the first half of 2000 to the

18 summer of 2002, "my direct supervisor was the assistant minister for SVR

19 Skopje, who, in the summer of 2001 was Mr. Zoran Efremov. Efremov

20 reported to the head of public security, Mr. Goran Mitevski; and his

21 superior was Mr. Ljube Boskoski, the minister of the interior. I was

22 responsible for everything that had to do with preventing and

23 investigating crime, like general crime, economic crime and drug-related

24 crime in SVR Skopje."

25 And then it says this: "If I had to issue orders that had to do

Page 9334

1 with the area of operation and responsibility of Cair police station, I

2 would do it through the head of OVR who, in 2001, was Mr. Ljube Krstevski.

3 Depending on the case, the orders were issued either in writing or

4 verbally, and the head of the OVR reported back in a similar manner, that

5 is, if he had received a written order he normally also responded in

6 writing."

7 Have you followed me?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. Isn't this what you told the investigators back in August of 2004?

10 A. I believe this is the statement which I did not sign.

11 Q. My question is something different. I'm asking you if what I just

12 read to you in paragraph 5 was what you told the investigators in August

13 of 2004.

14 A. No.

15 Q. And what is different or incorrect in this paragraph?

16 A. If you followed my evidence and testimony, you would know what is

17 different and what is identical.

18 Q. I'm sorry, sir, but I need a more specific response, please.

19 A. First of all, I was not a deputy; I was an assistant. There was

20 no reporting. I was not responsible for everything pertaining to crime,

21 orders, the manner.

22 Q. What about the orders? What about the orders or the manner of

23 orders is incorrect?

24 A. I said that the superior of OVR Cair was the head of SVR Skopje.

25 If there had been an order, only Mr. Efremov was authorised to have issued

Page 9335

1 such an order.

2 Q. What if Mr. --

3 A. The manner issued in written form or verbally does not correspond,

4 because, as I explained, the verbal ones were supplemented with written

5 ones.

6 Q. And if Mr. Efremov was not present in SVR Skopje, who would then

7 issue a necessary order to a head of an OVR?

8 A. Mr. Efremov was present in SVR Skopje, only I believe he was

9 absent at the end 2000, 2001 when he had a car accident and was hurt.

10 Q. But you told us, I believe, during your cross-examination that

11 there were times when simply Mr. Efremov was not physically at the SVR

12 Skopje office, and in those times, matters were directed either to you or

13 to Mr. Bliznakovski, right?

14 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours.

15 JUDGE PARKER: Ms. Residovic.

16 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] I believe this is misstating the

17 evidence. The witness never said it was when Efremov was physically away

18 from his office. The Prosecutor should refer back to the page of the

19 transcript to see what the witness exactly had said.

20 MR. SAXON: Your Honour, yesterday I showed the witness a document

21 that had a handwritten note on it saying, To Pero Stojan; and I asked the

22 witness why -- in fact it was a document from April 2001 it was a plan or

23 an addition to a plan from OVR Cair regarding the placement of

24 check-points and I asked the witness why was this document directed to

25 you? And the witness answered that there were certain times where, if

Page 9336

1 Mr. Efremov, his boss, was not available in SVR Skopje, matters would be

2 directed either to the witness or to Mr. Bliznakovski.

3 JUDGE PARKER: Basically accurate in what you say, Mr. Saxon, that

4 was not the initial effect of the evidence of the witness so there is

5 something to be said for both Ms. Residovic's position and your own; but

6 I'm sure this witness is capable of making clear where and if you should

7 misrepresent his understanding of his position.

8 So please carry on.


10 Q. So if Mr. Efremov was not physically present in SVR Skopje at a

11 given moment and an order needed to be issued to an OVR, who would issue

12 such an order?

13 A. First, in terms of the explanation for the document was different

14 than what you claim; and, second, if Mr. Efremov was not physically

15 present, he had a cell phone and he was always available.

16 Q. Can you turn, please, to paragraph 6.

17 Is there anything in paragraph 6 that is incorrect?

18 A. Above all, this paragraph is based or has as a starting point the

19 presumption that SVR did not undertake any activities regarding the events

20 in Ljuboten. If you followed my testimony, you would have known that SVR

21 Skopje, in regards to this event, carried out the function of

22 coordination.

23 Q. Mr. Stojanovski, my question was simply is the contents of

24 paragraph 6 correct. You can answer yes or no.

25 A. No.

Page 9337

1 Q. Okay. Well, all right. And how about paragraph 7?

2 Actually, let's go back to paragraph 6, if you will. Didn't you

3 testify that SVR Skopje did not undertake any activity, vis-a-vis the

4 events in Ljuboten, that SVR Skopje was not involved?

5 A. No.

6 Q. All right. Well, how was SVR Skopje then involved in the Ljuboten

7 events?

8 A. As I previously explained, on the 12th, on the day of the

9 activities, assistance was requested by OVR Cair for public law and order,

10 regarding what was happening at the check-points, and at the exits of the

11 village of Ljuboten. Help was requested also for coordinating activities

12 when preparing the criminal report.

13 Q. If you take a look at paragraph 8, please, Mr. Stojanovski, it

14 says: "I cannot remember whether I would have asked Mr. Krstevski or

15 somebody else to attend a particular meeting in Ljubanci on the 10th of

16 August, 2001. I probably have asked him to attend such a meeting, but I

17 cannot remember any details. Neither do I remember whether he would have

18 reported to me about what happened at the meeting."

19 Isn't this what you told the investigators in August of 2004?

20 A. I gave my oath or declaration as a witness here, and what I said

21 here is the truth. What is indicated here is an interpretation made by

22 your investigators who believe me to be a member or participant in a joint

23 criminal enterprise.

24 Q. If you take a look at paragraph 10, please. It say:

25 "When I am being asked whether I was contacted by Ljube Krstevski

Page 9338

1 on Friday, 10 August 2001 or on Saturday, 11 August 2001, regarding a

2 group of people demanding weapons from the Cair police station, I answer

3 that this is the first time I hear about such a thing. I don't believe

4 that Ljube Krstevski called me about this issue during that weekend, and I

5 do believe that since this is a rather serious matter I would remember

6 it."

7 Isn't that what you told the investigators in August 2004?

8 A. I believe that you showed that I had contacts with

9 Mr. Ljube Krstevski.

10 Q. I'm sorry, I'm sure if you've answered my question.

11 Is the contents -- do the contents of paragraph 10 reflect what

12 you told the investigators in August 2004.

13 Again, can you --

14 A. You could say so.

15 Q. All right. And take a look at paragraph 11, please, which says:

16 "When being asked whom Krstevski normally would report about this

17 kind of an issue, I reply that normally he would report it to Efremov,

18 myself, or the assistant minister."

19 That's correct, isn't it?

20 A. I would not agree with this.

21 Q. So what is written here -- so you did not tell the investigator

22 what is written here in paragraph 11. Is that right?

23 A. That's right.

24 Q. Could you turn to paragraph 14, please.

25 MR. SAXON: It will be on the next page in the English version.

Page 9339

1 Q. Paragraph 14 begins:

2 "Being asked whether I remember what was reported to me by my

3 subordinates on the 12th of August, 2001, I reply that I cannot really

4 remember whether somebody reported to me anything that day. As I have

5 said earlier, SVR Skopje was not involved in the events in Ljuboten. When

6 being asked if I knew anything about what was going on in Ljuboten, I

7 remember that Ljube Krstevski informed me on the day, before the combat

8 activities about the presence of the army of Macedonia in the area."

9 Isn't that what you told the investigators in August 2001 [sic]?

10 A. No.

11 Q. Are you suggesting that the investigators made this information up

12 and wrote it down?

13 A. If I judge it by their assertion that I was a participant in a

14 criminal enterprise, probably they did.

15 Q. So it's your position that this information in paragraph 14 did

16 not come from you, it was simply made up by the investigators and written

17 down the way it was written. Is that right?

18 A. Processed. So probably I said something, they probably processed

19 it in their own way.

20 Q. And your suggestion is that the investigators processed it in

21 their own way in order to try to bring criminal charges against you?

22 A. I couldn't judge their ideas at that time and their intentions.

23 However, it is a fact that they believed me to be a participant in a joint

24 criminal enterprise and probably they have serious facts in support to

25 this. I am convinced of that.

Page 9340

1 Q. Well, you see, Mr. Stojanovski, there is nothing in the sentences

2 in paragraph 14 that would -- that I've read to you at least that would

3 indicate that you were a participant in any crime or joint criminal

4 enterprise. So I'm trying to understand why you think that these

5 investigators somehow, in bad faith, made up these sentences and put them

6 in this draft statement.

7 A. I am not aware of the entire construction they made.

8 Q. Can you turn, please, to the last page of the draft statement. Go

9 toward paragraph 22, please.

10 Paragraph 22 says: "What I have said above is everything I can

11 say about what I know about what happened in Ljuboten and about what I

12 know about the role of my superiors and the policemen under my command."

13 And then there was a paragraph 23 that was written, but it has

14 some slash marks through it in a black pen. But you can still see what

15 the drafters wrote there. It says: "After this statement has been

16 translated to me into English, I state that even though I speak and

17 understand the English language, I will sign the statement only if it is

18 in Macedonian. If there will be a Macedonian translation available, I

19 will be happy to sign it."

20 Have you followed me, Mr. Stojanovski?

21 A. Yes, Mr. Saxon.

22 Q. And that's what you told the investigators at the time, isn't it,

23 that you wanted -- if you were going to sign a statement, it had to be a

24 statement written in the Macedonian language, right?

25 A. As I said already, the interview ended in a bit of a different

Page 9341

1 atmosphere and environment. With regards to the language, that was part

2 of a previous conversation, not at the end.

3 Q. But it is what you told the investigators, that you would not sign

4 a statement unless the statement was written in the Macedonian language,

5 right?

6 A. I asked to have a statement in the Macedonian language as well.

7 And with regards to negotiations as to whether to sign, I don't remember.

8 Q. And you refused to sign this statement because it was drafted in

9 English rather than in the Macedonian language, right?

10 A. You are playing with my words. I explained before why I did not

11 sign this statement.

12 Q. Mr. Stojanovski, I'm not playing with anything. And I'd like an

13 answer to my question. You can just answer yes or no, if you'd like.

14 A. No.

15 Q. Okay. And it's true, isn't it, that back in 2004 when you spoke

16 with OTP investigators, and even during your testimony here in this

17 courtroom that have you been trying to distance yourself from the

18 preparations for the attack on the village of Ljuboten that occurred on

19 Sunday, 12th of August. Isn't that true?

20 A. Would you like to explain this? I tried to distance myself?

21 Q. That you are trying to hide your own involvement in the

22 preparations for the attack on the village of Ljuboten that occurred on

23 Sunday, 12th of August, 2001. Isn't that right?

24 A. Not at all.

25 Q. It's true, isn't it, that you witnessed the beating of ethnic

Page 9342

1 Albanian civilians by police officers at OVR Cair on the afternoon of 12

2 August 2001, isn't it?

3 A. It is not like that at all.

4 Q. It's true, isn't it, Mr. Stojanovski, that you helped to ensure

5 that the group of men that were led into the village of Ljuboten by

6 Johan Tarculovski were armed and given uniforms and transportation at OVR

7 Cair. Isn't that true?

8 A. It is again not true, Mr. Saxon.

9 Q. It's true, Mr. Stojanovski, that you directed your subordinates,

10 such as Ljube Krstevski, to assist Johan Tarculovski and the group of men

11 who he would eventually lead into Ljuboten. Isn't that true?

12 A. It is completely untrue. I don't know Mr. Johan Tarculovski.

13 Q. And it's also true, isn't it, that during the weekend of 10 to 12

14 August you kept your superiors informed about the planning and

15 preparations for the attack on Ljuboten. Isn't that true?

16 A. It is absolutely not true.

17 Q. And subsequent to the events in and around Ljuboten in August

18 2001, you took no genuine measures to investigate any of the crimes that

19 occurred there. Isn't that true?

20 A. It is again incorrect, Mr. Saxon.

21 MR. SAXON: Your Honour, I have no further questions at this time.

22 Q. Thank you, Mr. Stojanovski.

23 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you, Mr. Saxon.

24 [Trial Chamber confers]

25 JUDGE PARKER: Ms. Residovic.

Page 9343

1 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, before I move on to

2 my cross-examination [as interpreted], my re-direct, I just wanted to

3 react on behalf of the Defence.

4 It is something that had to do with my learned friend's questions

5 just before the break. I don't believe those questions were appropriate.

6 You told us at the outset of these proceedings that witnesses should not

7 be --

8 JUDGE PARKER: Ms. Residovic, you raised a concern before the

9 break. It was dealt with. We don't want the matter going over again.

10 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, maybe there is a

11 misunderstanding. I wanted to react to the last series of questions, but

12 thank you for your warning. In any case, I won't address the issue

13 anymore and I will respect your decision.

14 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.

15 Re-examination by Ms. Residovic:

16 Q. [Interpretation] Witness, during my learned friend's

17 cross-examination, you will remember that you were asked a question as to

18 whether you can confirm what activities were undertaken by your colleague

19 Ljupco Bliznakovski, on the 11th of August. Do you remember that

20 question?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Some of the questions regards that topic had to do with whether it

23 would be normal under the given circumstances that an order would be

24 issued to strengthen the check-points in the area of Cair municipality, in

25 particular around Ljuboten village. Do you remember that?

Page 9344

1 A. Yes, I was asked that.

2 Q. During examination-in-chief, you were shown a number of orders

3 issued at the police stations in Cair and Mirkovci stipulating the number

4 of persons that were manning the check-points on the 12th of August, 2001.

5 Did you in any of the orders notice the -- any mention of the

6 notion of re-enforcing the check-points?

7 A. From the orders that I saw, I did not notice anything of the sort.

8 Q. Mr. Stojanovski, do you recall having had a conversation with my

9 learned friend the Prosecutor concerning your statement. It was just

10 mentioned that you told the head of the Cair OVR that he was to inform the

11 minister, once the minister is in the area, and you explained that oral

12 reporting or debriefing is not a standard procedure with the police. Do

13 you remember having discussed that with my learned friend?

14 A. Yes, I remember having discussed that.

15 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] In line 12, it says oral reporting

16 whereas I said that the minister was supposed to be informed.

17 Q. The Prosecutor showed you numerous Official Notes as well as

18 operative information and other types of informing used by the police. Do

19 you remember having been shown that?

20 A. Yes. He was showing me operative information and Official Notes.

21 Q. You agreed that it was one of the ways of passing on information

22 in the police.

23 A. Yes, that is one of the ways.

24 Q. You also explained that it had nothing to do with debriefings or

25 oral reports that you discussed previously?

Page 9345

1 A. I tried to.

2 Q. In relation to what you said, that reporting orally is not a way

3 of passing on information in the police --

4 [Defence counsel confer]

5 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, there seems to be

6 some confusion concerning interpretation. I see that every time I say

7 "Raport" it is being translated as reporting orally or passing on

8 information orally. Maybe there is no better way to put it in another

9 language, but I will try to clarify what the witness wanted to say in a

10 different way.

11 Q. Mr. Stojanovski, "Raport" in its military sense, and that is what

12 you discussed, has something to do with the contents of information, or

13 with a strictly prescribed procedure followed by the military in order to

14 inform superiors?

15 A. Having in mind that in 1980 I served my military service, and as

16 far as I can remember, it was a procedure, so ...

17 Q. All information on Official Notes shown to you by the Prosecutor,

18 do these have anything to do with this strict way of reporting in the

19 military, which we referred to as "raport"?

20 A. These are two completely different concepts.

21 Q. Do you recall having been asked by the Prosecutor about the

22 possibility at the institute for forensic medicine to gather information

23 of sorts? Do you recall that?

24 A. Yes, we spoke to them.

25 Q. I would kindly ask you to -- the third set of documents, Defence

Page 9346

1 documents, tab 168. It is P49004, under seal.

2 Can you see the document?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Dragan Nikolovski, the investigative judge, was sent to the

5 institute for forensic medicine, and he requested the notes of autopsy.

6 When you look at the document, in your experience is it the only way for

7 the institute to forward its findings --

8 MR. SAXON: Objection, Your Honour.

9 JUDGE PARKER: What is the point of your objection, Mr. Saxon?

10 MR. SAXON: That we are receiving now a very question. Look at

11 the document, in your experience, is it the only way for the institute to

12 forward its findings. That is clearly a question that suggests the

13 answer.

14 JUDGE PARKER: Perhaps you could rephrase it, Ms. Residovic.

15 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation]

16 Q. Mr. Stojanovski, have a look at the document. What does it mean

17 to you?

18 A. Well, this is a document produced by the investigating department

19 of the Basic Court Skopje II, a request sent to the forensic medicine and

20 criminology institute in Skopje, through which the institute is requested

21 to submit the autopsy protocol from the post-mortem of Atulla Qaili.

22 Q. Can such a request be made by the police to the institute?

23 A. I believe that during the previous discussions we stated that this

24 is the exclusive competence of the investigating judge.

25 Q. Please have a look at the other binder you have, tab 128. It is

Page 9347

1 Exhibit P54030, under seal.

2 Do you have the document before you?

3 A. Yes, I see the document.

4 Q. Can you tell us what it is?

5 A. The investigating judge, Velce Pancevski, requested information

6 from the forensic medicine institute, Skopje.

7 Q. What person, Bara ...

8 A. He requested documents on the person Atulla Qaili.

9 Q. Mr. Stojanovski, what does this exhibit point to?

10 A. I believe that this corroborate what had I stated before, that the

11 investigating judge is the one who has the official communication and

12 requests things from the forensic medicine institute.

13 Q. In your third binder, have a look at tab 177. It is a 65 ter

14 document, 1D227.

15 Before that, Mr. Stojanovski, tell me this: Do you know who

16 Jovan Serafimovski is?

17 A. I believe that he was a deputy public prosecutor.

18 Q. Thank you. This is a statement given by Jovan Serafimovski,

19 deputy of the basic public prosecutor in Skopje gave to the investigators

20 of this Tribunal.

21 I wanted to refer to certain paragraphs of the statement.

22 In paragraph 10, which is to be found on page 4, we can see:

23 [In English] "... Qaili it will referred to under number 7 I was

24 not there on 14 August 2001 that the accused Qaili Atulla was already

25 dead. I learned about the death of Atulla Qaili by receiving a written

Page 9348

1 information from the investigative Judge Velce Pancevski. It was my

2 obligation to find out of the cause of death of Atulla Qaili. We learned

3 that he was injured during a clash with the Macedonian security forces in

4 Ljuboten. I was informed from the media that police and army were in

5 Ljuboten. I don't know which unit of the police and army were involved.

6 I didn't know the unit or name of the police or army officers who were

7 directly involved in the death of Atulla Qaili. I did not try to find out

8 who was involved in the death of Atulla Qaili, because I was told that a

9 lot of security forces were involved in this events. In the Official Note

10 to the police, it was mentioned that the security forces were active in

11 Ljuboten. That was all the information about the events that we

12 received."

13 [Interpretation] Let us look at paragraph 13, which mentions the

14 same person [in English] "... Atulla Qaili, I knew the two other persons

15 who were arrested in Ljuboten were hospitalised together with Atulla

16 Qaili. I only remember that these two accused were in the city hospital.

17 I knew this because I read about this in the notes of the questioning

18 which are part of the files. I can't recall the name of these two

19 persons, although normally the investigative judge has an obligation to

20 ascertain the cause of the injuries, as I explained early, I learned that

21 these persons were injured during the clashes with the Macedonian security

22 forces. It was a war situation and at that time I did not even think

23 about trying to learn the cause of these injuries."

24 [Interpretation] In paragraph 14, the Prosecutor Serafimovski

25 states --

Page 9349

1 THE INTERPRETER: Could the counsel please read slowly and make

2 pauses when switching between different languages, thank you.

3 MS. RESIDOVIC: [In English] If this document was produced by the

4 investigative judge, then I have never been informed from him about this.

5 In reference to the death of Atulla Qaili, I only learned about the

6 injuries from the death certificate. I think the autopsy was initialised

7 by the investigative judge, Velce Pancevski. Normally, it would be my

8 obligation as a deputy public prosecutor to ask for an autopsy. If I had

9 known that the person was dead, when I was filed the question for an

10 investigation, I would have requested the autopsy. But in the case of

11 Atulla Qaili, it was the investigative judge."

12 [Interpretation] Mr. Stojanovski, you heard what the

13 Prosecutor Serafimovski said. To what extent does this statement by the

14 Prosecutor Serafimovski when he says that he -- his obligation or, rather

15 the obligation of the investigative judge, to what extent is it correct,

16 in keeping with the laws that were in place in Macedonia and according to

17 your experience.

18 A. I believe that we discussed something similar previously, as well

19 with regards to the autopsy and exhumation, and I believe that we said

20 then, or, actually, I said that as far as I know, to undertake such

21 actions the investigating judge has the competence.

22 Q. Concerning the part of the statement by Mr. Serafimovski, in which

23 he says that when he learned about his obligation to undertake measures,

24 does that differ from your testimony or does it corroborate your actual

25 testimony before this Tribunal?

Page 9350

1 A. I believe that it corroborates it.

2 Q. I will ask you to have a look at the Prosecutor's binder, tab 105.

3 It is document -- I can't see exactly what the exhibit number would be,

4 but it is an Official Note, number 1090.

5 THE INTERPRETER: Could the counsel please repeat the ERN numbers

6 in Macedonian and English slowly. Thank you.

7 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] As far as I can see it is P37,

8 under seal, on the list.

9 Q. Mr. Stojanovski, do you recall being shown this document by the

10 Prosecutor as well?

11 I apologise, maybe it wasn't.

12 You were shown --

13 A. I believe it was not shown.

14 Q. You were shown P105. I don't know where it is in the binder, but

15 could we please have that placed on the screen.

16 You remember being shown this document. We discussed it at length

17 whereby we said that the title, Official Note, was translated as operative

18 information. Do you remember that?

19 A. Yes.

20 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters kindly ask the counsel to pause

21 before starting a new question.

22 Would the counsel please repeat the question.

23 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] I'm being told that this is tab 79

24 in the Prosecutor's binder.

25 Q. My question was whether you recall being shown this document.

Page 9351

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. You were shown some additional documents and you were asked

3 whether you told the commission or other MVR members that they should talk

4 to some other people that were shown this document as well. Do you

5 remember that?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. You said that they knew what their job was and that they are more

8 familiar with it than you are. Am I interpreting that correctly?

9 A. Yes, it is correct interpretation.

10 Q. Regarding that, I have the following questions for you,

11 Mr. Stojanovski.

12 Those members of commissions or of the MVR, could they take over

13 the responsibility of the competent organs within the MVR or the SVR which

14 were tasked or duty-bound to investigate any such event, including the one

15 in Ljuboten?

16 A. This could not happen.

17 Q. Did you, upon their request, provide all of the documents had you

18 at your disposal and did you hide some of the documents?

19 A. I handed over all documents to the committee, and I organised that

20 these documents be available to the analytics department of the SVR Skopje

21 as well.

22 Q. As the liaison person with the Cair OVR, since you were tasked

23 with that by Mr. Efremov, your superior, did you also make sure that the

24 Cair OVR should made available all information they had at their disposal?

25 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Saxon.

Page 9352

1 MR. SAXON: This is a leading question on a very critical point.

2 Perhaps it could be rephrased.

3 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, I think that's fair enough.

4 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation]

5 Q. Mr. Stojanovski, you said that the head of the VR [as interpreted]

6 in Skopje, on the 13th, told you to serve as liaison between the

7 commission and the organs of the Ministry of Interior and the OVR Cair.

8 Did you accept that duty and did you execute those tasks?

9 A. I executed it.

10 Q. In relation to that and the requests sent to you by the Ministry

11 of Interior, were any measures undertaken by which those people would be

12 enabled to reach the Cair OVR?

13 A. I spoke to several heads, chiefs, and I informed them of their

14 duty to cooperate with the commission.

15 Q. Did any of the heads and persons you talked to say that they

16 refused to provide documents or that they refused to discuss the event?

17 A. It happened once only.

18 MR. SAXON: Your Honour.

19 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation]

20 Q. Can you tell us when?

21 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Saxon.

22 MR. SAXON: Your Honour, I do not see how this question falls

23 within the remit of cross-examination, and so that's why I'm objecting to

24 it.

25 JUDGE PARKER: I think the implementations of your

Page 9353

1 cross-examination may be wider than you are imagining. I wouldn't stop

2 Ms. Residovic at this point.

3 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

4 Q. My question was, on what occasion did it happen that someone or

5 that one person refused to provide documents?

6 A. The head of the OVR Cair did not want to cooperate with

7 Mrs. Galeva.

8 Q. Mr. Stojanovski, in your previous answers, you said that based on

9 the documents you received, you were unable to conclude that some

10 policemen overstepped or abused their authority. Do you remember that?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. Did you go through the documents carefully?

13 A. Yes. I reviewed them and, as I explained to the Prosecutor, I

14 don't how willing he was to understand what I was saying, it was important

15 for the ministry to ascertain the truth.

16 Q. Concerning your basic task, which was to establish the truth,

17 based on any of the documents, were you able to confirm the suspicions

18 raised and prevailing among the public concerning the behaviour of the

19 police?

20 A. I couldn't confirm such statements or -- how should I say? That

21 were presented in the media at that time.

22 Q. You were shown a document by the Prosecutor. Is it 1D183, which

23 is tab 45 in the second Defence binder, and you were asked some questions

24 about it.

25 Do you recall this document?

Page 9354

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. You gave answers to both me and my learned friend Mr. Saxon,

3 whereby you said that you believed the document was sent to you.

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. As far as I recall, you said that it is possible that it found its

6 way to you because on that day you may have been at the headquarters at

7 the SVR. Do you remember that?

8 A. Yes.

9 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters kindly ask the counsel and

10 witness to avoid overlapping.

11 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation]

12 Q. Mr. Stojanovski, there is a handwritten note for deputy

13 Pero Stojan, which you said probably meant it was for you. Just below it,

14 the date says the 15th of April, 2002. In addition to the fact that you

15 may have been given this document at the time it was drafted, can you tell

16 us why such a document would be sent to you on the 15th of April, 2002?

17 A. The only explanation that I could remember now would be that it

18 was probably upon a request by the commission.

19 Q. Do I understand correctly, that you were trying to get by certain

20 information throughout that period?

21 A. That was a continuous process.

22 Q. Let us have a look at tab 99. I believe it is a Prosecution

23 exhibit. It is -- no, it is 1D189.

24 Do you recall being shown this document by the Prosecutor? You

25 also provided certain answers in relation to the document. It is in the

Page 9355

1 second Prosecution binder.

2 You agreed with the Prosecutor that the information on the

3 allegedly killed in the village of Ljuboten is important.

4 A. Yes, I stated that it was useful.

5 Q. But you also said that it is incomplete, since it also contained

6 certain information which, at the time, you already knew was incorrect.

7 For instance, when it is stated that the people were buried the same day

8 they were killed.

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. You also provided answers concerning the way information is

11 checked in order to establish whether a crime had been committed. Can you

12 tell me whether this information was sufficient to corroborate the

13 suspicion that there was a crime committed?

14 A. In my opinion, no.

15 Q. I wanted to ask you this: On the day you attempted to carry on an

16 on-site investigation, did you also receive information regarding the

17 persons buried?

18 A. Yes. I believe this was on the 14th when we were informed that

19 the persons were buried. It was an information received through the

20 conversations which the head of OVR Cair, Krstevski; head of SVR, Efremov

21 of SVR Skopje, Efremov and MP Etemi had.

22 Q. Mr. Stojanovski, do you remember being shown some information

23 concerning a person from Skopje. That person provided information

24 concerning Cair.

25 A. I believe that there was such an information, but if I could see

Page 9356

1 it, it would be better for me. The person was -- I think this was person

2 was not from Ljuboten.

3 Q. Thank you. So as not to waste any time in trying to find that

4 information, I would kindly ask you to look at tab 148, which is in the

5 second Defence binder. It is P104. P104. N005- --

6 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters did not get the ERN number. It

7 is in Macedonian.

8 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation]

9 Q. You said a minute ago that the information you just saw was

10 insufficient for you to be able to address the issue of a suspicion of

11 crime being committed. You were told by the Prosecutor that that note was

12 compiled by Dejan Blazevski?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. Who drafted this note, the one before you?

15 A. Mr. Dejan Blazevski.

16 Q. We have already seen this note. Does it contain sufficient

17 relevant data, which may be used to ascertain whether those people were

18 killed or died in the village of Ljuboten?

19 A. Only on the basis of this information, no, there was no such

20 information.

21 Q. Have a look at the previous note. It is tab 147. Exhibit 1D190.

22 During examination-in-chief, that note was shown to you as well. It is

23 page 1D47351 in the Macedonian; and in the English it is 1D4753.

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. Do you see in this report of the Cair OVR that they are actually

Page 9357

1 providing a response to the Basic Court and its investigative judge. Do

2 you see that?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Can you also see from the document that it quotes the court

5 decision, or, rather, a request that was sent by the court in order to

6 perform their tasks?

7 A. Yes, the court had submit a request.

8 Q. Please have a look at another document, which is tab 146. It is

9 1D47, page 1D1949 in the Macedonian and 1590 in the English.

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. This is a document compiled by the investigative judge used by the

12 OVR Cair in their response.

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. In the second paragraph the court requests:

15 "In order to undertake these investigation actions, it is

16 necessary on your part to gather some additional reports and data, with

17 the aim of determining the identity of these persons, the location of the

18 graves where the corpses were buried, the time of burial, obtaining

19 statements from the persons who performed the burial, statements of family

20 members of the buried as well as other data and reports and written

21 material."

22 Is this what the court requested?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. You worked for a number of years with the crime squad. According

25 to what you know, it is one of the necessary prerequisites for a court to

Page 9358

1 initialise an autopsy?

2 A. Yes. It is usual beforehand to have the necessary information.

3 Q. The note shown to you by the Prosecutor, in which we have first

4 and last names of persons with the incorrect date of burial, that note in

5 itself, did it suffice to answer any of the questions or parts of the

6 request made by the court?

7 A. I think we could not rely on this information.

8 Q. In the third Defence binder, you -- could you please have a look

9 at tab 156. It is exhibit P490034, under seal.

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. We can see that it was created on the 5th of February, 2002.

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. And we have some text in English. Based on that, we can conclude

14 that these are the actual burial locations.

15 Could the police obtain this information in any way during 2001

16 and 2002?

17 A. No, it could not.

18 Q. Have a look at tab 158. It is Exhibit P5555, under seal.

19 Again, we have a drawing displaying the graves of the victims of

20 the 12th of August with their names, and the title is in English. The

21 police, with all the efforts you invested in order to investigate, were

22 you able to obtain this information?

23 A. No. I think I explained previously that we did not have

24 cooperation with the local population. Such cooperation was refused.

25 Q. Have a look at tab 159. It is Exhibit P5528, under seal.

Page 9359

1 In his request, Judge Nikolovski requested that interviews be

2 carried out with the members of the families of those allegedly killed.

3 A. Yes. I think this was in connection with the identification.

4 Q. And this document, which was compiled on the 21st of March, 2002,

5 Osman Ramadani gave a statement to the investigative judge. Can you see

6 that?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. And the judge had requested that he be given statements by those

9 people initially.

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. Have a look at the next page of the document.

12 A. Yes, I see it.

13 Q. In the last paragraph it says: "At the hearing the deputy of the

14 basic public prosecutor's office Cakic was present. Investigative Judge

15 Bekir Shahini in addition to Dragan Nikolovski, the representative from

16 the municipality community, Ljuboten Kenan Salievski, as well as

17 representatives of The Hague Tribunal Andrzej Szydlik, and Ali Nakija from

18 The Hague Tribunal."

19 Mr. Stojanovski, you testified about this earlier, was it possible

20 to address the issue or to answer the question of what had actually

21 happened without having any statements of family members who could tell

22 you something about those killed?

23 A. No.

24 Q. From what I have just said, it is clear that no police

25 representatives were there.

Page 9360

1 A. Yes, this is so.

2 Q. Is the police ever present during an interview conducted by a

3 judge in -- in a court building?

4 A. No.

5 Q. Is it clear from what I read to you that the interview of this

6 person, and this was a family member of one of the deceased, is it clear

7 that we -- that who was present were actually some village representatives

8 and people from The Hague Tribunal?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. Since you are fully familiar with the situation at the time, was

11 it possible to get by some real true information based on which what could

12 make educated guesses or conclusions as to what happened, based on the

13 statements given and the fate of the people killed?

14 A. It was not possible.

15 Q. Could the police make it possible for the court to have those

16 people appear before the court and give statements, since the court

17 requested so?

18 A. Could not.

19 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, to shorten this part

20 of my examination, I just wanted to say that it is identical to P5557

21 under seal which is in tab 60; and then exhibit P5521, under seal, tab

22 161; P5525, under seal, tab 162.

23 Q. Have a look at tab 120 in the second Defence binder. It is 1D9.

24 Tab 120. This document is also under seal. The page is 1D0040. We have

25 it in English only.

Page 9361

1 Mr. Stojanovski, we have here investigator's notes, the purpose of

2 which was to note the meeting with the representatives of the families of

3 the deceased from Ljuboten, the Republic of Macedonia, in order to discuss

4 the operational plan for the exhumation at the cemetery at the village of

5 Ljuboten. The meeting was held on the 8th of March, Friday, at 10.30.

6 You can see those present. On behalf of the village, there were three

7 people. Then you can see who the representatives of the families under

8 items 1 through 8. Then we have the representatives of the international

9 community, Mathias Elck of the OSCE, and Valentine Guileri of the OSCE as

10 well as Demeri-Shaipi, of the same organisation interpreter. On behalf of

11 the international Tribunal, we have Howard Tucker investigator and

12 Andzrey Sydlic operations officer in the office in Skopje.

13 Is it all visible from the first page?

14 A. Yes. These are investigator's notes with a degree of

15 confidentiality.

16 Q. Have a look at page 2. I will read out the last paragraph [In

17 English] ... "There was initial resistance by the spokesperson of the

18 crisis committee, Mr. Saliu Kenan about the involvement of the Republic of

19 Macedonia agency. Feelings were obviously running high and there was talk

20 of non-cooperation by the villages. However, after further discussion,

21 they all greed their support for the investigation."

22 [Interpretation] Mr. Stojanovski, these investigator's notes

23 stating the fact that the villagers expressed a lack of trust in all

24 Macedonian agencies and state bodies and refused to cooperate, was it

25 drafted in March 2002 and does it confirm what you know of the events at

Page 9362

1 the time confirming that the police was actually unable to get by

2 information?

3 A. Not only the police. All institutions of the Republic of

4 Macedonia.

5 Q. Have a look at the next page. It is 1D1142. The fourth line from

6 the bottom -- not line, excuse me, paragraph. It says [in

7 English] ..."Anyway, the bodies remaining in storage at the institute

8 until the process is completed was not acceptable to the families of the

9 deceased. They still carry a huge mistrust of anything Macedonian."

10 [Interpretation] Does this assertion, on the part of The Hague

11 Tribunal investigator, confirm your knowledge as to the police being

12 unable to combine information?

13 A. Yes, this is a correct assertion.

14 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I note the time.

15 However, I have quite a few questions left. I don't know whether we can

16 continue with the witness or ...

17 I covered the questions raised today. However, we also have

18 yesterday's cross-examination, and I will have some questions about that

19 as well.

20 JUDGE PARKER: We must adjourn now, because of the time. We will

21 resume tomorrow at 9.00, in the anticipation that you will finish in the

22 course of the first session tomorrow. We will be able to resume our

23 normal programme with the next witness, and we'll sit through until 1.45

24 tomorrow.

25 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

Page 9363

1 JUDGE PARKER: We will adjourn now.

2 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 12.34 p.m.,

3 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 14th day of February,

4 2008, at 9.00 a.m.