1 Friday, 15 February 2008
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.05 a.m.
5 JUDGE PARKER: Good morning.
6 I understand, Mr. Saxon, there may be some matter you wish to
8 MR. SAXON: Ms. Issa has a matter to raise, Your Honour.
9 JUDGE PARKER: Ms. Issa.
10 MS. ISSA: Yes, good morning, Your Honour.
11 There's just one matter, Your Honour. Last night we were notified
12 by the Defence that they may be using an additional exhibit which is
14 This matter was -- it's actually the contract of employment that
15 relates to Zoran Krstevski. This matter was never placed on the Rule 65
16 ter (G) summary that was provided by the Defence in relation to this
17 witness. Of course, we were -- we didn't have notice of this matter prior
18 to preparing our own notice of the exhibits we intend to use with this
19 witness. Therefore, in the event that the Defence do intend on using this
20 document with the witness, the Prosecution objects on that basis.
21 JUDGE PARKER: What is the difficulty that you have?
22 MS. ISSA: Well, the difficulty, is, Your Honour, that the issue
23 of when Zoran Krstevski became an advisor to the Ministry of Interior is
24 an important issue in this case and because it does effect the credibility
25 of an important aspect of Witness M-052.
1 JUDGE PARKER: Are you saying that there are issues here that you
2 need time to explore or that you need time to obtain another witness or
3 further evidence, or what is it; or don't you know?
4 MS. ISSA: Well, it's difficult to say, Your Honour. But if we
5 didn't have an indication, then we wouldn't have been able to place some
6 additional documents perhaps on our own exhibit list in order to explore
7 the issues with this particular witness.
8 So we're left in a position where we have not had the opportunity
9 to prepare for this particular issue, which is quite critical to the case.
10 JUDGE PARKER: Being the pessimist that I sometimes have to be on
11 Friday, we're certainly not going to finish this witness today.
12 MS. ISSA: That's unlikely.
13 JUDGE PARKER: If that's the case, you will have the weekend. Is
14 that enough?
15 MS. ISSA: I think it would be. It would be enough, Your Honour.
16 It's just a question of having to -- to gather the documents and add them
17 to our exhibit list.
18 JUDGE PARKER: Well, if the problem arises and if, as I suspect,
19 we are not going to finish the witness today, the weekend may solve it.
20 If the witness -- if the speed of our examination and cross-examination
21 exceeds expectation, we'll have to look again at your problem.
22 MS. ISSA: Thank you, Your Honour.
23 [Trial Chamber confers]
24 JUDGE PARKER: If there's no other matter, we will have the
1 [Trial Chamber confers]
2 [The witness entered court]
3 JUDGE PARKER: Good morning.
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning.
5 JUDGE PARKER: The affirmation you made at the beginning of your
6 evidence still applies.
7 Ms. Residovic.
8 WITNESS: VESNA DOREVSKA [Resumed]
9 [Witness answered through interpreter]
10 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
11 Examination by Ms. Residovic: [Continued]
12 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, Ms. Dorevska.
13 You will recall that yesterday we were discussing the duties and
14 authorisations of the minister. Do you remember that?
15 A. Yes, of course.
16 Q. And you said that the minister cannot assign duties and tasks to
17 himself, but that they are regulated by legal acts. Do you remember that?
18 A. Yes, I remember.
19 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Could the witness now be given
20 binder number one, please.
21 Q. And would you take a look at the document that comes after tab 5.
22 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] It is Exhibit P86, and Article 25
23 of that document or law. In paragraph 1 of Article 25, it is 8986 is the
24 page new in Macedonian; and in English, it is N000-8967.
25 Q. And Article 1 -- or rather, paragraph 1 of Article 25 says
1 that: "The minister provides the application form and the procedure for
2 issuing identification cards to the authorised officials."
3 Tell me now, Ms. Dorevska, is this an example of the
4 authorisations given by the law to the minister?
5 A. Yes. This is one of the ways which it establishes how the
6 minister has the authorisation for a certain task.
7 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Now let's take a look at Article
8 61, which is N000-8994 in Macedonian; and in English, it is N000-8976.
9 Q. That Article states as follows: "The minister or an employee
10 authorised by him can postpone or discontinue the annual leave of an
12 Is that a provision which confirms what you said during your
14 A. Yes. This is also one such provision which pertains to the same
16 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I'd like to indicate
17 some of the other Articles: Articles 67; 70; 74, paragraph 2; 75 of the
18 Law on the Ministry of Internal Affairs, which, in similar fashion deal
19 with these issues in the way that the witness has testified.
20 Q. Now, Ms. Dorevska, you also said that the minister can issue an
21 order if he is authorised to do so by law or pursuant to a government
22 decision or a parliament decision.
23 Do you remember saying that?
24 A. Yes, I remember.
25 Q. Now I'd like to ask you to take a look at Article 10, paragraph 2,
1 of that same law.
2 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] It is Exhibit P86. And it's on
3 page N000-8983 of the Macedonian, and N000-8964 of the English.
4 If you look at Article 10 paragraph 2, it says: "When the public
5 law and order are disrupted on a large-scale, the minister can order other
6 authorised officials, under Article 24 paragraph 2 of this law, to conduct
7 certain activities in uniforms."
8 Tell me, please, Ms. Dorevska, is this one of the ways in which
9 the law authorises the minister to issue direct orders and that was your
11 A. Yes. This Article 2 points to the fact that the minister can
12 issue orders in this regards to the authorised officers who usually do not
13 work in uniform, which means that by order of the minister, they're
14 obliged in certain cases to carry out obligations in uniform.
15 Q. I'd now like to ask you, Ms. Dorevska, to take a look at Article
17 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] It's on page N000-8987 of the
18 Macedonian, and N000-8969 of the English.
19 Q. In paragraph 2 of Article 30, it says the following -- or rather,
20 let's see what it says in paragraph 1: "In order to prevent committing
21 criminal offences and the discovery and apprehension of perpetrators of
22 the critical offences, as well as finding out and securing evidence and
23 traces of the criminal offences, the authorised officials can close the
24 access or entrances into a certain premise or building and to prevent
25 anybody from leaving the premises or building without permission. These
1 measures will be in force until the completion of the official
3 Now, in paragraph 2 of this Article, it says as follows: "The
4 minister or a person authorised by him can order the undertaking of the
5 measures stipulated in paragraph 2 of this Article."
6 Now, Ms. Dorevska, does this provision confirm what you yourself
7 said, that the law or other provisions and rules can vest the minister
8 with direct authorisation to issue direct orders?
9 A. Yes, and this provision confirms this.
10 Q. Now let's move on to another area, Ms. Dorevska.
11 Yesterday, we saw a number of acts issued by the ministry, or
12 rather, the minister; and tell me, please, as you are the head of the
13 sector for legal and personnel affairs, what the legal grounds are for the
14 minister to be able to pass such enactments?
15 A. The legal grounds for the minister to pass such an order is
16 Article 55 of the Law on Organisation and Work of the Ministry of Internal
17 Affairs, which prescribes the acts under the authorisation of the
18 ministries, including the Minister of the Interior?
19 Q. In addition to the law, are there any other acts that can be legal
20 grounds for the decisions taken by the minister?
21 A. Of course. In the Ministry of Interior, grounds for passing
22 certain acts of the minister are found in the collective agreement of the
24 Q. Would you now take a look at the next document. It's the one
25 found after tab 15, and we have already discussed it. But this time let's
1 just take a look at what the legal grounds for issuing this act.
2 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] It is 1D66, the exhibit number;
3 and can we look at page 1D2322.
4 Q. Now, Ms. Dorevska, where are the legal grounds stated authorising
5 the minister to pass an act of some kind regardless of whether we're
6 dealing with rules, decisions, or whatever?
7 A. At the very beginning, at the top of the document, always, it is
8 marked the legal grounds, the basis under which authorises the person who
9 is adopting this act to adopt such an act.
10 Q. And in this specific instance, as we see, it is pursuant to
11 Article 55, item 1 of the Law on the Organisation and Work of the Bodies
12 of the State Administration, which you said was the usual basis for these
14 A. Yes, this is so.
15 Q. Now, during your testimony yesterday, you said that the minister
16 was also linked by government decision of the president or "sobranje," or
17 prime minister or "sobranje."
18 Do you remember that part of your testimony?
19 A. Yes, I remember.
20 Q. Now, would you look at the document that comes after tab 18.
21 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] It is Exhibit P74, and it is on
22 42-4682 of the Macedonian, and 8042-4684 of the English.
23 Q. This is a decision and, as you said, provides the legal basis for
24 a decision to be taken. As it says here, it is "based on Article 55,
25 paragraph 1 of the Law on the Organisation and Work of the State
2 Now tell me, please, this decision, does it have any other legal
3 basis which the minister had to respect in order to pass a decision of
4 this kind?
5 A. Yes. This decision for establishing a police battalion for rapid
6 intervention, the basic Article is 55 which vests the authority to the
7 minister to pass decisions. There are also decisions of the government of
8 the Republic of Macedonia, and the decision of the president of the
9 Republic of Macedonia. These are documents which give rise to the
10 position of the minister to establish such a battalion, which means that
11 these are decisions which vest the minister with the -- with this
12 obligation, and this is why they're part of this decision as its legal
14 Q. Now take a look at the next document which comes after tab 19.
15 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] This is Exhibit P278. Page 4690
16 in the Macedonian, and 4690, 4691-ET [as interpreted]. P275 is the
17 exhibit number.
18 Q. Now, when you look at the legal basis here, tell me if it is any
19 different from the legal basis of the document we saw a moment ago?
20 A. No. This is the same legal basis in this case as well.
21 Q. Now take a look at document -- or rather, Exhibit 1D59.
22 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] It is 1D2329. It comes after
23 tab 20. In the English, it is 2331.
24 Q. Have you found the document?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Do you recognise the document in view of the documents you saw
3 A. Yes. This is a decision for establishing a unit for special
4 purposes adopted by the government of the Republic of Macedonia.
5 Q. Now take a look at the next document after tab 21, Exhibit 1D60.
6 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] The page is 1D2333 of the
7 Macedonian, and 1D2336.
8 Q. Ms. Dorevska, do you recognise this document in connection with
9 the decision and order that we saw a moment ago, as having been issued by
10 the minister?
11 A. Yes, I recognise it. This is also a decision of the president of
12 the Republic and one of the legal basis which are previously listed in the
13 decision by the Minister of the Interior.
14 Q. Now, Ms. Dorevska, for a unit to be formed within the Ministry of
15 Interior, what steps must be taken beforehand, before such a unit can be
16 established, or rather, before it comes into existence as a unit within
17 the ministry?
18 A. There need to be changes or supplements, amendments to the
19 organisational act of the ministry and for the act on systemization in
20 order for it to become part of the organisational structure of the
22 Q. A moment ago, we saw two decisions by the minister about the
23 formation for the -- of the rapid intervention battalion. Now, when
24 could this battalion have been formed and come into being as a unit of the
25 Ministry of Interior?
1 A. This happened or this could happen at the moment when amendments
2 are made to the act of systemization and organisation.
3 Q. Would you now take a look at the document that comes after tab 24.
4 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] It is Exhibit 1D61. 1D2353 is the
5 Macedonian page number, and the English is 1D2355. Exhibit 1D61 is the
6 document we're dealing with.
7 Q. Tell me, Ms. Dorevska, whether it was necessary to enact these
8 rules for amendments to the organisation and work of the Ministry of
9 Interior for the unit formed by the previous decision to be able to begin
10 to be formed in actual terms, to come into being?
11 A. Yes. It was obligatory for these rules to be passed, and this
12 indicated in itself that the battalion for rapid intervention is
13 established at the moment with the passing of this rule.
14 Q. Now take a look at the document that comes after tab 25, which is
15 Exhibit 1D62.
16 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] It is to be found on 1D2357 of the
17 Macedonian, and 1D2364 of the English.
18 Q. These are rules on the systemization of workplaces within the
19 Ministry of Interior.
20 Now, in view of your legal knowledge and experience and your
21 practical knowledge, is it possible that a unit comes into being before
22 systemization of workplaces is determined; that is to say, the work places
23 which that unit must fill and according to which the unit exists?
24 A. No, it cannot be set up. The rule on the organisation establishes
25 the organisational form, and this must be followed with the rules on
1 systemization of the specific work places which will indicate the
2 structure, the number of employees, and the work positions in that
3 concrete and specific organisational unit.
4 Q. Now, in that set of rules, would you, please, take a look at page
5 1D2359 which begins with item 5.1,?
6 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] In English, it is 1D2366.
7 Q. Now, these supplements to the rules on systemization, do they
8 provide for the structure of the unit? Does it regulate that? Is that
9 the condition that must be met if the unit is to be established?
10 A. Yes. This is a condition for the unit to be established, and it
11 points to the structure, the work places, the number of employees, the
12 status of the workplace and work positions, and other required conditions
13 for a specific work position.
14 Q. Now, Ms. Dorevska, if, for the formation of a particular unit or
15 an organisational entity, a special procedure is required and special
16 conditions, what then is necessary for the unit to be established in the
17 first place? What conditions must be met?
18 A. In specific police units, by-laws are also passed. It is
19 obligatory for such acts to be passed, which contains specific elements
20 which pertain to that particular unit.
21 Q. Now take a look at the document that comes after tab 27.
22 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] It is Exhibit P82 and the number
23 is R042-4685; and in English, it is R042-4685-R042-4689-ET -- or rather,
24 the previous page. No, we have the right page number there. That's
1 Q. Now, Ms. Dorevska, we see here the rules on the conditions and
2 procedure for the assignment, rights, and duties of members of the rapid
3 intervention battalion of the Ministry of Interior which was passed in
4 October 2001.
5 Now, are those, indeed, the rules that must be enacted if the
6 formation of a unit requires specific conditions to be met and you
7 testified about that?
8 A. Yes, this is so. This is one such rules which must accompany the
9 process of establishing a specific unit such as the one we're talking
10 about right now.
11 Q. And tell me, please, Ms. Dorevska, is it possible for a unit to
12 come into being before procedure is put in place and all the conditions
13 have been meet for each individual member of that unit?
14 A. Of course, not. It is not possible.
15 Q. Now, in practice, was there ever a case in the Ministry of
16 Interior whereby an organ was established or a unit was established before
17 all the stipulated conditions that we've discussed have been met?
18 A. I do not know of such a case.
19 Q. We've just been discussing units or one particular unit. Now, is
20 the situation the same and must the same rules be applied and procedure
21 put in place if an organisational form within the ministry is changed or
22 amended or supplemented in any way, or are there other rules for other
23 organisational procedure?
24 A. The procedure is the same for setting up any organisational form
25 in the ministry. This is done in an identical manner with amending the
1 Rule Book on Organisation and Systemization of Work Positions.
2 Q. Ms. Dorevska, yesterday, we looked at some diagrams relating to
3 the organisation of work in 2001 with amendments from August, August of
4 that year.
5 Now, tell me whether you know -- or rather, on that diagram or on
6 that chart, could we see that -- did see some information centre within
7 the ministry? Was there an information centre of any kind depicted in the
9 A. Within the framework of --
10 Q. Was there any press information centre within the Ministry of
12 A. No, not at all. There was no such organisational unit in the
14 Q. Do you know someone called Stevo Pendarovski?
15 A. Yes, of course.
16 Q. Do you know what his job was and how long he worked in the
17 Ministry of Interior?
18 A. I perhaps don't know the exact date; but I believe by May 2001, he
19 was working in the ministry and then he left his position there.
20 Q. And do you know what his function was in the ministry, before he
21 left the ministry, what post he occupied?
22 A. He -- he was the spokesperson of the ministry.
23 Q. Considering the fact that you told us what was your job in 2001,
24 before you became head of the sector for legal and personnel matters, you
25 were working on the personnel issues before that. Tell me, do you know
1 whether, after Stevo Pendarovski left, some other person was appointed the
2 spokesperson of the Minister of the Interior?
3 A. No. There was no person on that position after he left.
4 Q. Thank you. Now, Ms. Dorevska, we would move to another set of
6 In your testimony thus far, you mentioned that the works of the
7 Ministry of Interior or the tasks were carried out by the reserve police
8 forces in addition to the regular police forces in 2001. Was that your
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Could you tell me when is the -- when are the reserve forces
12 called up to carry out certain tasks of the Ministry of Interior?
13 A. There are specifically listed conditions in the Law on Internal
14 Affairs in the case of direct danger of war when the public law and order
15 is disrupted in a larger scale. In such case, it is possible to call in
16 military and police reservists.
17 Q. Thank you.
18 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] I would like to ask the usher to
19 assist us in removing this binder from the witness' table, and giving
20 number two of Defence exhibit to the witness.
21 I would kindly ask that these documents are also distributed to
22 the Chamber and to my colleagues from the Prosecutor's office.
23 Q. I would kindly ask you now, Ms. Dorevska, to tell me who are those
24 individuals who are called up? Is it that before the war situation
25 occurred that the military deployment or structure of reserve forces was
1 decided in the Republic of Macedonia?
2 A. These are persons, as established on the Law on Defence, who have
3 finished their military service or have in a different way regulated their
4 military obligations and who are registered at the Ministry of Defence,
5 more precisely, in the regional services of the Ministry of Defence, and
6 have deployment in the case of war in the ministry.
7 Q. Would you please now look at the document after tab 35.
8 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] That is Exhibit 1D154.
9 Q. Before I ask about this document, tell us, are you aware what are
10 the competences that the Minister of the Interior has in terms of reserve
11 police forces?
12 A. Regarding the reserve forces, and in accordance with the Law on
13 Internal Affairs, the minister has the obligation to pass the special
14 rules which pertains to calling in persons from the reserve forces.
15 Q. And who from within the Ministry of Interior enforces the
16 provisions of the rule book that is enacted by the minister?
17 A. There is a special organisational unit. This was the sector for
18 Defence preparation at the time. Now it has a different title which is
19 charged with implementing the activities regarding the police and military
21 Q. Would you kindly look now at the document after tab 40.
22 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] That is Exhibit P85. R042-4706 is
23 the Macedonian version, while the English is R042-4706-R042-4709-ET.
24 Q. Tell me, Ms. Dorevska, you have a general act in front of you
25 again. The adoption of this act, as a general act, is it within the
1 competence of the minister?
2 A. Yes. These are rules which relate to special identification
3 documents for members of the reservists.
4 Q. Ms. Dorevska, tell us whether the minister has any other rights
5 and duties with regards to the positions and the rights of the reserve
6 forces, considering the legally prescribed competences?
7 A. Yes. The minister also adopts an act which pertains to the fees
8 for the persons who are engaged in the reserve forces because they have a
9 legal right to such compensation.
10 Q. What is the status that the members of the police -- of the
11 reserve forces have within the Ministry of Interior?
12 A. These are persons, as I said, military and police conscripts which
13 are called in a given period of time; and in accordance with the law, they
14 have obligations and authorisations of authorised officials while they're
15 engaged. However, they do not have a contract of employment.
16 Q. That was supposed to be my next question. Do they have an
17 employment, full employment contract with the Ministry of Interior? You
18 partially answered that already, but can you give me a direct answer.
19 The members of the reserve forces, after being called up, do they
20 have an employment status with the Ministry of Interior?
21 A. No. The member of the reserve forces do not have a full contract
22 of employment at the Ministry of Interior. They can be employed in any
23 other organisations or they can be unemployed persons. However, they do
24 not include a contract for employment with the Ministry of Interior.
25 Q. Actually, although we will come back to this issue later, could
1 you just briefly tell us who are actually employees of the Ministry of
3 A. These are persons who have a contract of employment with the
4 Ministry of Interior.
5 Q. And what are the regulations that provide for that employment?
6 A. This is the labour law, which is also a systemic law pertaining to
7 labour relations,; the Law on Internal Affairs; and the provisions of the
8 collective agreement of the minister.
9 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] I would kindly ask that the
10 witness is now given the third set of documents, considering that we will
11 use that binder as well in the course of further examination of the
13 I kindly ask that those documents are distributed to the Chamber
14 and my colleagues from the Prosecution as well.
15 Q. Ms. Dorevska, would you kindly look at the document after tab 75.
16 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] That is Exhibit P553. N002-5377,
17 Macedonian version, page 2; or possibly page 1 also of the English
18 version. That is N006-323 --
19 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction: 6-3823.
20 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] I believe that is the first page
21 of the English version.
22 Q. I would kindly ask you now to look at the second page of the
23 document in the Macedonian version; and, tell me, is this the labour law
24 that you described as an organic law governing this area?
25 A. Yes. This is the labour law of 1993 which was in force at that
1 period of time.
2 Q. If you look now at the document after tab 76.
3 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] That is Exhibit P382, N006-4902;
4 and the English is N002-6338. That is, I believe, page 1.
5 Q. Tell me, is this the collective agreement that you mentioned just
6 now, which is the basis for the employment contract for the officers of
7 the Ministry of Interior?
8 A. Yes. This is the collective agreement of the ministry adopted in
9 1998, which strictly regulates the provisions related to working relations
10 for the employees at the ministry.
11 Q. Tell me, considering that this is the area where you worked for
12 many years, what could be the employment status of an officer within the
14 A. The employment status can be of unlimited duration or for a
15 limited duration. It might be also a part-time contract, but this is
16 rarely used.
17 Q. Does every employee, before they become an employee of the
18 minister, have to enter an employment contract?
19 A. The signing of the employment contract is mandatory for every
20 individual entering into employment with the ministry.
21 Q. Does the employment contract that the officer or the employee
22 enters into with the ministry contain the date the contract was entered
23 into; and if that date is contained in the document, is that the date when
24 an individual became an employee of the ministry?
25 A. That is correct, yes. That contract is entered into for a limited
1 or unlimited duration, as I mentioned; and, among other things, it also
2 contains the date from which the individual starts the employment and that
3 is also registered with the employment bureau in order to exercise other
4 rights related to the employment.
5 Q. Ms. Dorevska, if a given person hasn't signed a contract bearing
6 an exact date from which they become an employee, would that person be an
7 employee of the ministry?
8 A. No. That person is not considered an employee. That person could
9 not be employed if they have not signed an employment contract.
10 Q. If some officer does not have a contract, are they de jure or
11 de facto, or could they be an employee of the ministry?
12 A. No.
13 Q. Ms. Dorevska, do you know Zoran Krstevski?
14 A. Yes, I know him.
15 Q. How do you know that individual?
16 A. I remember when he was to start his employment with the ministry
17 because I was working then in the personnel section. I was in charge of
18 his employment procedure.
19 Q. Do you know whether he signed an employment contract with the
20 Ministry of Interior?
21 A. Yes. He has signed an employment contract.
22 Q. Does this contract indicate the date when he became the employee
23 of the ministry?
24 A. Of course. The date is a mandatory element in the employment
1 Q. Do you know what was the post that he held after he had signed
2 that contract?
3 A. Of course. His employment was with the cabinet of the minister.
4 He was advisor to the minister.
5 Q. Is that a duty denoted in his employment contract? You said that
6 you were in charge of that procedure of that employment contract.
7 A. I apologise. I did not understand your question well.
8 Q. Was that the duty, as you said, advisor in the cabinet, was that
9 defined in the contract that he signed with the ministry?
10 A. Yes, precisely. His employment contract expressly states the job
11 for which his employment contract is signed.
12 Q. And could you remember, Ms. Dorevska, when did -- did this take
14 A. I believe it was somewhere in September 2001.
15 Q. Thank you very much.
16 You just testified about the way in which the employment starts.
17 In addition to this, do the elected officials base their employment on the
18 same foundation as other officers of the ministry?
19 A. Of course, not. They do not sign an employment contract. Their
20 employment and legal status is regulated in a different way. They are
21 elected by the government of the Republic of Macedonia, by the parliament.
22 Q. Since we spoke about the employment contract, I will ask you to
23 lock now at the document after tab 77.
24 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] That is Exhibit 1D89. It is in
25 the page 1D3759, Macedonian page; while the English is 1D3761.
1 Q. Do you see this document, Exhibit 1D89, in front of you?
2 A. Yes, I see it.
3 Q. In response to my previous questions, you said -- or rather, you
4 gave us a detailed answer and said that each employee must have a contract
5 of employment which he signs with the ministry.
6 Now, when you look at this particular document, is it an example
7 of an employment agreement or contract of employment that you were talking
9 A. Yes. This is an employment contract.
10 Q. When an employee signs a contract of employment with the minister,
11 thereby becoming part of the staff of the ministry, in what way is he
12 assigned to jobs or promoted to various functions within the ministry?
13 How does that work?
14 A. Any further procedure, in terms of career development of the
15 officer, is accompanied by a specific decision for deployment or
16 assignment to that post.
17 Q. Tell me, please, are the conditions identical for all work posts,
18 or is there something that stipulates the conditions to be met for each
19 separate work post?
20 A. There are general, as well as special conditions, that are
21 identical for everyone. They are prescribed in the labour law and the Law
22 on Internal Affairs. Of course, special conditions are prescribed in the
23 act for systemization for each of the specific job posts.
24 Q. Now, the general conditions that each employee has to comply with
25 you said were determined by what act was it?
1 A. Labour law and the Law on Internal Affairs.
2 Q. I'm now going to ask to you take a look at the Law on Internal
4 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] That was in binder 1, and the
5 document that comes after tab 5 -- or rather, not to have to go back to
6 that binder, perhaps we can look at P86, Article 48 on e-court.
7 Q. Now, in Article 48, we have listed the conditions which you said
8 were general conditions that had to be complied with by each and every
9 employee of the ministry before that person can sign a contract of
10 employment with the ministry.
11 Now, tell me, were all these conditions in force in 2001?
12 A. Yes. These were the conditions that were in force, but then the
13 constitutional court revoked them, the first and the second item. I do
14 not remember the exact date when they were revoked, when that entered into
16 Q. Let's now take a look at the document that comes after tab 70 in
17 the second binder.
18 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] It's 65 ter 1D1217 [sic]. Did I
19 say after tab 70? It is 1D1216, a 65 ter document, 1D1216.
20 Q. As we can see, under number 430, we have a decision passed by the
21 constitutional court, passed on the 10th of April, 2002; and as we can see
22 from paragraph 1, Article 48, paragraph 1, item 2, if the Law on Internal
23 Affairs is rescinded.
24 Is that the decision, Ms. Dorevska, that you were talking about,
25 when it said it declared null and void some of the general conditions
1 stipulated by the law?
2 A. Yes. This is one of the decisions, referring to item 2 in
3 Article 48.
4 Q. So, from this time on, would that be the conclusion, from the 10th
5 of April, 2002, point 2 of Article 48, paragraph 1, was no longer in
6 force? It was no longer a general prerequisite for anybody to gain
7 employment in the ministry. Would my conclusion be correct?
8 A. Yes, it would be correct.
9 Q. Would you now take a look at the document after tab 71?
10 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] It is 65 ter 1D1217; and, once
11 again, it is from the Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia.
12 May we have the document displayed in Macedonian on e-court as
13 well, please.
14 Q. Now, down at the bottom there, and the number is 875, we see that
15 the constitutional court of the Republic of Macedonia, on the 23rd of May,
16 2001, passed a decision to abolish Article 48, paragraph 1, of the Law on
17 Internal Affairs.
18 Tell me, please, whether this document, this decision in fact,
19 indicates that, by this decision of the constitutional court, Article 48,
20 paragraph 1, item 1 was abolish on the Law on Employment [sic] that you
21 discussed earlier on?
22 A. Yes, of the Law on Internal Affairs.
23 Q. Yes, I apologise. I got that wrong.
24 A. This is one of the decisions of the constitutional court passed
25 previously which abolishes line 1 or item 1 of Article 48, which was
1 previously a special prerequisite for employment with the ministry.
2 Q. And as of the 7th of June 2001 when this decision was published,
3 is my understanding correct that paragraph 1, item 1, which was set out as
4 one of the conditions for a contract with the ministry to be concluded
5 could no longer applied? In fact, it no longer existed, right?
6 A. Of course, when a constitutional court passes a decision, the
7 decision itself indicates that that legal provision is abolished and the
8 decisions of the constitutional court and the other courts are mandatory.
9 Q. When an employee meets all the general conditions and the special
10 conditions stipulated, is there any set procedure for taking in the
11 employee for that person becoming a member of the staff?
12 A. Of course, there is a procedure prescribed with the law and the
13 secondary legislation depending on the way in which the employment is
15 Q. And, tell me, how is that put in place, what happens?
16 A. The employment could be based by a public ad or without such
17 public ad, and depending on that an appropriate procedure is followed. If
18 a public competition was opened, that procedure is regulated in the
19 collective agreement. The committee is established, the committee then
20 selects the candidates, makes a proposal, a list to the minister. And
21 from that list, he selects the individuals who will start their
23 And if it is an employment without a public ad, then the procedure
24 is slightly different. Then the services, the sector that I'm the head of
25 carry out the entire procedure. And if it is established that all the
1 requirements are met, then the person would enter employment contract.
2 Q. And who signs the actual contract on employment?
3 A. The contract is signed by the individual who starts their
4 employment and the minister on behalf of the Ministry of Interior.
5 Q. Can an employee sign a contract directly with the minister,
6 as a person, and not as an organ representing the ministry? So, is it
7 signed by the minister as an organ representing the ministry or by
8 the person?
9 A. The employee could sign a contract only with the body, within the
10 ministry. But on behalf of the ministry, as I said, the contract is
11 signed by the minister. One could not sign a contract with the minister
12 as an individual.
13 Q. Ms. Dorevska, when an employee signs such a contract of
14 employment, tell me, please, who has the right to assign that person to a
15 specific work post?
16 A. That right belongs to the minister to assign an officer to a
17 different post through a decision.
18 Q. Let's now take a look at the law governing labour relations, and
19 it's tab 75 in the third set of documents.
20 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] It is Exhibit P553, Article 27.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I apologise, but I don't think I
22 have it here.
23 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation]
24 Q. This is the third binder. Do you have it?
25 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] So we're looking at Article 27.
1 This is to be found on N002-5382 of the Macedonian; and in English, it is
2 N006-3830, or page 8 of 43.
3 Q. You said that this law is a systemic law. Now, tell me, please,
4 whether other regulations which relate to labour relations must be
5 dove-tailed and harmonised with the basic provisions of this systemic law?
7 A. Of course, they must be harmonised. Within the Ministry of
8 Interior, the collective agreement is fully harmonised with the labour
10 Q. And when you were talking about the minister's authorisations
11 yesterday, you said that he -- these authorisations are vested upon him by
13 Now, let's take a look at Article 27 in which it says
14 that: "Employees engaged in work at a position for which they have been
15 hired, in cases established in the collective agreement, employees may be
16 reassigned to any position that corresponds to their qualification.
17 "The decision of reassignment is brought by the employer or by his
18 appointed employee."
19 Now, since you said a moment ago that the act on assigning workers
20 is passed by the minister, now, this right of his, has it got anything to
21 do with the right of all employees, according to the systemic law?
22 A. Of course, it is related to this.
23 Q. Now, let's look at the document after tab 76 in the collective
24 contract or agreement of that same binder. It's Exhibit P382. Yes, 382.
25 Take a look at Article 26 there.
1 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] It's on page 6493; and in English,
2 page 6.
3 Q. This Article, as we can see, confirms or, in fact, is completely
4 aligned with the systemic law.
5 Now, paragraph 1 and 2, or rather, items 1 and 2 of this Article,
6 do they say that workers can be assigned to every work post determined by
7 the act on the systemization of work posts which corresponds to his level
8 of skills and training? Then it goes on to state the conditions when he
9 can be assigned to a post.
10 A. Yes, this is correct. This is the Article which the Ministry of
11 Interior or the sector which I head uses to prepare decisions for
12 employment. It states the conditions. Then this is followed, of course,
13 by the whole procedure related to the assignment.
14 Q. Now, let's take a look at Article 31 of this collective agreement,
15 which is on page 64921 and page 7 of the English.
16 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] In the Macedonian text of that
17 Article, there's something added on in handwriting there, some changes,
18 some corrections.
19 Q. Now, my understanding of this is what has been added in
20 handwriting is related to what it says next to Article 31 itself, that
21 that's what it refers to. Am I right?
22 A. Yes, you're right.
23 Q. So that is an amendment that was made, and the number is 3/2004,
24 so that mean notice year 2004, right?
25 A. Yes. In 2004, there were amendments to the provisions of the
1 collective agreement; among them, this provision.
2 Q. And if my understanding of this is correct, in 2001, this portion
3 written by hand was not in force. Is that right?
4 A. Yes, this is right.
5 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I made that
6 clarification because, in the English text, the entire sentence has been
7 translated, and we can't see in the English version that this second part
8 says -- well, we can't see that it was added later.
9 In Article -- yes. Perhaps not all that was recorded in the
10 transcript. But as the witness said, the written, handwritten part did
11 not exist in 2001, I'm going to read what it says there, written by hand,
12 and it says the following: "... or by him, authorised official."
13 Q. Now, in the first part of this Article, it says: "Decision for
14 deployment is passed by the minister."
15 Is that what was in force in 2001?
16 A. This is correct. It was in force in 2001.
17 Q. So this authorisation was given the minister from the systemic law
18 that we looked at a moment ago. That authorisation was vested in him by
20 A. Yes, this is correct.
21 Q. I'm now going to ask to you look briefly at a series of decisions
22 which, on behalf of the ministry, is passed by the minister, and they are
23 to be found in tabs ranges from 77 to 98. Once you've lacked at them, I'm
24 going to ask you a few questions about them.
25 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] For the record, it is P271,
1 Exhibit P271, P76, P78, P61, P62, P64, P71, P72, P77, P76, P57, P58, P59,
2 P65, P60, P63, P66, P67, P68, P69, and P70.
3 Q. Ms. Dorevska, just look through those documents briefly.
4 Have you managed to look through them?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Tell me this first: What is the organisational units within the
7 ministry which is in charge of preparing acts for the minister, regarding
8 the assignment of a person to a particular post or promoting an employee
9 or whatever?
10 A. This is the sector for legal and personnel affairs.
11 Q. Now, all the acts that you've looked at, was that prepared by your
13 A. Yes, all of these acts.
14 Q. And all the individuals all the persons mentioned in these acts
15 were previously employees of the Ministry of Interior, right?
16 A. Yes, of course. These are decisions for changing of the work
18 Q. Now, can you tell me what these decisions decided, if I can put it
19 that way? Do they relate to the same matters, or do they deal with
20 different situations, different issues where the minister is using his
21 authority under the law and passing decisions on behalf of the ministry?
22 A. What I'm able to see, these are decisions for reassignment,
23 however, in different situations. Some decisions for reassignment are
24 related to the changes in the work posts or promotions, if you will. In
25 some cases, it is a confirmation of the same work post, what we talked
1 about yesterday, by the head. The chief of the sector confirms this,
2 confirms the changes in the act for systemization.
3 Some of these decisions, as far as I can see, there are changes in
4 the title of the organisational unit. The work post is identical. Some
5 of the decisions are related to unit for special tasks. These are more
6 specific decisions which, in themselves, differ from the others. Mainly,
7 this is what I was able to see.
8 Q. And is it correct that any of those types of decision, which you
9 have enumerated and which you were able to see in these 20 or so documents
10 that you looked at?
11 THE INTERPRETER: Could counsel repeat what she said there,
13 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation]
14 Q. Can any one of these decisions, regardless of what type of
15 decision we're dealing with, can they be issued only to an employee who
16 already has employment?
17 A. Yes, this is correct. Only an employee which already is working
18 at the ministry.
19 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, would this be a
20 opportune moment for the break?
21 JUDGE PARKER: Very well. We will resume at 11.00.
22 --- Recess taken at 10.28 a.m.
23 --- On resuming at 11.03 a.m.
24 JUDGE PARKER: Ms. Residovic.
25 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
1 JUDGE PARKER: Ms. Issa.
2 MS. ISSA: I am sorry to interrupt, Your Honour. I wonder if I
3 could, very briefly, raise a matter. We've heard the witness throughout
4 her testimony refer to either a rule book or a Law on Systemization of
5 Work Posts or Workplaces. I'm not entirely sure if this perhaps is a
6 translation issue, but we've -- we don't have this rule book. We've tried
7 to locate it.
8 I've spoken to Ms. Residovic regarding this, and I believe she's
9 indicated - correct me if I'm wrong - that she doesn't have the original
10 form. I think there are amendments to the rule book which the Defence may
11 have, and I just wonder perhaps could the witness be asked if she has it,
12 so that we would be prepared to -- to use it for the purposes of the
14 JUDGE PARKER: Ms. Residovic.
15 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I tried to explain to
16 my learned friend, during the break, what the situation is. The
17 Prosecutor, through numerous witnesses and the Prosecution exhibits, gave
18 numerous rules on amendments and supplements to acts on systemization, and
19 the Court has it now. In the Law on Internal Affairs, numerous witnesses,
20 including this one, said that it was within the remit of the minister to
21 pass those acts.
22 Now, as far as the Defence is concerned, some comprehensive act or
23 the first act when it was passed, for the first time, it's not something
24 that the Defence is interested in. We handed up and offered all original
25 documents that were necessary; the act on amendments and supplements on
1 law with regard to the "Lavovi" or Lions.
2 So, a first act on systemization, I can ask the witness whether
3 any such document exists in the ministry. But I don't see the relevance
4 of this question at all, because we're talking about and discussing the
5 acts and provisions that are of relevance to these proceedings, not to the
6 12.000 staff of the Ministry of Interior.
7 JUDGE PARKER: Ms. Residovic, I'm afraid you have lost me now.
8 Ms. Issa is saying the witness appears to be referring to a rule
9 book, if I can use it that way, which is not in any of the Defence or
10 Prosecution papers.
11 Now, are you saying that is so but it's not relevant; or are you
12 saying there isn't such a rule book, it's a series of amendments to the
13 Law on Internal Affairs; or are you saying something else?
14 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I'm not a witness.
15 Now, I'm certain that, if the law provided for the fact that all
16 the ministries should have the acts, we can ask the witness. But in these
17 proceedings, neither the Prosecutor nor the Defence team offered up all
18 acts governing systemization, just those which would be relevant to the
19 issues we dealt with: The organisation chart, the position of the Tiger,
20 the Lions, "Tigri," "Lavovi," so those documents.
21 Those are ones we dealt with, and they're exhibits already. We
22 have not provided any fresh exhibits or presented any new exhibits to this
24 JUDGE PARKER: If I understand what you are saying correctly, you
25 are suggesting there is not a rule book. There are a series of, I
1 suspect, subsidiary or delegated pieces of legislation that have dealt
2 with individual items under the general heading of systemization of the
3 workplace, and those that you think are relevant have been separately
5 Is that what you're putting?
6 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, can I ask the witness
7 the question? She is, perhaps, better placed to clarify the matter.
8 JUDGE PARKER: As a matter of general law, I thought counsel would
9 be on top of this, but please go ahead.
10 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] With respect to the fact that
11 counsel can be on top of this, I would like to draw your attention to
12 Article 75 from the law governing internal affairs, which says that the
13 minister is duty bound to enact acts or documents regarding systemization
14 of work and the work of the ministry and the act on the systemization of
15 the workplaces.
16 Now, I'm going to ask the witness something with respect to that
17 fact, which might be relevant.
18 Q. Ms. Dorevska, tell me, please, in the ministry, are there acts on
19 systemization, do they exist, and work places; and a Book of Rules
20 governing the organisation and work of the bodies within the compensation
21 of the ministry?
22 A. Of course. These are two basic documents, Book of Rules, on the
23 basis of which the ministry operates. This is the rule of book on
24 organisation, as I said yesterday, which establishes the organisational
25 units and their authority. At the same time, the rule book on
1 organisation is accompanied by act on systemization, which is a document
2 which is constantly undergoing changes.
3 If at a given period of time, these changes become numerous, then
4 a clarified text of this document is enacted. The rule book on
5 systemization contains all work places in the ministry. Without such a
6 document, an employee cannot be assigned, an employee cannot be brought
7 into service. This is a basic document for each ministry, and so it is
8 the case with the Ministry of Interior.
9 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] I don't know whether that
10 suffices, Your Honour. Is my learned friend satisfied with that answer?
11 JUDGE PARKER: It doesn't yet; although, Judge Thelin thinks he
12 can see more clearly than I've managed to get.
13 We have a basic law which is applicable, and then we have a series
14 of ministerial acts which are amending that, or a series of individual
15 ministerial acts made pursuant to that. Every now and again, the
16 amendments may be collected together and a new print made.
17 Have I got it correctly yet? Perhaps I could ask the witness.
18 First, would you give me the name of the principle act, the
19 principle piece of legislation or book of rules?
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Book of Rules on Systemization of
21 Work Places in the Ministry of Interior.
22 JUDGE PARKER: Now, Ms. Residovic, is such a document in some form
23 in your papers that are on e-court?
24 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] No, Your Honour. I don't know
25 when that first Book of Rules, that first piece of legislation, was
1 enacted. But in the exhibits, and on our 65 ter list, every amendment to
2 that Book of Rules which speaks of the introductions of new work or work
3 places or new units which had not previously existed, and which are of
4 interest for this trial, for these proceedings; therefore, I'm speaking
5 directly of certain amendments which relate to the Tiger unit, and other
6 amendments related to the "Lavovi," or Lions, unit, which conditions are
7 required for someone in say a helicopter unit or dog training unit, that,
8 too, probably is contained in this voluminous Book of Rules governing
10 However, as far as I could see, the OTP, the Prosecutor wasn't
11 interested in providing that document, nor did the Defence consider that
12 that was relevant for the issues being discussed here today.
13 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you very much.
14 Ms. Issa, as we, at least as I, presently grasp it, the particular
15 documents that are in the Defence papers and of which you have notice are
16 those thought to be relevant because they deal with particular amendments
17 to the original, those particular amendments introducing something or
18 changing something that is relevant to this case. It is accepted that
19 the original total document is not in the papers.
20 Now, I do not know whether you feel that you need to see the
21 original. I do not know whether you feel that some amendment which has
22 been referred to by the witness is not to be found in the papers. But
23 given the explanation, could I suggest, for the moment, that you confine
24 yourself to the question whether any document particularly relied upon by
25 the witness is not to be found in the papers we have.
1 MS. ISSA: That would be -- that would be fine for the moment,
2 Your Honour.
3 The difficulty is, though, we would like to see the original
4 because it's difficult for us, at this stage, to say what may be relevant
5 in the original that may have some impact or may have some revelation
6 concerning the amendments that we see in the -- in the Defence binder.
7 The amendments, as Your Honour may have noted, are quite short.
8 They refer to a very specific matter or specific Article that appears to
9 have reference to the original. Without seeing the original, it's
10 difficult to fully comprehend the amendment. We can see what it says on
11 its face. However, without it, it's hard to say, at this stage, what
12 might be in the original that might assist us in understanding the matters
13 that are being discussed here.
14 JUDGE PARKER: Ms. Dorevska, do you have with you, by chance, a
15 copy of the Rule Book of the Systemization of Work Places in the Ministry?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, Your Honours. I do not have it
17 with me. This is a voluminous document, a document that is constantly
18 undergoing change. There are 15.000 work places perhaps, which contain
19 the name of the organisational unit and the workplaces in that unit and
20 the conditions for a specific work place.
21 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.
22 Ms. Issa, I don't believe the matter can be taken further by the
23 Chamber at the moment. Can I suggest that if you feel a particular
24 amendment gives rise to an issue either with the content of that amendment
25 or which requires reference to the original being amended, that you can
1 discuss with Ms. Residovic whether that can be made available to you in
2 some form.
3 At the moment, given the nature of the document, there doesn't
4 seem to be a great deal of reason for the matter to be pursued generally.
5 There may be some specific issue, and that I must leave to you to identify
6 and to take up with Ms. Residovic.
7 MS. ISSA: Thank you, Your Honour.
8 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you, then.
9 Yes, Ms. Residovic.
10 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I'd like to ask you
11 that in resolving this issue that we just go back to one exhibit which is
12 in our binders in these proceedings. Perhaps, it will be clearer to one
13 and all if the witness were to explain things to us taking an example, how
14 these amendments in systemization are done; or shall we leave that for
15 later, not to lose time going over, covering the same ground that we've
16 already covered?
17 JUDGE PARKER: I think we can leave it for the moment,
18 Ms. Residovic, and move on.
19 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
20 Q. Ms. Dorevska, we've seen a large number of decisions assigning
21 employees to various work places and posts. Now, tell me, once the
22 minister passes a decision on assigning an employee to a particular post,
23 does he still retain control over that employee whom he has assigned to a
24 specific work place?
25 A. No. This employee is now working in a specific organisational
1 unit, and the head of that unit now supervises or looks into the work of
2 that employee.
3 Q. Tell me, please, Ms. Dorevska, whether the law or a collective law
4 governing labour relations and the law on the interior, internal affairs,
5 does it stipulate the conditions that workers must meet and comply with
6 after he signs a contract of employment, for him to be assigned to a work
7 post later on or to remain in the ministry?
8 A. After signing of the employment contract, if this person has the
9 status of apprentice, there are conditions which he must fulfil, which
10 means that in a given period of time, he has to pass an apprenticeship
11 exam. Unless he or she does this, then there is an additional period of
12 time during which he can pass this exam. If that person does not pass the
13 exam on these two occasions, then the contract ends. There are also
14 conditions when a person has to be sent to additional training to pass
15 specialised exams or additional training.
16 Q. When an employee -- when a worker becomes an employee of the
17 Ministry of the Interior, by signing a contract of employment, does he
18 then have certain rights and duties?
19 A. Yes. In that case, the employee is part of the ministry, and this
20 person must work in accordance with the law and the rules and regulations
21 in the ministry with full responsibility.
22 Q. Ms. Dorevska, can you tell us whether the concept of an employed
23 worker, an employee of the Ministry of Interior, is it identical to the
24 concept of "authorised official," which is the term that appears in
25 Article 24 of the law?
1 A. No. Authorised official is a status of a work place; while
2 employee of the ministry can imply other categories, categories of civil
3 servant, who are employees of the ministry but are not authorised
4 officials. There are persons who work on work legislation for which
5 neither the civil service or ministry or internal affairs law does not
6 apply. Therefore, this is one category of persons.
7 Q. Ms. Dorevska, let me ask the question in the reverse: Can you
8 tell me whether all authorised officials are, by the same token, employees
9 of the Ministry of Interior?
10 A. Of course, not. The minister, the deputy minister, as we said,
11 they have the status of authorised officials, are not employed in the
12 ministry. What we spoke about today, about the reserve forces, these are
13 persons who are not employed at the ministry but have obligations and
14 authorisations of authorised officials.
15 Q. You mentioned who the reservists are, the reserve forces are, and
16 who the employees are. Now, tell me once again: Are the reservists, in
17 fact, employees of the Ministry of Interior?
18 A. No. Reservists are not employees of the Ministry of Interior.
19 Q. Let's now take a look at the next document, which comes after tab
20 76, or paragraph 76, which you mentioned as a basis for gaining employment
22 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] P382 is the document number,
23 N006-4902; and in the English version, it is -- well, I don't seem to have
24 the English version.
25 It's on e-court, on our screens. Thank you.
1 Q. Now, Ms. Dorevska, take a look at the first four articles of this
2 collective agreement which is the basic document regulating the status of
4 Article 1 says as follows: "This collective agreement regulates,
5 completes the regulation of the rights, obligations, duties, and
6 responsibilities of the employees in the Ministry of Interior and the
7 employer, as well as the way and scope in which these rights and duties
8 are fulfilled, and other provisions concerning questions of interests of
9 the employees and the employer, as well as the manner and procedure of
10 resolving mutual relations."
11 Article 2 stipulates the following: "The employer, in the sense
12 of this collective agreement, is the Ministry of Interior of the Republic
13 of Macedonia, hereinafter referred to as the ministry, represented by the
14 Minister of Interior, hereinafter referred to as the minister."
15 Then Article 3 reads: "Employees, in the sense of this collective
16 agreement, is a person who is employed full-time for a shorter, or a
17 full-time or part-time for indefinite or definite time, within the
19 Tell me, Ms. Dorevska, does -- do these three Articles, in
20 accordance to what you know and in accordance with your practice, regulate
21 whom this collective agreement refers to, who is the employee, and who is
22 the employer?
23 A. Yes. These are the provisions which clearly define the position
24 of an employee and the position of the employer. Employees are persons
25 who have contracts with the Ministry of the Interior. The employer is the
1 Ministry of Interior, represented by the Minister of the Interior.
2 Q. Article 4, paragraph 1 says as follows: "The collective agreement
3 shall be applied immediately and is compulsory for the ministry and the
4 employees in whose name the agreement is signed."
5 Tell me now, please, in whose name is this collective agreement
6 signed precisely?
7 A. In the name of the Ministry of Interior.
8 Q. And with regards to the employees?
9 A. The collective agreement is signed by the representative of the
10 trade union, which cares for the rights of the employees, and the minister
11 on behalf of the Ministry of Interior.
12 Q. Look now, please, at Article 12.
13 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] That is on the next page, which
14 reads -- the page is N002-64922.
15 Q. This Article reads: "The employment is to be established by
16 signing a contract, employment contract, between the employee and the
18 Is it, again, Ms. Dorevska, the provision that you spoke about
19 before the break, on the basis of which the employment contracts are
20 signed between the employee and the ministry?
21 A. Yes, this is correct. This is that provision.
22 Q. As you stated, that the reservists were not employees, tell me, do
23 the reservists sign a contract with the ministry about their employment or
25 A. No. The reservists do not sign any kind of contract with the
2 Q. When the reservists are called up to perform certain duties within
3 the reserve force of the police, what kind of duties they have?
4 A. The reservists, in accordance with the Law on Internal Affairs,
5 have the obligations and rights of authorised officials.
6 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] I would kindly ask that the
7 e-court shows P86, that is Law on Internal Affairs, Article 46.
8 Q. Answering one of the questions, you stated what the
9 responsibilities and the authorisations were.
10 Article 46, paragraph 2 reads that the time during which the
11 members of the reserve forces carry out their duties, in terms of Article
12 24 of this law, they have the duties and authorisations of an authorised
14 When you were answering the question that they have the duties and
15 the powers of an authorised officer, were you referring to this provision
16 of the law?
17 A. Yes. This is the provision I had in mind.
18 Q. And do they have some responsibilities? Does the law regulate
19 their responsibilities as well?
20 A. About the responsibility, as all other citizens, they have
21 responsibility in the case of a criminal offence, they would certainly be
22 held responsible for the act they committed.
23 Q. Could they be subject of a disciplinary procedure within the
24 Ministry of Interior?
25 A. A reservist cannot be prone to disciplinary procedure because
1 they're not employees of the ministry; and, therefore, their employment
2 cannot end as a result of the disciplinary procedure that is led against
4 Q. You stated that the reservists were not employees. Do they
5 receive a salary from the Ministry of Interior?
6 A. They have a fee. They don't have a salary, but they are
7 remunerated, as regulated in Article 47 on the Law on Internal Affairs,
8 from the workplace where they carried out their activities which is -- and
9 which are police obligations.
10 Q. You just mentioned now Article 47 from the Law on Internal
12 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Since we see this Article in the
13 Macedonian language on the screen, I would like to ask to show the next
14 page in English, so that the witness is able to clarify what she just
16 I apologise, Your Honours, but Article 47 has three lines only in
17 the English language, while I see several paragraphs in Macedonian.
18 Perhaps Article 47 starts in the previous page, because this obviously is
19 not the translation of the Article that has three paragraphs.
20 I would like to read it, or I would kindly ask the witness to read
21 the Macedonian text of the Article 47, because it is obvious that the
22 translation here does not correspond to the Macedonian original.
23 Q. So, would you be so kind as to read it. What does the Article 47
24 specify, the Article that you quoted?
25 A. "For conducting the duties and tasks, the members of the reserve
1 force have the right for allowance established according to the regulation
2 for carrying out military service for serving in the reserve force.
3 "Funds for remuneration as paragraph 1 of this Article are secured
4 in the budget of the Republic. The minister will adopt by-laws regulating
5 the manner of calling in and engagement of members of the reserve forces."
6 Q. So, does this provision confirm your testimony, that the
7 reservists do not receive a salary but they have a right to certain
9 A. Yes, this is so. They are remunerated established by a special
10 decision passed by the Ministry of Interior.
11 Q. I would kindly ask you now to take the second binder and look at
12 the document in tab 45.
13 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] This is 65 ter 1D1208. The page
14 is 1D9688, and the English page is 1D0033.
15 Q. Ms. Dorevska, in this introductory part, where you said the legal
16 foundation, the basis for adoption of a document is indicated, we can see
17 that the minister invokes not only the general Article 55, but also the
18 Article 46, paragraph 2 and 47, paragraphs 1 and 2 of the Law on Internal
20 Are these the Articles that you read?
21 A. Yes, this is this Article.
22 Q. And what is this act?
23 A. This is a decision which establishes the remuneration for the
24 members of the reserve forces because they carry out work tasks in the
25 ministry related to a specific workplace. Here, it also enumerates the
1 things which are -- they're entitled to while they're carrying out their
2 tasks. This is salary, this is transport fees, one-time assistance in the
3 case of death or injuries, and other fees and costs involved.
4 Q. Would you please now look at the following page, 1D9689.
5 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] The English page is 1D0034.
6 Q. You see that this act was passed by the then Minister of the
7 Interior, Dosta Dimovska, pursuant to the competences listed the Law on
8 Internal Affairs.
9 A. Yes, this is so.
10 Q. In item Roman numeral VII, we see that the decision declares null
11 and void the previous decision dated 16th of April, 1999.
12 A. Yes, this is correct. This is a previous decision which pertains
13 to the same matter.
14 Q. Could you tell me, Ms. Dorevska, when the second decision
15 regulated the remuneration, was it the case that the employees could be --
16 that the reservists could be employees of the ministry?
17 A. No. Even in the period of that decision, once again, we speak of
18 remuneration, not of employees. Reservists have never been employed in
19 the Ministry of Interior.
20 Q. I would kindly ask you now to look at the document after tab 46.
21 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] That is 65 ter 1D1209. The page
22 is 1D9690 in Macedonian, and 1D0035 is the English page.
23 Q. This is a decision passed on the 16th of October, 2003; and as we
24 can see from the text, that is a decision that declared the previous
25 decision null and void, the decision of 11th of May, 2002.
1 Is this what this document is?
2 A. Yes, this is so.
3 Q. Tell me, then, in the period between this decision, 11th of May,
4 2001 and until that moment, what was the remuneration paid to the members
5 of the reserve forces; so throughout 2001 and 2002?
6 A. In that period, the reservists received the remuneration
7 supplements which I read out previously from the 11th of May, 2001,
8 salary for workplace for a police officers, and all the supplements to
9 which that work post is entitled to.
10 Q. Would you please now look at the document after tab 47.
11 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] That is 65 ter 1D1210.
12 Q. This is a decision passed on the 16th of April, 1999, by the then
13 Minister of the Interior, Pavle Trajanov.
14 Tell me, Ms. Dorevska, is this the decision in force until the
15 11th of May, when it was declared null and void by the decision that you
16 recognised and commented upon a moment ago?
17 A. Yes. This is the decision which was valid until the next decision
18 was passed; and, once again, it calls on the Law on Defence, a special
19 provision which pertains to remuneration of persons who are called in to
20 carry out the rights and obligations related to the defence.
21 Q. Ms. Dorevska, we're speaking about the reserve forces. We saw
22 that the minister enacts the rules on the way of calling up of the members
23 of reserve forces as a general act, then also enacts a decision on
25 Tell me, does the minister have any other authorisations towards
1 the reserve forces?
2 A. I believe he decides about their being called in.
3 Q. Thank you. Once they are called up - I apologise, let me just
4 clarify this - or decides about them being called up, what did you refer
5 it? Is it a call-up of an individual member of the reserve forces or what
6 is it about?
7 A. I believe that he passes a decision for engaging reservists not on
8 an individual basis.
9 Q. And who then follows this, and what is the procedure through which
10 the calling up is carried out?
11 A. Then this, the Book of Rules, is followed by a specific organised
12 unit in the ministry, and this the section on defence preparations.
13 Q. Does the minister have any right to interfere or be involved in
14 the carrying out of the procedure, with respect to the bodies dealing with
15 defence preparations?
16 A. Of course, he does not.
17 Q. Once a member of the reserve force is called up and deployed to a
18 given post, who then issues or who then assigns tasks to him?
19 A. This the head and most often the commander of the police station
20 where this person is called in to carry out the obligations.
21 Q. You stated that the members of the reserve forces are responsible
22 as any other citizen if they commit a crime, and that they can't be held
23 disciplinary responsible because they are not an employee of the Ministry
24 of Interior.
25 But if a member of the reserve force fails to perform properly the
1 duties where they are appointed by the commander of the police station or
2 any other senior officer under whom they are deployed, is there a way in
3 which the ministry could act against such reservist?
4 A. There is an established procedure if the reserve police officer
5 does not carry out the obligations as expected of him or due to other
6 reasons. In that case, the head or the commander of the police station
7 will inform the competent organisational unit.
8 This is the section for defence preparations, which will then
9 inform the original unit of the Ministry of Defence that this person is
10 disengaged, and that there is no longer and no further need of his
11 engagement within the ministry.
12 Q. I will kindly ask you now, Ms. Dorevska, to find in the binder 2
13 in the document in tab 48 [as interpreted].
14 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] This is 65 ter 1D1214.1. That is
15 1D9768, and the English page is 1D0042.
16 Q. Ms. Dorevska, this is a document from the sector of internal
17 affairs for the city of Skopje, the defence preparation department.
18 Is this the organisational unit that you spoke about as being the
19 unit carrying out the procedure after a decision to call up reservists is
21 A. This is so. As within the framework of the ministry, there is a
22 section for defence preparations, while each sector of internal affairs
23 has a segment that works with defence preparations. In this document, we
24 are talking about this part, that is part of the sector of the internal
25 affairs in Skopje.
1 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] In line 19, it should be tab "40A"
2 [Realtime transcript read in error "48"], and not "48."
3 Q. This document speaks about recruitment of military conscripts.
4 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Maybe I'm not speaking well. But
5 in line 6, it is, again, stated "48." It should be tab "40A," with the
6 letter A.
7 Q. So the subject is: "Recruitment of military conscripts within the
8 sector for internal affairs of the city of Skopje."
9 Is this the subject of this document that we see in front of us?
10 A. Yes. This is the subject of this document: "Recruitment of 20
11 military conscripts in the sector of internal affairs of the city of
13 Q. Would you please now look at the second page, and you can see the
14 number, 1D9769.
15 The last paragraph there says the following: "The remaining
16 conscripts, whose files have been selected but who do not meet the
17 prescribed criteria for recruitment into reserve force of the SVR Skopje,
18 are handed over to you for their potential deployment to other defence
20 When you spoke that the defence preparation unit could actually
21 remove those who do not meet the requirements and transfer them to the
22 Ministry of Defence, is this the situation that we read about in this
24 A. Yes, this is such a situation.
25 Q. Kindly look now at the document in tab 40B.
1 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] This is 65 ter 1D1214.2. That is
2 1D9770, and the English page is 1D0044.
3 Q. We have, again, a document of the competent body within the sector
4 of internal affairs for the city of Skopje sent to the Ministry of
6 Tell me, before I ask you a question in relation to the document,
7 tell me, please, where are the records maintained of all military
8 conscripts in the Republic of Macedonia?
9 A. The records are held in the regional units of the Ministry of
11 Q. So, this body of internal affairs would address the competent body
12 that maintains the records of all conscripts.
13 Is that understanding of mine correct?
14 A. Yes, this is so.
15 Q. Subject of this document is: "Report on reserve military
16 conscripts stricken from the VOS of the SVR of Skopje city."
17 The first paragraph says: "We hereby inform you that on the
18 grounds that they do not meet the criteria envisaged for serving in the
19 police reserve, the following reserve conscripts have been stricken from
20 the records of the reserve police of the SVR Skopje," and then their names
21 are indicated.
22 Does this document also correspond to your knowledge and the
23 practice, that if someone from within the reserve forces do not meet the
24 requirements, they can only be sent back to the main records of the
25 reserve force?
1 A. According to my knowledge, because I do not have much practice in
2 this area, I know that this is the manner in which military conscripts are
3 stricken off from the register.
4 Q. And which is the body that issues such decision, which is the body
5 that strikes of these persons' names and informs the body of the Ministry
6 of Interior?
7 A. These are sectors for internal affairs and the sections for
8 defence preparations which work therein.
9 Q. Tell me, could the minister strike off the name of a reserve
10 force, or could they order someone to remove someone's name from the list
11 of the reserve forces?
12 A. Of course, not. That is an established procedure that is carried
13 out by a specific organisational unit.
14 Q. Ms. Dorevska, throughout the day today, we've been discussing
15 employees of the Ministry of Interior and the conditions of their
16 employment and work.
17 Now, tell me, please, since you have worked in the ministry for
18 many years, in all that time, were there any efforts made to improve the
19 structure of those employed in the ministry, especially the ethnic
20 structure within the Ministry of Interior?
21 A. Of course. Even then, I believe even earlier than this time,
22 activities started to improve the representation of the ethnic minorities
23 in the Republic of Macedonia.
24 Q. Would you now take a look at tab 58 in the second binder.
25 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] It's Exhibit 1D119; 1D4274 in the
2 Q. This is a report dated the 24th of April, 2001, and the subject
3 is: "Negotiations with respect to the training of the newly recruited
4 policemen in cooperation with the US Embassy in the Republic of
6 Now, in view of the fact that you worked in the area of labour
7 relations, do you know when efforts were started to change the ethnic
8 structure and did this evolve throughout? Were there any problems along
9 the way; and if so, why?
10 A. Somewhere in the year 2000, the procedure for recruitment of new
11 police officers in the Ministry of Interior commenced. Before that, the
12 recruitment of police officers went through the recruiting graduates from
13 the secondary police school, but the last group finished their education
14 in 1999. So, in the next year, in the year 2000, activities started to
15 recruit police officers through a public ad.
16 I was then head of the personnel department. I know that during
17 certain time, because of the ongoing activities, the procedure was
18 interrupted and it continued sometime in September 2001, when we published
19 the first ad for recruitment of police officers.
20 Q. The critical situation in Macedonia, did it have an effect on
21 whereby it slowed down the process that had been initiated?
22 A. Of course. That was the main reason why was the process delayed.
23 Q. You've just said that, at the time, you were head of the personnel
24 department up until the time that you became head of the legal and
25 personnel affairs sector. So, in view of that, let's look at the
1 following documents between tabs 59 and 65.
2 Look through those and tell me whether you are familiar with those
4 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] And, for the record, these are
5 Exhibits 1D120, 1D121, 1D122, 1D123, 1D124.
6 Q. Are you familiar with these documents; and if so, what do they
7 refer to?
8 A. Of course. These are documents produced in the sector that I am
9 the head of then and now, in the sector for personnel affairs; and they
10 concern public ad for recruitment of 100 police officers in the Ministry
11 of Interior published in several media outlets.
12 Q. Now, Ms. Dorevska, look at tab 64, please?
13 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] This is a 65 ter document, 1D1207;
14 beginning with page 1D9683 in Macedonian and 1D0031 in English.
15 Q. Are you familiar with this document, Ms. Dorevska?
16 A. Yes, of course. I'm familiar with this document. I know that
17 during that time such brochures were produced, small brochures that were
18 given to the police officers. I myself have such document in my
20 Q. Do you know when this particular document was printed?
21 A. I couldn't say when precisely.
22 Q. Do you know how many copies of it was printed?
23 A. I believe that the circulation was rather large, 1.000, 2.000. I
24 really can't say precisely.
25 Q. We've already spoken about the fact that the director cannot be
1 taken to task in disciplinary proceedings, and that the only thing that is
2 possible is that the minister can propose that he be relieved of his
3 duties. The proposal goes to the government who appointed him.
4 Do you remember us discussing that?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Tell me, please, can disciplinary measures be taken against the
7 minister himself?
8 A. Of course, not. The minister is an official elected by the
9 parliament of the Republic of Macedonia.
10 Q. Is he an employee of the Ministry of Interior?
11 A. No.
12 Q. Is the -- does the collective agreement apply to the minister?
13 JUDGE PARKER: Ms. Residovic, on my count, you've asked these
14 questions at least six times now, always getting the same answer.
15 I think we might move on.
16 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] I wasn't counting, but probably I
17 did repeat them quite a number of times. Thank you.
18 Q. Are there separate laws governing the rights and duties of
19 ministers and other officials who are elected and appointed?
20 A. Yes. There are such special laws, governing the matters of their
21 salary, allowances, and other employment-related rights.
22 Q. Now, when we speak of disciplinary procedure, you said that
23 disciplinary measures and proceedings can be taken against employees of
24 the Ministry of Interior.
25 Can you tell me who is authorised to set into motion a
1 disciplinary measure or proceedings against an employee?
2 A. A proposal to initiate a disciplinary procedure could be filed
3 by --
4 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters kindly ask the counsel to move
5 the binder away from the microphone and the witness to repeat the answer
6 because we couldn't hear it because of the noise.
7 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, I do apologise. The Defence
8 counsel seems to be under attack and criticism. It is obvious that
9 Defence counsel is a little tired, so I apologise to the Trial Chamber and
10 to the interpreters.
11 Q. Yes, Witness, could you answer that question, and the question
12 was: Who is authorised to initiate disciplinary proceedings and what
13 regulates that?
14 A. Are you referring to the initiative, or are you referring to the
15 commencement of a disciplinary procedure?
16 Q. Well, tell us, first, since we saw some provisions on the rules an
17 organisation of work, who can initiate disciplinary proceedings against an
19 A. Any superior officer could initiate a disciplinary procedure
20 against an employee from within his subordination, while the proposal
21 could be filed by the director of the bureaus for public security and for
22 public safety and for sate security and the officers who are authorised by
23 the minister.
24 Q. I'd like you now, Ms. Dorevska, to take a look at a document we
25 have already seen.
1 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] This is tab 46, Exhibit P382.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I apologise, I don't think it is
3 here. I don't think it is in this binder.
4 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, it is in binder 3; Tab 76, in
5 binder 3.
6 Q. I'd like to ask to you take a look at Article 143.
7 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Article 143 is on page 27 of the
8 English text; 6375, N002-6375.
9 Q. Ms. Dorevska, tell me, please, who tables a proposal? You already
10 told us at whose initiative, but who tables a proposal that disciplinary
11 proceedings be taken against an employee?
12 A. Of course, I answered this already, but I will repeat again.
13 On the basis of Article 143, paragraph 5, it reads that the
14 proposal is made by the under-secretary, the director of the directorate,
15 and the officers authorised by the minister.
16 Since the provisions of this collective agreement are a bit older,
17 the proposals is made by the directors of the bureau and of the
18 directorate and the officers that the minister authorises for this.
19 Q. Now, is the minister authorised himself to file a proposal for
20 disciplinary proceedings to be taken?
21 A. No. The minister is not authorised to make a proposal to start a
22 disciplinary procedure, and you can see it very clearly from this
24 Q. What authorisation of the minister is stipulated here?
25 A. On the basis of this provision, the minister is obliged to
1 authorise workers who can file a proposal for disciplinary proceeding.
2 Q. Tell me, why is it that the minister can't be the initiator of the
3 disciplinary proceedings, why not?
4 A. Because the minister adopts the decision for a disciplinary
5 measure; and, therefore, he cannot, at the same time, submit this
6 proposal. This would mean that two matters would focus or would be placed
7 in the person of one individual.
8 Q. And who conducts the proceedings to establish disciplinary
9 responsibility and accountability of workers?
10 A. This is a special commission for dismissal which is established by
11 the minister.
12 Q. Tell me, please -- well, we've said, as I understand it, the
13 minister decides to set up a commission. He makes that decision.
14 Secondly, he establishes who, in addition to these individuals,
15 have the right to table the proposal.
16 What else can a minister do with within these steps towards
17 disciplinary proceedings?
18 A. He is obliged to pass the decision for a disciplinary measure.
19 Q. And when does he do that? When does he pass that decision?
20 A. At that moment, when the dismissal commission, on the basis of the
21 previous initiative and proposal, will finish the procedure foreseen for
22 that issue and will propose to the minister a certain measure against a
23 specific individual.
24 Q. While the commission is conducting the proceedings, does the
25 minister enjoy any rights, does very any rights in interfering in the
1 proceedings or taking part in the proceedings at all?
2 A. No. The minister cannot take part in the proceeding and cannot at
3 all interfere in the work of the commission. The commission is -- is
4 independent in its proceedings on disciplinary matters.
5 Q. Now, you said that the minister makes the decisions. What
6 decision, after the procedure has been put in place and conducted, what
7 decision can the minister take?
8 A. At the proposal of the commission, the minister can adopt a
9 decision on dismissal, termination of employment; and at the proposal of
10 the commission, this termination of employment can be replaced with a fee,
11 a fine, for a period of one to six months.
12 Q. This decision by the minister, with respect to disciplinary
13 responsibility and accountability, is it final?
14 A. No. This decision is it not final, because the employee can
15 always appeal to the second instance commission at the government which
16 decides in areas related to labour issues.
17 Q. What can that second instance commission actually do?
18 A. This commission can take into account the appeal of the employee,
19 can change the decision of the minister; and in this case, this decision
20 of the second instance commission is obligatory for the Ministry of
22 Q. I'm now going to ask you to take up the second binder and to look
23 at tab 72, the document there.
24 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] It is 65 ter 1D1266, and it on
25 page 1D0135.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm sorry. I have the third binder.
2 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] After tab 72, it is 1D0135; and in
3 English, it's 1D0161.
4 Q. In the preamble of this act, we can see that in referring to the
5 legal basis, legal grounds, the commission for the second instance
6 commission decides on an appeal that has been lodged.
7 Is that the commission that you have just testified about, this
8 second instance commission, which deals with appeals to the ministerial
10 A. Yes. This is the second instance commission in the government.
11 Q. As we can see, this decision passed a decision; and below, it says
12 that the appeal is granted, as founded.
13 Does that confirm what you said, that the second instance
14 commission can uphold the minister's decision or reject it on appeal?
15 A. Exactly so. This is one manner in which way the commission can
16 reach a decision.
17 Q. What is the procedure according to which the second instance
18 commission works, or the government commission?
19 A. This commission works on the basis of the provisions of the Law on
20 Government which regulates the work of the commissions, but also there is
21 also a Book of Rules about its work which establishes the manner and the
22 procedures for the work of this commission and the decisions that it can
24 Q. Would you now look at tab 73.
25 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] That is 65 ter exhibit [as
1 interpreted] 1D1267. 0137 is the page number in Macedonian, and 1D0163 in
3 Q. Tell me, Ms. Dorevska, these rules of procedure, are they the
4 rules according to which the government commission works, that you've just
5 talked about?
6 A. Yes. This is a rule of procedure for the work of the commission.
7 Q. When an employee is in transgression of a duty, what is the
8 deadline within which proceedings can be taken against a particular
9 employee, or are there any deadlines? Is there any statute of limitations
10 after which time disciplinary measures can not be taken?
11 A. There is such a deadline established with the collective
12 agreement. This is a period of three months from the day of learning of
13 the violation. This is objective [as interpreted].
14 Six months, an objective, once this is repeated once, these
15 deadlines have been surpassed. The disciplinary procedure cannot be
16 repeated because of the existence of a statute of limitations.
17 Q. And, finally, Ms. Dorevska, let us take a look at some documents
18 found in binder 3.
19 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] On page 50/1 -- no, I apologise.
20 Page 58, line 1, or rather, on 58, line 1, something was erroneously
21 recorded, because she was speaking about a "subjective" deadline of three
22 months, and an objective deadline of six months.
23 Q. Did I understand you correctly, Witness?
24 A. Yes, this is what I said.
25 Q. Let's take a look at tab 105, which is a 65 ter document.
1 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] The number of which is 1D1271.
2 And it is page 1D0185; and in the English, it is 0187.
3 Q. Tell me, please, Ms. Dorevska, what does this document represent?
4 A. This is a decision by which, after a procedure for an individual,
5 employment is terminated without a period for termination.
6 Q. And who passes this decision?
7 A. This decision is reached by the minister at the proposal of the
8 commission who led the proceeding.
9 Q. Look at tab 106 now, please.
10 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] It is 65 ter 1D1272. Page 1D0191
11 in Macedonian, and 1D0192 in the English. Yes, 0190, Macedonian; and
12 0192, English.
13 Q. Now, what does this document represent, Ms. Dorevska?
14 A. This is an objection of an employee against a decision of the
15 Ministry of Internal Affairs by which, I presume, the employee has been
16 issued a decision for termination of work.
17 Q. Now let's take a look at tab 107, which is 65 ter 1D1273.
18 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] And on page 1D0194 of the
19 Macedonian, and 1D0196 of the English.
20 Q. Ms. Dorevska, can you tell me, please, what this document is
22 A. In a case when an employee objects before the second instance
23 commission of the government, then this proceeding is carried out in a way
24 that this objection is submitted through the body which adopted the
25 decision. In this case, the objection comes to the sector which I head at
1 the moment, and then this sector as a specialised service prepares an
2 opinion in regards to this objection, which is submitted to the second
3 instance commission at the government.
4 It can happen that the objection is submitted directly to the
5 commission at the government. However, this will be returned back to the
6 Ministry of Interior, so as it can receive it from the ministry, that is
7 to say, can receive an opinion whether this objection is grounded or not
8 grounded, which does not bind the commission in any way.
9 Of course, this can only be in the interest of making this
11 Q. And my last question, Ms. Dorevska, which relates to tab 108,
12 65 ter 1D1274.
13 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] 0198 is the page in Macedonian,
14 and 0200 in English.
15 Q. Tell me, please, Ms. Dorevska, what is this document about?
16 A. This is a decision of the second instance commission at the
17 government which has decided that the objection is rejected as ungrounded.
18 Q. Thank you, Ms. Dorevska.
19 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, that completes my
20 examination of the witness.
21 During the break, I will provide a list of exhibits -- or rather,
22 documents which I put to the witness, which are not included in the list
23 of exhibits that the Prosecutor has, in order to facilitate their work and
24 rather to facilitate the work of the Trial Chamber in makes its decisions
25 [as interpreted].
1 Yes. I have been told that there's a problem with the
2 interpretation. I said that these documents are still not exhibits, but
3 they are on the list of our documents.
4 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you. We will have the break now and resume
5 at 1.00.
6 Thank you very much.
7 --- Recess taken at 12.30 p.m.
8 --- On resuming at 1.00 p.m.
9 JUDGE PARKER: Ms. Residovic.
10 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, as I said, I have
11 submitted the list of documents that we wished to tender to my learned
12 colleague, so I will first seek to tender the documents that the
13 Prosecution does not object to.
14 So I seek to tender the following documents: 65 ter 1D1200, which
15 was in tab 9 and is the rule book on the work of the sector for
16 intelligence and counter-intelligence.
17 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.
18 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit 1D297, Your Honours.
19 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] I seek to tender in evidence
20 65 ter document 1216, which was in tab 70. That is the decision of the
21 constitutional court.
22 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.
23 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit 1D298, Your Honours.
24 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] We seek to tender into evidence
25 the 65 ter document 1D1217. That was in tab 71, which is the second
1 decision of -- or another decision of the constitutional court.
2 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.
3 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit 1D299.
4 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] We seek to tender into evidence 65
5 ter 1D1218 [as interpreted], which is in tab 45. That is the decision
6 about the remuneration on -- for the reserve forces.
7 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.
8 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit 1D300, Your Honours.
9 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] We seek to tender into evidence
10 65 ter 1D1209 and 1D1210, in tabs 46 and 47 respectively, which are again
11 related to remuneration for the reserve forces.
12 JUDGE PARKER: Together they will be received.
13 THE REGISTRAR: 65 ter 1D1209 will become Exhibit 1D301, and
14 65 ter 1D1210 will become Exhibit 1D302.
15 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] 65 ter 1D1207 which is in tab 64,
16 and they are rules -- I apologise. 1D1207, that is the rules of the
17 Ministry of Interior related to the security bodies.
18 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.
19 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit 1D303, Your Honours.
20 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] I seek to tender into evidence
21 65 ter 1D1271, which is in tab 105. That is a decision about the
22 disciplinary procedure.
23 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.
24 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit 1D304, Your Honours.
25 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] I seek to tender into evidence
1 65 ter 1D1272 in tab 106, and that is an appeal against a minister's
2 decision on termination of employment.
3 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.
4 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit 1D305, Your Honours.
5 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] I seek to tender into evidence
6 65 ter 1D1273 in tab 107, which is a response from the ministry to the
7 appeal that was lodged.
8 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.
9 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit 1D306, Your Honours.
10 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, the Prosecutor's
11 office objected to the following documents that the Defence wishes to
13 These are 65 ter 1D1214.1. That was in tab 42 [as interpreted],
14 and it pertains to the conditions or the procedure through which the
15 reservists are removed from the forces of the Ministry of Interior and
16 transferred to the Ministry of Defence.
17 At the same time, 65 ter 1214.2. That was in tab 40B. That,
18 again, speaks about striking out names of reservists who do not meet the
19 requirements from the list and their transfer again to the Ministry of
21 The Defence proposes that these documents are received as relevant
22 documents because, on the one hand, they are authentic; on the other hand,
23 they are relevant since they show in which was the only way that the
24 ministry could react, versus the reserve forces when they do not meet the
25 necessary requirements or prerequisites for a person to be a member of the
1 Ministry of Interior.
2 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction: Page 62/14, "40A,"
3 letter A, instead of "42."
4 JUDGE PARKER: Ms. Issa, on those two proposed exhibits.
5 MS. ISSA: Your Honour, we're objecting because those two proposed
6 exhibits arise from a later time-period.
7 65 ter 1D1214.1 at tab 40A is dated 8 April 2004, and 65 ter
8 1D1214.2 at tab 40B is dated 16 April 2004; and so, therefore, the
9 Prosecution fails to see the relevance of these documents.
10 [Trial Chamber confers]
11 JUDGE PARKER: They will not be received.
12 Now does that complete your list of exhibits?
13 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] There are two more that the
14 Prosecutor's office objected to: 65 ter 1D1266 in tab 72 and 65 ter
15 1D1267 in tab 73.
16 Decision of the second instance committee which show in which way
17 the second instance committee decided upon appeals of employees against
18 minister's decision, and the second document speaks about the rules of
19 procedure of the committee used by the committee when making such
21 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.
22 Ms. Issa.
23 MS. ISSA: Your Honour, with respect to 65 ter 1D1266, once again
24 it is a decision that falls outside of the relevant time-period. It was
25 delivered on the 22nd of August 2007, and the preamble of the decision
1 refers to laws and regulations that are respectively in 2003, 2005, 2007.
2 So, in my submission, again that would be irrelevant to the proceedings.
3 With respect 65 ter 1267, which is the rules of procedure, once
4 against it appears that these rules were adopted on the 2nd of April
5 2003. So their relevance is -- well, they're irrelevant in my submission.
6 JUDGE PARKER: Ms. Residovic.
7 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I do believe that the
8 witness answered some of the objections.
9 Could you allow me that, before you make your decision, I ask one
10 additional question of the witness?
11 JUDGE PARKER: I really don't think it would help, Ms. Residovic.
12 My own objection is we have oral evidence that there was a second instance
13 committee established at the government level to which appeals could be
15 Though independent of the minister, they made decisions against
16 decisions of the minister. What more do you need?
17 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you very much, Your Honours.
18 I'm satisfied with your statement, and I do not insist to submit these
19 documents as evidence.
20 JUDGE PARKER: They will not be received. Thank you.
21 Mr. Apostolski.
22 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Your Honours. I
23 have no questions of this witness.
24 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you very much.
25 Ms. Issa.
1 MS. ISSA: Thank you, Your Honour.
2 Cross-examination by Ms. Issa:
3 Q. Good afternoon, Ms. Dorevska. Just if I can introduce myself.
4 A. Good afternoon.
5 Q. My name is Antoinette Issa and I work for the Prosecutor's office
6 and I'm here on their behalf, and I would just like to ask you a few
8 First of all, I've noted, in your examination-in-chief, you've
9 indicated that you've had a very long career with the ministry and you
10 kind of went over your work rather quickly. So I'd like just to highlight
11 a few things, if I may.
12 I understand that, on 10 April 2001, you had been assigned to the
13 post of the head officer of personnel department for the sector of legal
14 and personnel matters by then Minister Dosta Dimovska.
15 Is that correct?
16 A. Yes, this is correct.
17 Q. And then, on the 1st of October in 2001, you were reassigned to
18 another place of duty as head officer to the personnel department, again
19 in the sector for legal and personnel matters, and you were given an
20 increase in your salary at that point.
21 Is that correct?
22 A. I apologise. I'm not sure that I understood your question well.
23 I believe you mentioned the same workplace?
24 Q. Was there an increase in your salary in October 2001 and a
25 reassignment at that point?
1 A. In October 2001, I received a contract for head of legal and
2 personnel affairs; and, yes, I received a raise in my salary.
3 Q. And that was done at the time that Minister Boskoski was then in
4 office. Is that correct?
5 A. This is correct.
6 Q. And then two months later, in January of 2002, you were promoted
7 to assistant to the minister in the sector for legal and personnel
9 Is that right?
10 A. No, this is not correct. This was the identical workplace. I
11 mentioned this during my testimony. Previously, I was head of the same
12 sector because the name of the workplace, the title of that workplace was
13 such, but this was a temporary decision. At the beginning of 2002 I was
14 assigned assistant to the minister because the name of the -- the title of
15 the workplace had changed; otherwise, it is the same workplace in
17 Q. Okay. And then you continued in this post; and as I understand
18 it, in September 2002, which was six months later, you received an
19 increase in salary or cash bonus, once again.
20 Is that right?
21 A. No, this is not correct. In October 2001, when I received the
22 first decision as the head officers and the later decision for the same
23 work post with the title assistant minister, I did not -- I did not
24 receive an ensuing decision. I'm still at the same work post.
25 Q. Perhaps, you misunderstood me. What I asked what was whether you
1 received an increase in your salary or a cash bonus, if you recall.
2 A. If you mean remuneration, yes, a bonus, yes; but this is not a
3 raise there salary. My salary was the same established with the decision
4 which served to my assignment, but a bonus or any other type of reward is
5 an altogether different matter.
6 Q. Okay. Now, you mentioned, Ms. Dorevska, that your tasks at the
7 ministry in 2001, and I guess to the present day, entail drafting laws and
8 regulations and to deal with matters of human remain resources and
9 management and things of that nature. Is that fair?
10 A. Yes, this is so.
11 Q. And you also work -- you said today, I believe, that you deal with
12 personnel matters as well.
13 A. Yes. I still work on personnel issues; but, at this moment, there
14 is a different organisation to it, and it is somewhat different than the
15 period in question.
16 Q. Okay. But just staying with the period in question, which is in
17 2001/2002, those were essentially your tasks. Is that right?
18 A. Yes, this is right.
19 Q. And, prior to your work at the Ministry of Interior, you had not
20 worked as a police officer, had you?
21 A. No, I have not worked. I said I had a voluntary apprenticeship at
22 the commercial court prior to my employment at the minister. Even now,
23 I'm not a police officer.
24 Q. Okay. And you also mentioned, I believe in your direct testimony,
25 that you never went out and executed a search warrant or had anything to
1 do with operative tasks. So I take it you've never worked on
2 investigations of -- of crimes, have you?
3 A. No. I have never worked on these matters.
4 Q. So you have never been out in the field assisting or you were
5 never present at a police operation, have you?
6 A. No, never.
7 Q. And I take it you never accompanied Minister Boskoski at the time
8 in the field.
9 A. No. I believe that also Minister Boskoski was never on the field.
10 Q. Okay. But that's something that you -- how do you know that?
11 What makes you say that?
12 A. Just a presumption. I'm not sure about this.
13 Q. Okay. So that's just your belief.
14 Now, clearly, you've done well for yourself, Ms. Dorevska, because
15 you have been promoted several times, and I take it that you take your
16 work very seriously and that you're conscientious at what you do.
17 Is that right?
18 A. I believe that this is so.
19 Q. And as assistant to the minister at the time, in 2001, did you
20 have supervisory duties?
21 A. I apologise. What do you mean by "supervisory duties."
22 Q. Well, you said you were the head of sector for legal affairs and
23 personnel. So presumably you had people that were working for in that
24 sector. Is that right?
25 A. Of course. I had over 30 people in the sector.
1 Q. Did those people that you supervise report to you regarding the
2 tasks that they carried out?
3 A. Yes. Above all, they reported to their direct superiors because
4 there were two sections which part of my sector, but also to me as head
5 officer of the sector through their section heads.
6 Q. So what you're saying is that you had people working for you that
7 had immediate superiors, but you were the -- the head of the entire sector
8 and so you received reports up that chain to you. Is that right?
9 A. Correct.
10 Q. And I take it, Ms. Dorevska, that these reports concerned
11 information regarding the work of your particular sector and the ongoing
12 tasks. Is that right?
13 A. Of course.
14 Q. And I take it, as -- as the superior and as the head of the
15 sector, that you relied upon these reports in order to help you make
16 decisions regarding the work of the sector. Is that right?
17 A. This is right.
18 Q. And sometimes, based on the information that you received, did you
19 delegate some tasks to your subordinates or to people in the sector?
20 A. Of course. This is one of the basic principle of work to delegate
21 certain competencies.
22 Q. And it's part of your rule, as a supervisor or the head of the
23 sector at the time, that to know when to delegate certain tasks and other
24 times to carry out those tasks yourself.
25 That would be a basic principle. Is that fair?
1 A. Yes, one could say that.
2 Q. And as assistant to the minister in -- for that sector, you said
3 that you were subordinate to the minister or you were directly linked to
4 the minister. Is that right?
5 A. Yes, this is so. This is a sector which functionally is related
6 to the work of the minister. It is directly connected to the minister.
7 Q. So, presumably, you reported to the minister about your tasks and
8 activities as well. Is that -- is that right?
9 A. Yes. On the collegium which were held, I always gave reports
10 about the work of my sector.
11 Q. Did you give reports to the minister outside of the collegium as
13 A. Reports, no.
14 Q. Did you -- did you give information outside of the -- of the
15 collegium as well; if not reports, did you provide him with information?
16 A. Of course. If the minister so requested for a certain matter, I
17 was -- I'm duty-bound to provide information to him.
18 Q. And if there was a matter that you felt was of importance that
19 should come to his attention as the minister, wouldn't you also provide
20 him with that information?
21 A. Of course. I would provide that information.
22 Q. Because that would, of course, permit him to make decisions as the
23 minister on the basis of the information that you provide, right?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. And did sometimes the minister give you instructions in relation
1 to certain activities or tasks that he wished -- he wanted to have carried
3 A. No. He never gave me instructions. They were always
4 conversations where certain matters were decided, matters which sector
5 should undertake as its task.
6 Q. Well, suppose the minister had said to you that he wanted a
7 particular matter in your sector to be carried out in a -- in a specific
8 way, would you follow that request?
9 A. Above all, I would point out to him what can be done in that
10 regard, and this did happen. The request of the minister is always
11 supported with my professional indications; and if conditions are met,
12 then, of course, the work will be done.
13 Q. Okay. So what you're telling us, then, is that you would give him
14 your views and your opinion on how you think a particular matter should be
15 carried out; and, in the end, he may decide that should be carried out in
16 a particular way. Is that right?
17 A. In certain circumstances, yes.
18 Q. Okay. Now, in 2001, Ms. Dorevska, at that time, there was an
19 ongoing conflict, wasn't there?
20 A. Correct.
21 Q. And there was a crisis in 2001 that put great pressure on the work
22 of the ministry, didn't it?
23 A. Correct.
24 Q. In fact, you've just explained earlier today that certain public
25 announcements for training of employees were not made during that period,
1 because of the great pressure and stress in -- because of the crisis,
3 A. No. Activities were halted regarding the publishing public
4 announcements for hiring police officers, not for training.
5 Q. Okay. But they were halted because of the -- of the pressure, of
6 the complex security situation as a result of the conflict.
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. And, in fact, the security situation was so serious at the time
9 that reservists had to be called up to assist the regular Macedonian
10 forces in 2001, right?
11 A. I cannot give you a concrete answer to this question, because I
12 don't know how the decision was passed for the call-up of reserve forces.
13 But I can presume, due to the serious nature of the situation, that it was
14 essential to increase the number of police officers or rather, to call up
15 the reserve forces.
16 Q. Okay. Thank you. And just moving, then, on to another topic.
17 You've explained yesterday to us, Ms. Dorevska, that the directors or the
18 director of the bureau of public safety, or public security, and the other
19 director of counter-intelligence and security, are appointed by the
20 government on proposal of the minister. Is that right?
21 A. This is correct.
22 Q. And, equally, you've said that the minister can issue a proposal
23 to the government to have the director removed, right?
24 A. He can submit a proposal for his dismissal.
25 Q. And the director is responsible for the work of the body that he
1 manages to the minister, as well as to the government. Is that right?
2 A. This is correct.
3 Q. And the law that you referred to yesterday makes it is clear that
4 the director is accountable or answerable to the minister.
5 A. Yes. He is answerable to the minister, too.
6 Q. And, in fact, what I believe you said in your testimony is that
7 the director is primarily accountable to the minister because he is part
8 of ministry. Is that right?
9 A. One could say that this is correct.
10 Q. So does the director report to the minister about his tasks and
11 the work of the public security bureau?
12 A. Of course.
13 Q. And if the director is responsible for his work to the minister,
14 doesn't that also mean that the minister can check the quality of his
16 A. I don't know how he would check that.
17 Q. Well, wouldn't the director, if, say, the director reported to the
18 minister about some task that he undertook and the minister wasn't very
19 happy with the way in which the director carried out that task, can the
20 minister, for example, tell him to revise the task or change it somehow?
21 A. Maybe to an extent, yes, as a result of some collegium within
22 which decisions are made of strategic importance.
23 Q. Okay. But if the -- assuming, then, if the director's work was
24 not of good quality or the minister was not happy with the way in which
25 the director was carrying out his tasks in general, then what you've told
1 us is that the minister can propose to have the director dismissed to the
2 government. Right?
3 A. Of course. And to elaborate it, before the government presenting
4 facts why he is not satisfied with the work of the director.
5 Q. Okay. And, presumably, the director knows that he is in the
6 position of director because he was given that post after a proposal was
7 made by the minister to make him director. Is that right?
8 A. It is probably right.
9 Q. Well, you would presume that if that's how things worked and
10 that's how the director got his post, he would know that the -- he
11 received the post as a result of the proposal made by the minister.
12 Isn't that just -- isn't that logical?
13 A. That is a procedure for appointing the director, and every
14 director is appointed following that same procedure.
15 Q. Okay. So the director knows, practically speaking, that it would
16 be foolish to do anything that contravened the minister's wishes, wouldn't
18 A. In this case, the wishes of the minister are irrelevant for the
19 performance of the duties in the area of public safety and state security.
20 These are precisely defined obligations that they have the duty to follow.
21 Q. Well, I appreciate that that's what you said the way things work.
22 But, practically speaking, Ms. Dorevska, you've told us that the director
23 reports to the minister regarding his tasks, and you've told us that the
24 minister has some say in the quality or -- on the quality of the work of
25 the director.
1 Don't you think that the director might be influenced by a concern
2 that he didn't wish to contravene the minister's wishes?
3 A. No. I don't think like that at all, because the ministry, and I
4 will repeat it again, does not work according to the wishes of the
5 minister. It works pursuant to the legislation and the constitution of
6 the state.
7 Q. What if the director was at a collegium with the minister and the
8 minister suggested or asked the director to carry out a specific task that
9 is within his competence and the director didn't do it properly or didn't
10 do it according the wishes of the minister, couldn't the minister at that
11 stage propose to remove the director?
12 A. Whenever the minister is not satisfied with the work of the
13 director, the minister could always submit a proposal, but that proposal
14 must always be corroborated by other facts. One single situation where
15 the minister is not satisfied with the activity as it was carried out
16 could not be sufficient grounds for removal of the director.
17 Q. Okay. But let's just say that it's not one single activity.
18 Let's just say it's a number of activities that the director simply was
19 not carrying out the tasks in the way that the minister would have liked
20 to see.
21 A. That is the assessment of the minister. If the minister assesses
22 that the director performed the duties unconsciously or undiligently, I
23 would repeat again, the minister can submit a proposal and inform the
24 government. The government is the body appointing and dismissing the
25 director, and the government will decide whether the work of the director
1 was proper, satisfactory, or not.
2 Q. And if the director makes a specific proposal to the minister, can
3 the minister disagree with the proposal that the director has made.
4 A. They could disagree, depending on what is the issue.
5 Q. Okay. And you mentioned that in 2001, the director of bureau for
6 public security was Goran Mitevski. Is that right?
7 A. Yes, that is correct.
8 Q. And I believe that, without going to the exhibit, you were shown
9 an exhibit, 1D105, where we saw that Goran Mitevski was appointed, on
10 15 May 2001, as director of public security. Is that right?
11 A. Yes, that is right.
12 Q. Do you recall that?
13 A. Yes, I recall that.
14 Q. And that was two days after Ljube Boskoski was appointed as
15 minister. He was appointed on 13 May, 2001. Is that right?
16 A. Right.
17 Q. So it didn't take very long for Goran Mitevski to be appointed,
18 did it?
19 A. Whenever a new minister comes to the office, the team around the
20 minister arrives simultaneously. That is a rule in the ministry. And in
21 all other ministries, the minister, deputy ministers, state secretary, and
22 the directors are political figures that are the makeup of the team during
23 given periods. I don't see anything illogical in that.
24 Q. And the minister can decide on the team that he wishes to have
25 around him, including the director of public security. Is that right?
1 A. Yes, one can say so.
2 Q. In November 2002, when Ljube Boskoski left the office of the
3 minister, Goran Mitevski also left the ministry altogether.
4 Is that right?
5 A. Yes, that's right.
6 Q. And isn't that true, Ms. Dorevska, that, historically, people
7 sometimes, when a new minister entered office, he may transfer people and
8 shift people around, some people get demoted, and others leave.
9 Is that fair?
10 A. That happens, unfortunately.
11 Q. And that happens because of the relationships of trust that
12 develop between people and the different political allegiances.
13 Is that right?
14 A. I couldn't make such assessment.
15 Q. Well, in November 2002, when Ljube Boskoski left, his former
16 advisor, Zoran Krstevski, left as well, didn't he?
17 A. I couldn't remember the precise time when Mr. Krstevski left. I
18 know that he left the office of his own will.
19 Q. But, nevertheless, he left shortly after Ljube Boskoski left,
20 didn't he?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. And Sofija Galeva, who was the state advisor within the cabinet of
23 the ministry, she also left the ministry as well, around that time, right?
24 A. No. She did not leave the ministry. She was assigned to a
25 different post.
1 Q. Okay. She was assigned to a different post around the time right
2 after Ljube Boskoski left.
3 A. Yes. There were many shifts after Mr. Boskoski left and after the
4 power changed.
5 Q. Thank you Ms. Dorevska.
6 MS. ISSA: Your Honour, I am aware of the time, and I was to move
7 to another topic.
8 JUDGE PARKER: Very well.
9 We will adjourn now. We resume on Monday at 2.15.
10 I'm afraid we must ask you to come back on Monday, Ms. Dorevska.
11 Thank you very much.
12 We now adjourn.
13 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.43 p.m.,
14 to be reconvened on Monday, the 18th day of
15 February, 2008, at 2.15 p.m.