1 Tuesday, 17 February 2009
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.08 a.m.
5 JUDGE PARKER: Good morning. Good morning, in particular, to
6 those who have been so generous with their time as to be available at
7 this very short notice to enable us to sit this morning.
8 The witness is being brought in, I believe.
9 [The witness entered court]
10 WITNESS: LUTFI RAMADANI [Resumed]
11 [Witness answered through interpreter]
12 JUDGE PARKER: Good morning, Mr. Ramadani.
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning.
14 JUDGE PARKER: I will remind you of the affirmation you made to
15 tell the truth at the beginning of your evidence, which still applies.
16 Now, Mr. Djordjevic, your cross-examination is continuing.
17 MR. DJORDJEVIC: Thank you, Your Honours.
18 Cross-examination by Mr. Djordjevic: [Continued]
19 Q. [Interpretation] As I promised during my cross-examination in
20 relation to the bulldozers, I have to provide a reference, first and
21 foremost. We're dealing with the Milutinovic case, and could it please
22 be called up. P306, page 29. In the transcript it is marked as 4311.
23 Thank you.
24 Mr. Ramadani, please look at lines 4, 5, and 6 of this
25 transcript. In all fairness, it's in English. It's the transcript in
1 English, but the point of that section is that you said:
2 "We found some burned shoes and some sleeves, some pieces of
3 clothes, nothing else, because ..." and then you said: "... bulldozers
4 had been working before." And before that, you said those that had been
6 I wish to remind you of that detail because we have never heard
7 that before or after. Who told you about these bulldozers? I mean, if
8 you actually did refer to bulldozers, because yesterday you said that you
9 did not mention bulldozers at all.
10 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Djordjevic, what you said yesterday suggested
11 to me and I believe the witness -- that the witness had spoken in his
12 evidence in this court of bulldozers, which was not -- it's still my
13 recollection that he didn't mention bulldozers in this court. What you
14 are now doing is putting to him what he said in a previous trial. Just
15 understand that there has been a significant movement of ground by you on
16 that matter.
17 MR. DJORDJEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, Judge, perhaps it
18 was understood in a different way, but the point was that the witness did
19 not mention bulldozers yesterday at all, and I had asked about
20 bulldozers. Yesterday the witness said, "I never mentioned bulldozers."
21 That's what the transcript says. That is the reply to my question. And
22 I said that later on I would go back to that when I find the actual
23 reference. My reference is from the Milutinovic case. I have referred
24 to the proper transcript page and line, et cetera. So that was my
25 intention yesterday, too, but perhaps I've been misunderstood.
1 JUDGE PARKER: The position which I put to you is my
2 understanding of it, that yesterday what you said was in the context of
3 what had been said in court in this trial.
4 Now, I take it that you accept that there was no mention in the
5 course of the evidence of this trial by the witness of bulldozers, and
6 that's all that his comment to you was about. Yes.
7 MR. DJORDJEVIC: [Interpretation] I asked him the following: You
8 mentioned bulldozers earlier on, and the witness said, "No." And I said,
9 "Well, I'll find the reference," but I couldn't find it yesterday. So my
10 question was whether it was these machines that were out there, and the
11 witness said I never mentioned any bulldozers. That is what the
12 transcript says, I mean yesterday's transcript in relation to
13 Mr. Ramadani's testimony.
14 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Djordjevic, could I suggest you stop debating
15 the issue. What is clear is that what was understood by your question
16 yesterday is that the witness had mentioned bulldozers in this courtroom
17 yesterday. He hadn't. Now, he may -- there well may be some issue about
18 bulldozers you want to follow up from a previous trial. Please, if you
19 want to do that, okay, and no need to keep talking about it. Just move
20 on to deal with the question.
21 MR. DJORDJEVIC: [Interpretation] Precisely, Your Honour. I do
22 apologise. I may have misspoken, and perhaps I explained it the wrong
24 Q. Mr. Ramadani, as you can see in this case, the Milutinovic case,
25 during your testimony you referred to bulldozers. Could you give us your
1 brief comment with regard to this particular section, this quote from the
2 transcript from that case. Could you just tell us what you know about
3 that. Thank you.
4 A. The traces of bulldozers or lorries were there. I didn't mention
5 the bulldozer as such because those concrete blocks, to be removed from
6 the site, they require machinery. They cannot be removed just by hands.
7 There you have two -- two craters. We found two craters after the war.
8 So how they removed all that, that I don't know, but I suggest that they
9 required bulldozers.
10 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ramadani. This is much clearer now.
11 In relation to what you stated yesterday, I will have to ask you
12 to explain why is it that until yesterday you had never mentioned the
13 fact that you had found some bodies, as well, and that they had been
14 identified and that those who wanted to find these bodies - it was
15 probably their family members - they found them on the banks of the Drim
16 River. Why did you refer to that only yesterday? And I think that this
17 is an important fact. You never mentioned this identification, not in
18 the Milosevic case. I do apologise. I'd just like to give you a
19 reference. For example, it is D001, page 18. So could that please be
20 displayed on the screens. It is part of the Milosevic transcript.
21 D001-4430, page 18.
22 You say there:
23 "I don't know what happened to their bodies. The only thing we
24 found were clothes and shoes ..." and so on and so forth. It is line 21,
25 all the way up to the end of that page. You did not refer to the Drim
1 River at all, all of these things that you spoke of yesterday. What's
2 the reason for that?
3 A. I did mention the Drini River
4 identified in 2007, I believe, and after that they were reburied.
5 Q. Correct me, Mr. Ramadani, if I'm wrong, but it was my
6 understanding that these remains were found in 1999, on the basis of what
7 you said yesterday, and that they were transferred to Pristina, that some
8 experts did that there. It wasn't my understanding that it was only now.
9 A. They were taken to the Rahovec morgue first and then to the
10 Prishtina morgue, and they were returned to us in 2007, some of the
12 Q. My last question in relation to all of these things that you've
13 said with regard to the crime scene where all these victims had lost
14 their lives and all of this in specific terms is the following: Was an
15 official list of compiled by the official authorities that were then
16 established in Kosovo? I am referring to UNMIK and the others. In
17 relation to this crime, I mean. That's what I'm referring to. Is there
18 an official list of the fatalities with specific details, including their
19 personal identification numbers and everything else?
20 Now, yesterday the list of persons who had lost their lives that
21 you compiled and Mr. Avdyli, who hails from the same village as you do,
22 and -- Mr. Krasniqi, rather, do you know that after that some new list
23 was made, a complete one, of the persons who had lost their lives in Mala
24 Krusa on the 26th of March, 1999?
25 A. We made the list, and some got the list. I wasn't there when
1 they got the list, so I don't know which authorities got the list. When
2 I compiled the list I gave it to the investigators, but as for other
3 authorities from UNMIK, that I don't know. I don't know who from UNMIK
4 got the list. I didn't ask for their names.
5 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ramadani. I'm going to move on to my next
6 question now.
7 Several times you made statements, and you testified in the
8 Milutinovic case, in the Milosevic case, and you spoke about that in your
9 statements that you gave to the investigators of this Tribunal. It has
10 to do with an agreement that was allegedly reached between the Serbs and
11 the Albanians. You refer to three surnames there, three persons, and on
12 your -- from the Serb side, that is, and on your side you mention the
13 late Mr. Ismail Arifi. However, you gave different testimony with regard
14 to that agreement. In relation to this, I'm going to put two questions
15 to you.
16 First question: Do you know whether this agreement was concluded
17 at all?
18 A. I wasn't personally present, and I mentioned it yesterday that
19 even if an agreement was reached, the Serb side did not abide by it.
20 They killed; they shelled; they burned. So I wasn't there to witness any
21 agreement. But even if this agreement was reached, it was not respected
22 by the Serbs. The Serbs didn't see any threat from the Albanians.
23 Q. Thank you, sir. Mr. Arifi [sic], now I'm going to ask the usher
24 to show all of us here in the courtroom on our monitors something from
25 the Milosevic case: D001-4430, page 12.
1 Fine. Mr. Ramadani, first of all, I would like to show you lines
2 9, 10, and 11 on this page. This is the answer that you provide to the
3 question that was put to you by the accused, and you say: "They did make
4 an agreement ..." if they made it. That's what you say here. You're
5 speaking in the conditional. "I wasn't present." That's what you said
6 today too. However, do you know from anyone that this agreement had
7 indeed been reached because here you say they did make an agreement, or
8 are you assuming all the time when you're speaking about this agreement
9 that it was reached? Do you really know from someone that such an
10 agreement was concluded or not? Could you just give me a brief answer?
11 A. This is just hearsay. As I said, I wasn't present physically
12 during that agreement, and I don't know if that agreement was reached and
13 under which terms. If an agreement was reached, it wasn't abided by by
14 the Serbs.
15 Q. My understanding is that you explained then that the Serbs
16 committed themselves then that they would protect the Albanians from the
17 Serb forces or anybody else in case there is a conflict, and when you
18 said that Serbs did not honour this agreement, they were burning and
19 torching, et cetera. However, there's another part of your agreement.
20 You said that the other part of this agreement that had been concluded
21 was that the Albanians would protect the Serbs from the KLA. Why did you
22 say that then, and what was it that you meant when you said that? That's
23 the question that was put to you, and that was the testimony that you
25 A. That is not true. What I'm saying now is what I said then. I
1 didn't say anything else. I just said that I wasn't present during that
2 agreement if there was an agreement. And I already told you that even if
3 an agreement was reached, the Serbs didn't respect it. I'm not aware of
4 saying what you're putting to me.
5 Q. Mr. Ramadani, my question was how is it that you then claimed
6 that they had reached an agreement, and how come you're saying today that
7 the Serbs did not honour the agreement? And there probably wasn't an
8 agreement or you don't know about it, but if that is the case, then
9 please tell us "I don't know," et cetera. But it doesn't seem to be
10 logical. If you have another comment, I mean, I'm not going to pursue
11 this line of questioning because obviously I am unable to get an answer
12 to the question that I keep putting.
13 MS. NILSEN: Your Honours, I'm sorry to interrupt.
14 JUDGE PARKER: Ms. Nilsen.
15 MS. NILSEN: The Defence lawyer is apparently referring to the
16 statement given by the witness, the 18th and the 20th of July, 1999,
17 where he is talking about this allegedly agreement which the witness also
18 said today is a hearsay evidence. He was told about this.
19 On page -- page 3, my learned colleague, if you can look at that.
20 There is not a referring to an agreement where the Albanians would
21 protect the Serbs against the KLA. The correct sentence is that they
22 would protect the Serbs from the UCK. Thank you.
23 MR. DJORDJEVIC: [Interpretation] My learned friend, I have to
24 remind you that the UCK is the same thing as the OVK or the KLA. It's
25 one and the same thing. You probably didn't hear what I was saying. So
1 the UCK is the same thing as the OVK and the KLA. So the witness says
2 that the Albanians would protect the Serbs from the KLA, the UCK, the
3 OVK. It's one and the same thing. The Milosevic testimony refers to
4 precisely that part of the witness's testimony, and he said that he was
5 not present, and I am not asking the witness about that. I'm just asking
6 the witness -- he did say that it was hearsay evidence, yes. Now, who he
7 learned that from, you will agree that that is a bit more detail for a
8 person who says maybe he was there, maybe he wasn't. Obviously the
9 witness knew that there was an agreement, but I want him to tell me who
10 he heard this from, and he says that the Serbs did not honour it. He did
11 not say what was it that they did not honour. What he doesn't know
12 about, that is what they did not honour? If he doesn't know, we can move
14 Q. I mean, I cannot force you to be -- to speak about something that
15 you either don't know or do not wish to speak about, but, of course, I
16 don't want to infer anything on the basis of all of this. It is for
17 others to do that.
18 But my question was just if you could explain this. Why did you
19 mention the KLA, and why did you mention that there was this kind of an
20 agreement? Nothing else. Please just don't repeat everything that
21 you've already said when I do know actually that you were not present.
23 A. I didn't say that an agreement was reached. I wasn't physically
24 present. I didn't know that an agreement existed. However, even if we
25 suggest that there was an agreement, I am telling you that they did not
1 respect that agreement. This is my belief. As I said, I wasn't there
2 and I cannot confirm whether there was or there wasn't an agreement made.
3 This is all hearsay words.
4 JUDGE PARKER: In the Milosevic trial, Mr. Ramadani, it would
5 appear that you said you had been told by Ismail Arifi that there had
6 been an agreement. Is that a correct understanding of the position?
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I wasn't present there when this
8 agreement was made, if it was made. This is all that I heard from other
9 people. To what extent it is true, that I don't know. That's why I said
10 in the past that I only heard about an agreement. However, even if there
11 was an agreement, it wasn't respected by the Serb side.
12 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you for that, but is it correct that you
13 heard that there was an agreement made between the Serbs and the Albanian
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As I said, I heard rumours. That's
16 not a direct information that I got. I just heard people mentioning an
17 agreement, but personally I was not aware of any.
18 JUDGE PARKER: Is Ismail Arifi one of the people from whom you
19 heard these rumours?
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] These were rumours that I heard
21 when people were speaking between themselves, not from Ismail Arifi
22 directly. This was a conversation going on while we were near the creek.
23 JUDGE PARKER: Did these rumours indicate that the agreement was
24 that the Serbs would protect the Albanian population and that the
25 Albanians would protect the Serbs from the UCK?
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know how it was possible
2 for them to protect the Serbs from the KLA when there was no KLA presence
3 there. The Serbs on the other side, they were all mobilised. They were
4 dressed in uniforms. They had weapons, and they had the upper hand. As
5 I said, I was not personally involved in these matters. It's just that I
6 overheard these conversations. I did not hear this information directly
7 from Ismail Arifi. It's just hearsay, as I said.
8 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you. And that hearsay, I wonder whether you
9 could tell me whether it indicated that the agreement, firstly, was for
10 the Serbs to protect the Albanian villagers.
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Some were saying this, and some
12 others were saying other things. Personally, I didn't take any interest
13 in these conversations. We were threatened by the Serbs at the time. So
14 for me personally, they didn't play a great role, these conversations.
15 This is just what people were talking between themselves there.
16 JUDGE PARKER: Right. Well, I understand you to say that you did
17 hear from some people that there was an agreement that the Serbs would
18 protect the Albanian population; is that correct?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Correct. This is what they were
20 talking about.
21 JUDGE PARKER: Right.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] But the Serbs did not respect their
23 word, their promise, and it all fell apart.
24 JUDGE PARKER: Did you also hear from some people that the
25 agreement also provided that Albanians would protect the Serbs from the
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As I said earlier, there is no
3 ground for such a promise because there was no KLA presence in my
4 village. So that's why I don't know why they would promise such a thing,
5 to protect the Serbs from the KLA.
6 We were a mixed village in terms of ethnicity, so there was no
7 chance that there would be a KLA presence in our village, and that's why
8 I don't see any ground for such a promise. These were all rumours.
9 JUDGE PARKER: I think we can understand very well what you say,
10 that you couldn't understand why there would be such any -- any such
11 agreement, but what I'm asking you is whether you heard that there was an
12 agreement which included a provision that the -- that the Albanian people
13 would protect the Serbs from the UCK. Did you hear it being suggested
14 that there was such an agreement?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As I said, I overheard this
16 conversation not directly from Ismail Arifi. Now, I don't even know who
17 was involved in that conversation, but they were talking about these
18 things. Directly, I didn't get any information from anyone about this.
19 JUDGE PARKER: I understand your answer there to be yes, you
20 heard that being said; is that correct?
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] All right. We'll leave it that
22 way, then.
23 JUDGE PARKER: It's a matter of trying to understand,
24 Mr. Ramadani, what it was that you heard at the time. Now, that doesn't
25 mean if you heard it that it's correct, but it's only the question
1 whether you heard it, and it seems that you may have heard from someone
2 or some people at the time.
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As I said, I overheard these type
4 of conversations but not directly from Ismail Arifi or others that you
5 mention. This is just talks that I overheard from others who were
6 discussing what was going on, what was happening. Personally, I was
7 concerned about the safety of myself and my family, the shelling had
8 already started, and so on and so forth.
9 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you very much.
10 Yes, Mr. Djordjevic.
11 MR. DJORDJEVIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
12 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Krasniqi [sic], how far is Prizren from your
14 A. Fifteen kilometres.
15 Q. I'm waiting for the interpretation. Mr. Krasniqi [sic], how far
16 is Orahovac from your village?
17 A. About 12 kilometres, I would say.
18 Q. Mr. Ramadani, how far is Djakovica from your village?
19 A. I don't see these questions reasonable. It is more important to
20 treat the issue of women left without men, without children, and houses
21 left without --
22 Q. Mr. Krasniqi [sic], please, I have to interrupt you.
23 A. I'm Mr. Ramadani.
24 Q. Please don't comment, because I need you to just answer my
25 question. How far is Djakovica from your village? That's the question
1 that I asked you.
2 A. I did not measures the distance but approximately 30 kilometres.
3 Q. Mr. Ramadani, did you hear of an organisation called the UCK,
4 OVK, or KLA at that time in Kosovo before March 1999? Did you have any
5 knowledge of it or not?
6 A. I didn't take any interest in these issues whether there was KLA
7 or not. I was a farmer, and I -- my main interest was to provide for my
8 family. I was not interested in the KLA.
9 Q. Mr. Ramadani, you will agree with me that you lived in that area,
10 that you lived side by side with those people, with people of your ethnic
11 community, with Roma, with Serbs, and of course you were concerned for
12 your own safety, and you wanted to know what was going on outside of your
13 village. There was TV. There were media, the press, Serbian, Albanian.
14 At any rate, there was the inflow of information. And now I'm asking
15 you, did you hear about the abductions of Serbs before March 1999? Did
16 you hear about the murders and the bodies that were found in Kosovo? And
17 even if it is Serb propaganda, I'm not saying that it is, that the Serb
18 propaganda claimed that this was going on. But I cannot agree with you
19 that you didn't hear about it and that you were not interested in it.
20 You're saying about the Serb forces going there. Well, you're a farmer.
21 You shouldn't be interested in that. Now I'm asking you. I want you to
22 tell me whether you knew as an Albanian that the KLA existed. As a
23 patriot, as a member of the Albanian ethnic community, were you aware of
24 it? If you tell me you were not aware I will be quite happy, and I will
25 agree with you.
1 A. There was no KLA presence in our area. It existed, if it
2 existed, in the Drenica area.
3 Q. So there was some at the time. You said it was around Drenica.
4 Did you hear about any fighting around Djakovica between the KLA and the
5 Serb forces and also fighting between the Serb forces and the KLA around
7 A. I did not hear about these fightings. I've seen tanks and APCs
8 moving along the main road. I haven't seen any combat activities, so I
9 cannot help you with that.
10 Q. You cannot. Mr. Ramadani, you've already mentioned tanks so many
11 times. Yesterday I wanted to hear about the shelling, and I asked you
12 some questions about that.
13 MR. DJORDJEVIC: [Interpretation] Now I would like to ask the
14 usher to bring up to our screens the English and the Albanian versions of
15 the statement this witness gave on the 5th of October, 2001. That's
16 D001-4382 for the English version and D001-4392 for the Albanian version.
17 If we could please have that.
18 Well, yes, I have been warned that this has been admitted into
19 evidence as D29. So could we please have that. Could we please look at
20 page 3. The English version too. Thank you.
21 Q. Mr. Ramadani, in your statement, this is paragraph -- I'll look
22 in the B/C/S and it's probably similar, both in English and Albanian.
23 Perhaps it's one or two paragraphs up or down. In B/C/S, it's paragraph
24 8, and it begins with the following words:
25 "I have been asked how many VJ vehicles were on the asphalt road
1 outside Kruse e Vogel ..."
2 And then it goes on.
3 "There was a line" -- "They were lined up along the
4 Djakovica-Prizren road -- the asphalt road. They were first deployed
5 there on the 25th of March, 1999, at 4.00 a.m. I saw 30 to 40 vehicles
6 parked on the road. The vehicles I saw were a mixture between an APC and
7 Pragas. They were not camouflage. The APCs were normal blue MUP colour,
8 and the Pragas were the normal green colour such as the VJ had. The
9 Pragas were armed with machine-guns and cannon. Pragas can have
10 different types of weapons. The Pragas were manned by the VJ troops.
11 "I don't know who was manning the APCs, but I presume that it
12 was MUP."
13 And then you say:
14 "I have been asked if I am aware of any T-55 tanks being
15 stationed in the area of Kruse e Vogel at this time. I have been asked
16 if I saw any rockets on any of those vehicles ..." and your answer was,
18 "I have been asked if any of these weapons were used in the
19 attack." Well, I'm not going to go on. I asked you yesterday about
20 that, and today I'm asking you -- well, I'm not asking you to describe
21 what a T-55 tank looks like, but let me ask you this: Did you do your
22 national service in the army?
23 A. Yes. I was in the navy.
24 Q. So you did your national service in the former Socialist
25 Federative Republic of Yugoslavia
1 A. Yes. I was in the navy. I completed my military service in
3 Q. You will agree with me that the army that existed at that time in
4 the Socialist Federative Republic of Yugoslavia was among the best
5 equipped and strongest armies in the region?
6 A. I don't know whether it was the most sophisticated army or not.
7 The officers knew that. We were ordinary soldiers, and it was not our
8 business to know which armies were modern and which were not. Those who
9 were trained and schooled in this, they knew it. We were just ordinary
10 soldiers, as I said.
11 Q. While you did your national service, were you promoted to any
12 rank, Mr. Lutfi?
13 A. No, I didn't.
14 Q. I presume that you did the regular military service while you
15 were in the navy -- or, rather, regular training while you served there.
16 Let me correct myself.
17 A. Yes, in Pula
18 Q. And in line with this, my next question is going to be: Can you
19 tell us, what is a tank? You keep talking about tanks, tanks, tanks.
20 When you say "tank," what do you mean by that when you say "tank,"
21 Mr. Ramadani?
22 A. A tank has a long barrel. It can have steel tracks. There are
23 also tanks on wheels to protect the asphalt, but there are also tanks on
24 steel tracks. I don't know every specific group of tanks, but I know
25 that they have long barrels, and those who man the tanks have their
1 special equipment, military equipment. This is what I know about tanks,
2 nothing else. Those who have completed military academies may have
3 better knowledge about this. Personally, I wasn't trained for this.
4 Q. You say that they have long barrels. Are you referring to cannon
5 or what?
6 A. Yes. Yes. I was referring to cannons, to the long barrels.
7 Q. And those tanks that you're telling us about, are those tracked
8 tanks or wheeled tanks?
9 A. No. These ones were on tracks, with tracks, the ones that I saw.
10 I don't know what their exact name is.
11 Q. That's what I assumed, Mr. Ramadani. But at any rate, you have a
12 very generalised notion of what a tank is, and I have, too, because I'm
13 not very familiar with military skills. So, Mr. Ramadani, could you
14 please tell us, it is quite obvious that at that time in 2001 when you
15 gave this statement, you knew what a tank was in principle. It is true
16 that here you were asked about T-55, and you said that there weren't any
17 tanks. Why did you say that at the time, and now you're saying something
18 completely different? You said that there were Pragas and APCs. That's
19 what you say in your 2001 statement. That's almost eight years ago.
20 A. I don't have the statements with me. There were tanks. There
21 were anti-aircraft equipment, cannons, everything. I don't have the
22 statement with me, and you can see there what I've said. Only if a
23 mistake was made, then that's a different story.
24 JUDGE PARKER: Perhaps I could help, Mr. Ramadani. The statement
25 which is being referred to by Mr. Djordjevic includes a question -- or a
1 passage which reads:
2 "I have been asked if I am aware of any T- 55 tanks being
3 stationed in the area of Krusha e Vogel at this time." And the answer
4 you gave was no, and I think that's this passage which Mr. Djordjevic is
5 putting to you. Were you aware of any T-55 tanks being stationed in the
6 area the village? And your answer was no as it's recorded in this
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's correct. In the village
9 itself, there was no tank. The tanks were camouflaged, and they were
10 positioned almost near Krusha e Madhe. There were APCs and Pragas along
11 the main road. There were tanks, as well, but they were further from our
12 village, almost next to Krusha e Madhe. My house is in the outskirts of
13 the village, and you can see it very well, that part, from my house.
14 MR. DJORDJEVIC: [Interpretation]
15 Q. Mr. Ramadani, you said that you in fact don't know what a T-55
16 is. You know what a tank is, but you don't know what a T-55 is. Can I
17 then agree with you that in your statement of the 5th October that we
18 have in front of us on the screen, when you said that there were no
19 tanks, T--55 tanks there, that what you actually meant was that there
20 were no tanks at all, or can we not agree?
21 A. What I wanted to say and what I meant by that was that there were
22 no tanks in the village of Krusa
23 Q. It is clear from your testimony the tanks could only be on the
24 road, the asphalt road, because you keep insisting that the army did not
25 take part at all. You will agree with me then?
1 A. The army did take part, but it was positioned around the village,
2 on the sides. The police were inside the village. The military, the
3 army, was positioned by the main road, Prishtina -- correction,
4 Prizren-Gjakove, not in the village itself. There were only policemen in
5 the village.
6 Q. That's clear from your evidence, Mr. Ramadani, but when you speak
7 about tanks, tanks were used by the Yugoslav army, and as you say, it was
8 not in the village; it was outside of the village. So it is not
9 controversial that the tanks and all the other military equipment could
10 be seen outside of the village on the asphalt road between Djakovica and
11 Prizren. It was only to be expected. But when you said that there were
12 no tanks, they did not ask you whether there were any tanks in the
13 village. They -- you say that they were there where you could expect
14 them to be, on the road, 30 to 40 vehicles on the asphalt road outside of
15 the village. You said that you didn't see any tanks there. Why do you
16 say that then? It is uncontroversial that there were no tanks in the
17 village. That's what you're saying, yes, but there where you saw those
18 vehicles, the VJ vehicles, 30 to 40 of them, you say that there were no
19 tanks there. Why did you say that at the time and now you say something
20 different? Please could you tell me that, and then I will have no
21 further questions.
22 A. The main road, Prizren-Gjakove, there the military were
23 positioned with their tanks and anti-aircraft equipment and so on and so
24 forth. They were not in the village itself. I've always said that there
25 was no military presence in the village; only the police was there.
1 Q. Why did you say that there were Pragas and APCs, and then when
2 you were asked about a tank specifically, about T-55 tanks, you say there
3 weren't any, and now you're saying there were?
4 A. I will state again that they were outside the village, not inside
5 the village. There was no army presence in the village, and there were
6 no tanks in the village. Only the police were present in the village.
7 Q. I'm asking you, when the investigator asked you a direct question
8 whether there was a T-55 tank, you say no. Of course we're not talking
9 about tanks in the village. Could you please explain that if you can?
10 Please don't --
11 MS. NILSEN: Objection, Your Honours. The situation is not that
12 the investigator asked this question. I would like to draw the attention
13 to the Milutinovic statement -- or, sorry, the Milutinovic transcript,
14 page number 63. It's already given a P number, P003 --
15 JUDGE PARKER: The witness is being asked at the moment about
16 this statement --
17 MS. NILSEN: Yes, I'm aware of that.
18 JUDGE PARKER: -- in October. I don't think it would be helpful
19 for you to suggest something that may have been said in another trial
20 about this.
21 MS. NILSEN: I'm aware of that.
22 JUDGE PARKER: The witness can comment on this statement --
23 MS. NILSEN: I'm aware of this, Your Honour. I just would like
24 to state that exactly the same thing has been confronted to this witness
25 in a previously transcript.
1 JUDGE PARKER: Well, that's a matter -- sorry to stop you, but
2 it's not proper for you to be suggesting that at the moment. The witness
3 will answer these questions. You, if you wish, may raise something in
5 MS. NILSEN: That's fine, Your Honour. I would still like to say
6 that this question was not raised by the investigator. Thank you.
7 JUDGE PARKER: Well, did you hear me? Don't raise it at this
9 MS. NILSEN: Okay. Thank you.
10 JUDGE PARKER: You can't coach the witness in that way.
11 MR. DJORDJEVIC: [Interpretation]
12 Q. Mr. Ramadani, I'm forced to read back to you again what you
13 stated, and could you please put on your glasses and look at what you
14 said. You have your own statement in front of you on the screen, so let
15 us assist the Trial Chamber. Let us try and assist ourselves to clear up
16 some things. Thank you.
17 You see that they were first deployed there at 4.00 a.m. on the
18 25th of March. "I saw 40 to 50 vehicles parked on the road." Well,
19 that's uncontroversial. On the road outside of the village. What road?
20 It was the Djakovica-Prizren road. You will agree with me; right? Very
22 "The vehicles I saw were a mixture of APCs and Pragas. They were
23 not camouflaged ..." so no tanks.
24 Let us skip the three paragraphs, and then you say:
25 "I have been asked if I'm aware of any T-55 tanks being stationed
1 in the area of Krusa e Vogel at this time."
2 So not even on the road but somewhere around it, three
3 kilometres, and you say, "No." Nobody asked you about whether it was the
4 tank -- if the tank was in the village, not even on the road but in the
5 area of Mala Krusa, and you say no, and then there are some questions
6 about what we discussed yesterday. We concluded there were no artillery,
7 but here we have one more answer on your part. You know there were no
8 rockets there, and there was not a single tank there. You are sure about
9 that. Could you please tell me, what did you mean then, and what do you
10 mean today; what did you mean yesterday? Because you keep talking about
11 tanks, and in 2001, when your memory was much fresher, the unpleasant
12 events that you had been through, there were no tanks. That's what you
13 say. That's a fact. So could you please just answer this. I will not
14 be asking any further questions, and I will not dwell on this anymore,
15 regardless of your answer.
16 A. I was questioned about the tanks and -- in the village. The
17 Prosecutors asked me whether there were tanks in the village, and I told
18 them there were no tanks in the village.
19 Q. I do apologise, Mr. Ramadani, but that's not true. They were
20 asking you very nicely whether in the area of Mala Krusa there was a
21 tank, in the area of Mala Krusa, not even on the road, in the area of
22 Mala Krusa, and your answer was no. So what you're saying now is not
24 A. I'm telling you that they asked me about the tanks, whether there
25 were tanks in the village, whether there were army in the village. I
1 told them that in the village there were no tanks. There were no
2 soldiers. There were only police. They were asking me about things in
3 the village. There were no questions about outside the village. The
4 army was actually stationed on the road from Prizren to Gjakove. In the
5 village, the army was not. This is what I told them.
6 Q. Mr. Ramadani, this signature in the Roman script down here at the
7 bottom of the page, is that your signature? Did you sign this?
8 A. Yes, yes.
9 Q. Thank you. I'm not going to put any more questions to you with
10 regard to this.
11 MR. DJORDJEVIC: [Interpretation] I would like to ask the usher to
12 make it possible for us to see once again 99 from the 92 ter list --
13 65 ter list. We want to have an aerial image of Mala Krusa, and that
14 will be the end of my cross. So it is number 99 from the 65 ter list.
15 It's an aerial image of Mala Krusa. That's right.
16 Q. Mr. Ramadani, could you please tell me whether you know when this
17 picture was taken?
18 A. No, I don't know. Late. At the time, there were not something
19 here which I see in the picture, like vegetation, for instance.
20 Q. Mr. Ramadani, can you tell me whether you know what year this
21 picture was taken? Do you know?
22 A. No, I cannot tell you that.
23 Q. Mr. Ramadani, could you tell me -- or, rather, could you mark the
24 houses of your Roma neighbours. And you did say that there were two
25 families. You spoke of the Gashi family. I'm not going to ask you
1 anything else in relation to that, and could you indicate to us where the
2 Serb houses were. On this picture, can one see that or not? Just tell
3 me that.
4 A. The Roma houses cannot be seen here. These houses cannot be seen
5 on this picture. Yes, for the Serb houses, I can tell you that.
6 Should I mark with the pencil?
7 MR. DJORDJEVIC: [Interpretation] I would kindly ask the usher to
8 assist the witness so that he could indicate where the Serb houses are on
9 this picture.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This was the house of Dimitrije
12 MR. DJORDJEVIC: [Interpretation]
13 Q. The house with the circle? Could you please put number 1 there,
14 number 1 by that circle, please.
15 A. Yes, Dimitrije house was here. Here was the house -- here was
16 the house of Miljenka. Here was the house of Dusani, of Misic, of Seka,
17 of Poshkits [phoen]. This was the house of Spiro. This were the houses
18 of Nikolic.
19 Q. I did not see you mark the Nikolic houses.
20 A. Nikolic Dimitrije, Nikolic Milenko, Nikolic Dusani, Nikolic --
21 Q. Could you please mark those houses? Could you mark them, please?
22 A. Yes, yes. Nikolic Milenki, Nikolic Dimitrije, Nikolic Dusani,
23 Nikolic Milos, Nikolic Seka, Nikolic Bosko, Jovca.
24 Q. Could I ask you something else. This house without a roof on the
25 far right by the field, to the south, I mean, do you know whose house
1 this is? It's standing out there on its own, on the right.
2 A. Just a moment, please. This house was Petkovic's house.
3 Q. Petkovic house, that's right. Yes. Ranko Petkovic.
4 A. These houses were burned. This picture was taken later. So
5 these were the houses you asked me for. [Microphone not activated] was
6 the house of Djika.
7 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ramadani. Thank you, Mr. Ramadani.
8 I have to tell you that my learned friend Mr. Stamp when this
9 aerial image was being admitted into evidence said that this picture was
10 taken in the summer of 1999. I cannot believe or disbelieve him. It was
11 simply said, and I can only accept that.
12 What about the rest of the houses that you didn't mark? Are they
13 mostly Albanian houses? That would be my first question, because you
14 already marked the Serb houses.
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. You said that you found ashes there when you returned, and how do
17 you explain the fact that this picture shows that all the houses look
18 very nice and that they all have roofs and they don't seem burned,
19 torched in any way? At least that's the way they look from here. You
20 showed the Serb houses, and they have in roofs.
21 My question is not addressed to you now as far as the Serb houses
22 are concerned. My question to you is -- may I please finish,
23 Mr. Ramadani. You said that the houses were turned into ashes. That's
24 what you said literally, and we see that the houses are intact here.
25 They have roofs. Could you just give me your comment with regard to
1 that, and that will be my last question for you.
2 A. These houses were burnt down, but they were repaired later. This
3 house here -- this house here was the house of my brother. It was
4 totally burnt down. Now it has been repaired. This picture was taken
5 later. This house here was also repaired later, so these houses were
6 repaired, as you tell you. This is what happened with this house too.
7 It was destroyed and later repair. This one here was also repaired
8 later, this one too.
9 This one here was also rebuilt after being burnt down. So all
10 these houses were burnt down without roofs, and then they were rebuilt.
11 This picture was not taken then. It was taken later, after the
12 houses were rebuilt. This house here, for instance, was rebuilt later
13 too. I have put dates on which these houses were rebuilt. I have all
14 these documents. I have not taken these documents with me. This house
15 here, for instance, was already rebuilt. The same thing happened with
16 this one too. All these houses were destroyed, were burnt down and were
17 then rebuilt later after the war.
18 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ramadani, for having answered all my questions. I
19 do appreciate that.
20 MR. DJORDJEVIC: [Interpretation] I should like to ask the Trial
21 Chamber to have this marked photograph admitted into evidence.
22 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Ramadani, I have a problem -- I beg your
23 pardon. Mr. Djordjevic, I have a problem. You started by having the
24 witness mark Serb houses. As his evidence progressed, he also marked a
25 number of houses which he said were burned and had been rebuilt. So we
1 have now both Serb and Albanian houses marked. Is that what you're
3 MR. DJORDJEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, as Defence counsel,
4 for the sake of objectivity, I have to say that I would agree with the
5 witness would mark with a different colour the Albanian houses that had
6 allegedly been burnt and then repaired. That why it's not logical when
7 we read the transcript. This house was also burnt down and was rebuilt
8 after the war. Those are his words. I agree that the witness could use
9 a different coloured pen to mark all the other things that he was
10 referring to, and then could we have it admitted into evidence so that it
11 would all become clear.
12 JUDGE PARKER: I would ask the court officer to clear the
13 markings, if you would. Thank you.
14 Mr. Ramadani, with your pen, would you please put a circle around
15 the houses that were occupied by Serb families in March 1999.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] [Marks]
17 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you for that. Now I'll ask the court
18 officer to give you a red marking pen. Now could you mark the houses
19 that you can see that were burned down and then rebuilt.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] [Marks]
21 MR. DJORDJEVIC: It seems we have a problem, Your Honour.
22 JUDGE PARKER: Not so far.
23 MR. DJORDJEVIC: Okay. Okay. Now it's okay.
24 JUDGE PARKER: Yes.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] [Marks] these ones cannot be seen
1 very well, but one should be here, the other one here.
2 MR. DJORDJEVIC: [Interpretation] I would like to tender what the
3 witness has marked. Could it please be admitted into evidence?
4 JUDGE PARKER: For the transcript, the witness has marked in blue
5 with circles the houses occupied by Serb families and is circling in red,
6 and is still doing it, houses which he says were burned and then have
7 been rebuilt.
8 Thank you very much, Mr. Ramadani.
9 That marked photograph will now be received.
10 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit D30, Your Honours.
11 MR. DJORDJEVIC: [Interpretation] I suggest that we take the break
12 now before the Prosecutor re-examines, Your Honour.
13 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you very much, Mr. Djordjevic.
14 Ms. Nilsen, can you indicate how long you would like -- expect to
15 be in re-examination?
16 MS. NILSEN: Your Honour --
17 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
18 MS. NILSEN: Your Honour, the Prosecution doesn't have any
19 re-examination questions. I would just like for the record to clarify
20 this picture so it's -- the date is correct. It was said the 12th of
21 February by Mr. Stamp, that it was taken in 1999 by ICTY investigator. I
22 am afraid that's not correct. I think the right date would be 6th of
23 September, 2001, Your Honours.
24 JUDGE PARKER: Well, that may need to be a matter of evidence if
25 there's some dispute about it. Our present evidence is that this
1 photograph shows houses that were destroyed by fire and rebuilt, and that
2 can't have been in the date originally indicated. If you want to lead
3 evidence about the actual date of the photograph, that can be done.
4 MS. NILSEN: Thank you.
5 JUDGE PARKER: Now, I did stop you when you were wanting to
6 mention -- Ms. Nilsen. I did stop you when you were wanting to mention
7 during cross-examination evidence given by the witness in another trial.
8 That was a matter -- I stopped you then because it could have been a
9 coaching of the witness. If it's a matter that you wish to pursue and
10 have recorded, it's a matter you can put to the witness now in
12 MS. NILSEN: Well, thank you, Your Honour, but I will not have
13 any questions. Thank you.
14 [Trial Chamber confers]
15 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Ramadani, that concludes the questions for
16 you. The Chamber would like to thank you for your assistance here and
17 the trouble you've taken to come to The Hague to help. We will give
18 attention to your evidence in due course when we hear the other
19 witnesses. So you may now go with the court officer who will show you
20 out, and you are free to go back to your home and your ordinary
21 activities, and you go with our thanks.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
23 MR. DJORDJEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, with regard to the
24 photograph and when the photograph was taken -- well, we won't be needing
25 the witness any more definitely.
1 JUDGE PARKER: You can wait, Mr. Djordjevic, yes.
2 MR. DJORDJEVIC: [Interpretation] I would like to express my
3 concern on account of this.
4 JUDGE PARKER: Sorry, Mr. Djordjevic. What I said was if you
5 would wait, the witness can be shown out, so the court officer will show
6 the witness out.
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
8 [The witness withdrew]
9 JUDGE PARKER: Now, Mr. Djordjevic.
10 MR. DJORDJEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. On
11 behalf of the Defence, I wish to express my concern over the date when
12 this photograph had been taken. What my learned friend Ms. Nilsen said
13 subsequently and what Mr. Stamp said previously make the Defence wonder
14 seriously when this photograph was taken, and I assume that this is a
15 very important matter for all the parties in these proceedings.
16 Therefore, I would ask that the OTP proffer additional proof as to when
17 this photograph was actually taken, who took it, on what date, under what
18 conditions. Now it seems to be in dispute.
19 JUDGE PARKER: The Chamber has already indicated, Mr. Djordjevic,
20 that if there's an issue about the date of this photograph that it should
21 be the subject of further evidence from the Prosecution. At the moment,
22 it's agreed that it is a photograph of the village. The only evidence we
23 have is that this photograph was taken after houses were rebuilt, and
24 just when that was, the Chamber does not know.
25 Now, it may be that it's a matter that after discussion between
1 counsel for the Prosecution and the Defence that it can be agreed, or it
2 may be that the Prosecution will need to prove the date of the
3 photograph. That, we'll leave to be resolved, but we quite agree with
4 you, Mr. Djordjevic, that it appears on the face of it not to be a
5 photograph taken at about the time of March 1999.
6 The Chamber would mention one or two other matters flowing from
7 the experience with witness of this week. All counsel will be aware that
8 it is important for the progress of this trial that we don't lose time
9 unnecessarily, and it's, of course, in the interests of the Tribunal to
10 conclude this trial as efficiently and quickly as we can, and it's very
11 much in the interests of the accused that the trial be concluded as
12 quickly as can be.
13 That being the case, the Chamber is of the view that it would be
14 desirable for us to introduce a procedural requirement similar to that
15 which we understand applied in the Milutinovic trial, which is that there
16 always be at least one reserve witness ready and able to be called in
17 case of illness or some other unexpected event which means that the
18 anticipated witness cannot be called.
19 As counsel will be aware, a witness is ill this week. That is a
20 thing that can happen during a trial. What the Chamber wants to ensure
21 is that should something like that occur in future, there will be another
22 witness present in The Hague
24 Now, that not only means that the Prosecution will need to be
25 watching and have always one further witness ready; it also means that
1 the Defence in its preparation for cross-examination will need to be
2 working one further witness ahead, and in that way, then, if something
3 unexpected happens, it can be illness or it can be transport delay, these
4 are problems -- a number of things can mean that an expected witness is
5 not here, what the Chamber anticipates should happen in the future should
6 something like that occur, that a further witness will be here, able to
7 be called by the Prosecution and able to be cross-examined by the Defence
8 so that we do not lose unnecessary days. And if the Chamber can indicate
9 that that procedure should be now followed by both Prosecution and
10 Defence, and we hope that we don't have to make use of that additional
11 reserve witness often, but the witness will always be there and both
12 sides ready.
13 We indicated yesterday that we will deal not with the ill witness
14 but with the evidence in chief of the witness beyond the ill witness
15 tomorrow, and we will then expect to commence cross-examination of that
16 witness first thing on Friday morning, which is 9.00 on Friday, and that
17 will be our programme. If that witness finishes evidence on Friday, it
18 may be that the witness who is presently ill will by then be able to be
19 called, or it may be that that witness will have to come next week.
20 The Chamber would like record its appreciation, particularly to
21 the interpreters, who were able last night to rearrange their affairs to
22 be able to sit this morning to enable us to complete the evidence of this
23 present witness who has just left, which has minimised, then, the time
24 that we will lose in the course of this week.
25 We now will adjourn if there are no other procedural matters, and
1 we will resume tomorrow morning at 9.00 to hear the evidence in chief,
2 and we will look forward to seeing you then.
3 We adjourn now.
4 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 10.39 a.m.
5 to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 18th day
6 of February, 2009, at 9.00 a.m.