1 Friday, 19 March 2010
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 2.28 p.m.
5 JUDGE PARKER: Good afternoon, sorry we have a delayed start
6 because the previous trial ran overtime.
7 [The witness takes the stand]
8 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Djordjevic.
9 MR. DJORDJEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. As I
10 promised, I believe I will complete the redirect examination today within
11 15 or 20 minutes.
12 WITNESS: DANICA MARINKOVIC [Resumed]
13 [Witness answered through interpreter]
14 Re-examination by Mr. Djordjevic: [Continued]
15 Q. Mr. Marinkovic, yesterday I was unable to understand the answer
16 you gave to Ms. Gopalan about whether or not you knew personally the
17 lawyer Destan Rukiqi. Did you know him as a lawyer at all?
18 A. Yes, I knew him as a lawyer.
19 Q. Did he work in Pristina or in another town?
20 A. In Pristina.
21 Q. Tell me about Mr. Rukiqi. Was he a well known attorney in
22 Pristina in the territory of the district court of Pristina?
23 A. He wasn't really well known or reputed or actually professional
25 Q. Was Mr. Rukiqi a known advocate of human rights as is stated in
1 some texts? Did you have personal knowledge about that?
2 A. No, I heard of that for the first time yesterday. He didn't
3 engage in such activity.
4 Q. The cross-examination about the topic I'm going to deal with now
5 lasted almost an entire session. Now you said that for [indiscernible]
6 personal injuries the subject matter jurisdiction is with the municipal
7 court and the municipal public prosecutor. So tell me, was ever an
8 investigation against you launched before the municipal court in
9 Pristina? So I will not focus only on the offence of committing crimes
10 on the part of a judge. So was any investigation launched against you,
11 were any proceedings launched against you in connection with your work,
12 that is, did Albanians appear before court to testify against you? So
13 were there criminal proceedings pending against you?
14 A. No. Never. Nor were there any objections to my work.
15 Q. As for the objection to the work of a judge, to who can such an
16 objection be uttered?
17 A. To the president of the court. That's what the law provides.
18 Q. The case involving the illegal MUP, was any objection filed
19 against you in connection with that?
20 A. No.
21 Q. Thank you. My next question refers to something Ms. Gopalan
22 asked you toward the end of the cross-examination. It has to do with a
23 number of matters that followed after the question was asked whether the
24 court in Pristina worked professionally and whether it upheld the law,
25 et cetera. But you didn't provide a direct answer to one of
1 Ms. Gopalan's questions, and I believe we should hear that answer.
2 I will immediately provide a reference. Page 13088 of
3 yesterday's transcript. It's toward the top of the page. I think it
4 even starts in line 1. You were asked, do you cover the work of the MUP,
5 that is, the alleged torture of the suspects held in detention, but you
6 didn't provide a clear answer. So did you -- was the work of the police
7 within the scope of your responsibilities?
8 A. No, it didn't. I wasn't authorised to do so, nor is it part of
9 my job description. I have no direct connections with the work of the
10 police. It's the prosecutor who co-operates with them, so I couldn't
11 have done that at any time.
12 Q. I will take this a bit further. In which part of the
13 investigation do you have direct contact with the police and how, in
14 which cases?
15 A. Under the Law on Criminal Procedure, I as an investigating judge
16 can issue an order to the -- to the police to conduct a certain
17 investigative measure, that is, search a home or issue a certificate
18 about evidence taken. Likewise, the police -- I can also order the
19 police to secure the site.
20 Q. Stop. What does that mean, secure the site?
21 A. The site must be secured so that nobody can manipulate the
22 evidence so the site is fenced off and nobody is allowed access to that
23 location where there may be traces or some objects used in the commitment
24 of a crime.
25 Q. All right. This will be important for us later. Please
1 continue. What else could the police do?
2 A. Likewise, the police authorised by the investigating judge could
3 carry out investigative measures, one of which is if the indictee fails
4 to respond to a summons, the investigating judge can issue an order which
5 must be executed by the police and bring in the person to be interviewed
6 by the investigating judge. This applies to witnesses also.
7 Q. Apart from what you have mentioned in the framework of an
8 investigation, that is investigative measures, can the police ask
9 questions or have demands toward the investigating judge or even issue
11 A. No, by no means.
12 Q. The following question is the entire verdict for the parallel MUP
13 case is included in the case file. Does this include the reasoning of
14 the verdict?
15 A. Yes. There is a reasoning that is over 130 pages long.
16 Q. Thank you.
17 MR. DJORDJEVIC: [Interpretation] I will now ask our assistant
18 Ms. O'Leary to prepare the video-clips, and I would like to see the
19 portion from 17 minutes, 18 seconds, and then some 6 or 7 seconds of that
20 clip. After that I'll have a specific question. Is everything all right
21 for the witness also, Mr. Usher? Let's start.
22 [Video-clip played]
23 MR. DJORDJEVIC: [Interpretation] We should have started earlier.
24 Yes, now.
25 [Video-clip played]
1 MR. DJORDJEVIC: [Interpretation]
2 Q. Do you recognise the person in the video-clip? Can you see the
3 person now passing and the other who continues moving in front of him?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Did KVM or the OSCE ever have uniformed people in their escort
6 like these two men?
7 MR. DJORDJEVIC: [Interpretation] And, Ms. O'Leary, can we try to
8 go back in that video-clip and take a look at the patch on the sleeve of
9 that man's jacket. Stop it here, please.
10 Q. Have you ever seen such a patch?
11 A. Yes, several times. That's the KLA insignia.
12 Q. Thank you. My next question is connected with your conversation
13 that you had with General Drewienkiewicz on the 17th of January. I
14 believe that you spoke in the police station in Stimlje. Did General
15 Drewienkiewicz mention the presence of KLA forces at the site in the
16 village of Racak?
17 A. No.
18 MR. DJORDJEVIC: [Interpretation] Could we now see the next clip
19 from 17 minutes, 30 something seconds.
20 [Video-clip played]
21 MR. DJORDJEVIC: [Interpretation]
22 Q. Take a look at this. Thank you, this will do. You saw what was
23 done here, did anybody have the right when we speak about securing the
24 site, to arrive there before the investigative services of the country
25 arrived there? This was before the NATO bombing, you saw what this
1 person was doing.
2 A. No, nobody had such authority.
3 Q. And I must go back to the conversation with General
4 Drewienkiewicz again. Did the KVM try to secure the site in Racak?
5 A. Drewienkiewicz did not mention that, but they are not authorised
6 to do so either, but he had no suggestion to that effect, nor did we
7 speak about that.
8 Q. This again has to do with the bodies that were autopsied. We
9 speak about the -- their number being 40. Do you know, did the OTP or
10 anybody else even in previous trials such as Milutinovic or Milosevic,
11 did anybody speak about another number of the persons killed in Racak?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Tell me more.
14 A. It was in the Milosevic trial when I gave evidence. In the
15 indictment he was also accused of being responsible for the death of 45
16 persons in Racak.
17 Q. Did you ever resolve that mystery later?
18 A. Yes. During my testimony with the Trial Chamber and assisted by
19 the Prosecutor, we compared our respective lists and clarified the
20 matter, and it was clarified in my testimony.
21 Q. How was that? Can you give us an account?
22 A. I had a list of 40 persons who were identified. We compared that
23 to the list of persons as included in the indictment and then we saw that
24 the indictment contained nine more than were on my list. And then we
25 compared and found out that some persons were mentioned twice, with the
1 same name, and so we reduced the number to 40.
2 Q. I will have to ask you once more, after receiving the expert
3 report of the pathologists or forensic medical expert, and I'm referring
4 here to domestic experts, Dr. Dunjic, Dr. Dobricanin and others, and some
5 colleagues from Belarus and later on they were joined by a Finnish
6 forensic team headed by Dr. Helena Ranta. Do these reports mention a
7 decapitated body of a man; do you remember?
8 A. No, no decapitated body was mentioned.
9 Q. You said that you found the bodies in the mosque?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Did you try to establish from where the bodies had been taken to
12 the mosque and who did that? Were there persons with who you could try
13 to establish that at the site?
14 A. No. At the site there was no one to help me establish that
15 because none of the inhabitants of Racak were there.
16 Q. And finally, the very fact that you saw the clips that
17 Ms. Gopalan showed you, and we keep speaking about document P1575 marked
18 for identification, what did the fact that yesterday you saw those bodies
19 which you claimed you couldn't recognise mean to you as an investigating
20 judge? If those bodies were taken to the mosque later, what would that
21 mean to you as an investigating judge?
22 A. It would mean that everything that was found at the site was the
23 result of manipulation. If the bodies were taken from the gully to the
24 mosque, then much evidence that would be important for the subsequent
25 investigation would have been destroyed. The body that we saw just now,
1 the man who was wounded in the head but his cap remained on his head,
2 then really I don't understand how he was wounded and how that body got
3 there. And we saw a body and KLA soldiers and Walker pass that body by
4 and nobody heeds it. And we also saw some other dead bodies.
5 Q. Thank you. We will not deal with this topic any further. My
6 following questions are of a general nature and refer to newspaper
8 Yesterday my colleague referred to an article from the "Financial
9 Times" and to an article from "Nin." There were statements given by
10 various people from Mr. Destan Rukiqi to Dr. Flore Brovina to Natasha
11 Kandic. Here's what I'm interested to hear. After these conflicts
12 ended, did anybody launch any sort of proceedings against you on the
13 grounds of the allegations that you were incriminated with in the
15 A. No, never.
16 Q. Did anyone from the official bodies call you ever to inquire
17 about any potential incorrect conduct towards the citizens?
18 A. No, I resumed my normal duties with the district court in
20 MR. DJORDJEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you. I believe everyone
21 in the courtroom will be pleased to hear that this closes my redirect. I
22 wanted to thank the witness who came here to clarify many an issue that
23 to this Defence team is important.
24 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you very much, Mr. Djordjevic.
25 Questioned by the Court:
1 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Witness, I would like to hear a little bit more
2 about the mosque you entered when you saw the 40 bodies. Could you
3 describe the building when you entered, what did you see?
4 A. That day when we entered Racak, the mosque appeared undamaged.
5 It looked like any other mosque in terms of structure. It was surrounded
6 by a wall. As one enters the village and moves towards the centre it is
7 on the right-hand side. It is circular, has many windows and a large
8 open door. We entered the mosque. With me were all the team members as
9 well as the OSCE representatives and the journalists who were there both
10 domestic and foreign, with cameras. At a certain point in time, I
11 allowed them to record the corpses. I'm trying to say that we all saw
12 the corpses at the same moment.
13 As I said, the mosque is a circular building, and the corpses
14 were lined up in a circular fashion. Their heads were towards the
15 windows and their feet was the centre of the mosque. They were dressed,
16 and their faces were covered with something that resembled white towels.
17 The first thing I did was to tell my scene-of-crime officer to
18 assign numbers to each and every corpse because this is standard
19 procedure. Each corpse had to be tagged, and when the journalists were
20 recording, the forensic expert, Dr. Dobricanin, followed me from one
21 corpse to the next. He uncovered each of the corpses to see the head,
22 and we were mainly interested in seeing whether there were any visible
23 injuries to the heads and whether there was any blood. We all saw it at
24 the same time, it was all recorded.
25 After that the journalists left and we resumed our work.
1 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Who was it who entered the mosque first, you or
2 who was it?
3 A. I was the first and then I was followed by everyone else.
4 However, since the door was large and open, we all came in at the same
5 time. The rest of the people there asked me whether they could enter and
6 I said that we should all go in. The team members, the expert, the
7 verifiers, and the journalists. It's all on the footage. There's a CD
8 of that footage and you can see it all very well. It was shown in the
9 Milosevic case when I testified.
10 JUDGE FLUEGGE: How many people altogether?
11 A. You mean how many people, how many corpses were there in the
13 JUDGE FLUEGGE: No. I know you testified there were 40 corpses,
14 but how many people entered the mosque at the same time? How many in
15 this group?
16 A. Well, I am afraid I can't be precise. In any case, the on-site
17 investigation team members, the prosecutor, the forensic expert, the
18 three representatives plus their interpreter, and there were journalists,
19 perhaps five or six, so I would say anywhere between 10 and 15. I really
20 didn't pay much attention to the exact number.
21 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Who touched the bodies? Who was really dealing
22 with the corpses at that time?
23 A. No one touched the bodies save for the expert. He didn't even
24 touch them, but he simply picked up the towel to see the head and then he
25 would put it back. No one else touched the bodies, and I didn't allow
1 anyone to do so.
2 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Did you personally see despite of the faces or
3 the heads anything else of the bodies, only the clothes of the bodies?
4 A. Yes, I have said so. They were all dressed in pants and jackets
5 as well as vests and shoes. What I was able to observe that most of the
6 corpses had thick soldiers pants as well as army boots and something that
7 resembled army belts.
8 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Could you describe the clothes, especially the
9 trousers and the vests in a little bit more detail?
10 A. Well, they had woolen sweaters, jackets, and track suits. As for
11 the pants, they had the thick pants the army used to have. There may
12 have been some with regular pants or bottom parts of track suits, but it
13 was particularly interesting for me to see that some had what seemed to
14 be military items of clothing.
15 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Which colour?
16 A. Navy blue and dark grey.
17 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you. And could you describe the clothes of
18 the female body?
19 A. To tell you the truth, I really cannot recall that.
20 JUDGE FLUEGGE: How long did you stay in the mosque?
21 A. We didn't stay in the mosque for a long time. After we checked
22 the bodies, everyone left the mosque, save for the scene of crime
23 officers. In front of the mosque, there had already been a cistern or a
24 reservoir truck parked. There were some workers there who were in charge
25 of placing each corpse in a separate body-bag. The body-bags were sealed
1 after which the corpses were put on to the truck. As a matter of fact,
2 it was a refrigerator truck.
3 In the presence of the verifiers, I ordered that the truck be
4 sealed and that it was not to be touched until we returned from the
6 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you. And I'm interested in the concrete
7 work and the duty of Dr. Dobricanin. What exactly did he when he was in
8 the mosque?
9 A. Mr. Dobricanin?
10 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Yes.
11 A. As I said, he looked at each corpse individually. He would raise
12 the towel, check the head, comment on something, and he put it back.
13 That's all he could do at that time as a doctor, a forensic medical
14 expert, that's all he could do at that moment to offer what he could
15 immediately observe. This was not an official examination. He merely
16 wanted to check what we were interested in the most, and that is to see
17 whether there were any traces of slaughter on those bodies that could be
18 determined visually.
19 JUDGE FLUEGGE: That means he didn't turn the bodies to the other
20 side, upside down, or investigated the heads of the bodies? He just
21 looked at them? Did I understand you correctly?
22 A. Yes, he did.
23 JUDGE FLUEGGE: When he -- he looked at every and each of these
24 40 bodies as you told us, and then you heard his comment that he stated
25 loud that there were no trace of any slaughter on those bodies, and this
1 way it is recorded what you said yesterday. Have you an estimation
2 between the beginning of his investigation to this comment?
3 A. Time-wise I don't know how long it lasted, but he made the full
4 round of the bodies, and he commented on it, and it was all recorded.
5 You can hear it for yourselves. You can hear him say those things.
6 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you very much.
7 JUDGE BAIRD: Mrs. Marinkovic, I should like to take you back to
8 your evidence touching Gornje Obrinje very briefly. Now, you testified
9 that the district court in Pristina had received a request from a number
10 of families who lived in Gornje Obrinje? And they had reported that some
11 of the family members who had been killed were actually buried in Gornje
12 Obrinje; correct?
13 A. That was the information we had. We were not able to verify it
15 JUDGE BAIRD: Yes. Now, did you get any idea at all as to how
16 many bodies there were buried there?
17 A. As far as I can recall, in their request they did not specify any
18 numbers. Perhaps they didn't know it either. We tried to ascertain that
19 and in order to do so, all the bodies found needed to be exhumed and
20 autopsied. This was all supposed to have been done on the spot, hence I
21 am afraid I cannot estimate.
22 JUDGE BAIRD: You never did get that number. But tell me now, in
23 answer to Ms. Gopalan, you stated that the on-site investigation was
24 never completed because you were prevented from attending the scene. I
25 think Helena Ranta you said told you that there were KLA blockades and
1 there was a conversation between you and Ms. Ranta. And you said, for
2 objective reasons, the investigation could not have been completed.
3 A. Yes.
4 JUDGE BAIRD: Well, now, you testified that in Racak you were
5 prevented from carrying out the on-site investigation on three occasions.
6 You went first on the 15th and you were shot at and you had to return to
7 Stimlje. And notwithstanding that danger, you returned on the 16th, and
8 again you were shot at, and you had to return to Stimlje. And you went
9 again on the 17th and again you were shot at, and it was only on the 18th
10 that you were able to carry out that investigation in Racak.
11 Now, my question to you, Mrs. Marinkovic, is this: Having been
12 prevented from attending the scene at Gornje Obrinje on one occasion, why
13 did you not return a second or a third time as you did in Racak? Can you
14 tell me?
15 A. Because there was no goodwill on the part of the Finnish team to
16 do this jointly. They actually tried to steer clear of us avoiding any
17 further contact.
18 JUDGE BAIRD: So is it that the investigation depended on the
19 Finnish team to be carried out?
20 A. It didn't depend on the Finnish team, but given that it was on
21 the level of the court and the prosecutor's office as well as the Finnish
22 team, there had been a meeting, they agreed upon doing this jointly.
23 Therefore, I had no further influence on that. This was decided upon on
24 a level senior to mine to go there the next day. Helena Ranta herself
25 said that there were terrorists, that there were KLA in Gornje Obrinje
1 and that we wouldn't be able to conduct an on-site investigation.
2 JUDGE BAIRD: So as far as you can tell us, you never conducted
3 an investigation into the killing and burial of those persons, did you?
4 A. Well, I didn't. Someone else might have. Since I didn't do it,
5 it didn't necessarily have to mean that no one else could. I really
6 don't know whether there was an on-site investigation and whether it was
7 ever completed. On the day I wanted to go, it wasn't, but I don't know
8 whether it was followed up.
9 JUDGE BAIRD: But for somebody else to have done that, what would
10 have had to happen? Would there have to be fresh requests? Would
11 Ms. Ranta have to come in? What would have to happen?
12 A. If the family asked for it to be done, if it was in their
13 interest, then the president was supposed to decide on it and to assign
14 it to me or someone else. This was just a single investigative measure
15 depending on the fact who was on duty at any given point in time and who
16 was there to conduct an on-site investigation.
17 JUDGE BAIRD: And this leads me now to another question, Mrs.
18 Marinkovic, you stated that the families were no longer requesting any
19 investigations, and my question is, the families having made the first
20 request for an investigation into the killing and burying of their family
21 members, was it necessary for them to make further and continuous
22 requests for that investigation to continue on, or could that one request
23 have been sufficient?
24 A. Well, that request was submitted by the families of the victims.
25 We, in such case, act urgently following the receipt of such a request
1 filed by the families of victims.
2 JUDGE BAIRD: Yes. But you said that one of the reasons why you
3 didn't pursue the investigation was because the families were no longer
4 requesting any investigations, and my question to you is, was it
5 necessary for them to continue requesting, having made the first request?
6 A. I'm trying to explain that. When we act upon a request, it is on
7 their request that we take any further steps. They didn't come to see me
8 subsequently. They may have turned to the court, maybe the court
9 president assigned it to someone else. I don't know what the final
10 outcome concerning the Gornje Obrinje incident was. I only know that on
11 that day we wanted to go there in order to complete it.
12 JUDGE BAIRD: I see. What time did you and the team set out from
13 Pristina for Gornje Obrinje? Do you recollect the time roughly?
14 A. I think we set out around 6.00 a.m. from Pristina. I know it was
16 JUDGE BAIRD: Okay. As best you can, I know it may be a bit
17 difficult, but can you tell me, can you tell us, who comprised that team
18 that you set out with from Pristina? Roughly how many?
19 A. Standard members of an on-site investigation: Myself, the
20 district prosecutor, a court forensic expert, Mr. Dobricanin and his
21 assistant Dr. Susanna, I can't recall her last name. From the Finnish
22 team, there was Helena Ranta, the ambassador for human rights whose name
23 I can't recall with his wife, and two or three other persons. I know in
24 any case that there were two full OSCE vehicles. There was our vehicle
25 and a column of policemen who were there to accompany us and to secure
1 the scene. I don't know how many of them there were. At the head of the
2 column, there were OSCE representatives since they had visited the scene
3 once before without us.
4 JUDGE BAIRD: Now, how long would it have taken you, had you not
5 been stopped by Ms. Ranta. Roughly how long would it have taken you to
6 get from Prishtina to Gornje Obrinje?
7 A. As far as I can remember, we travelled quite a long time from
8 Pristina to -- I think we were halfway to Gornje Obrinje when we stopped.
9 I really can't recall how long it took us. In any case, we stopped in
10 the middle of the main road.
11 JUDGE BAIRD: But, now, that was when you and Ms. Ranta had the
12 conversation about her wanting you to go along and you wanted to have the
13 police escort.
14 A. Well, they stopped suddenly. We didn't know why.
15 JUDGE BAIRD: You said that. And you came out of the vehicle and
16 then you and Ms. Ranta spoke. Now, the important thing, though, Mrs.
17 Marinkovic, is that you say it was getting dark around that time?
18 A. It was during the winter, so after 4.00 or 5.00 p.m. it's already
19 dark. I don't know how long we stayed there. And the first moment I
20 thought they wanted to get some rest and that's why they had stopped and
21 then I started speaking with Helena. Then the ambassador's wife when she
22 realised the turn that conversation was taking, she couldn't say anything
23 but put her hands together and she said, Madam, please, no. She was
24 signalling to me not to go any further. I'll never forget that.
25 And then we realised that up on the hills they had already
1 started surrounding us in black uniforms slouched with automatic rifles.
2 They were setting up ambush. I've also explained the conversation I had
3 with Helena Ranta.
4 JUDGE BAIRD: If it were getting dark, Mrs. Marinkovic, by the
5 time you got to Gornje Obrinje, had you not been stopped, it would have
6 been dark, so how would you have carried out the exhumation in the
8 A. No, no, we would not have arrived there during the dark. We
9 stayed quite a long time in the road explaining, discussing. Our plan
10 was to get there between 2.00 and 3.00 p.m. As Helena had told us, the
11 alleged mass grave was as one enters the village. That's the information
12 they had. Had we been able to reach that location, we would have been
13 able to complete it during daylight. We simply exhume the bodies, we
14 take samples, and then the rest including autopsies is done at the
15 forensic medical institute.
16 JUDGE BAIRD: Thank you. Now, there's just one last question,
17 Mrs. Marinkovic, and I shall relieve you. I want to hear your comments
18 on a matter. Now, you stated that during the investigation the
19 investigating judges, the only person authorised to collect evidence?
21 A. Yes.
22 JUDGE BAIRD: And you also said that some investigative
23 activities the investigating judge would transfer to the police, for
24 example, an order to search certain facilities if necessary, to locate
25 the perpetrator of crime or objects that were used in committing crime.
1 A. Yes, these investigative measures.
2 JUDGE BAIRD: And you answered Mr. Djordjevic that the police
3 cannot ask questions or have demands towards the investigating judge or
4 even issue orders?
5 A. That is correct.
6 JUDGE BAIRD: Now, can I have your comment on this statement,
7 Mrs. Marinkovic. MUP officials could institute investigations when the
8 urgency of the situation required it, and they were not hampered by the
9 presence or absence of the investigative judge or the prosecutor. What
10 comment would you have on that?
11 A. Well, colleague, let me tell you, that was in force during the
12 state of war because a decree had been passed by the federal government
13 about the application of the war [as interpreted] on criminal procedure
14 in the state of war, so while the state of war was in force, the
15 investigating judge and police bodies could conduct an investigation
16 without a request made by the public prosecutor if that was urgent. But
17 the investigating judge and the MUP were duty-bound to immediately inform
18 the public prosecutor. But that applied only in the state of war
19 because --
20 JUDGE BAIRD: Did it ever happen? Did you ever experience it at
22 A. No, I didn't. I wasn't faced with such a situation. The public
23 prosecutor always acted in a timely fashion, and I always carried out
24 their request. There was no case where I had to conduct an investigation
25 urgently and directly with that request by the public prosecutor.
1 JUDGE BAIRD: I thank you very much indeed, and I apologise for
2 keeping you that long. Thank you very much.
3 JUDGE PARKER: You will be pleased to know that that concludes
4 the questions for you. The Chamber would like to thank you for your
5 attendance here in The Hague and for the assistance that you've been able
6 to give over several days. You are, of course, now, able to return to
7 your normal activities and a Court Officer will assist you out. Thank
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I thank the Trial Chamber for your
10 tolerance and understanding. Some of my answers may have been long, but
11 it was only because I tried to help to find the truth.
12 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.
13 [The witness withdrew]
14 MS. KRAVETZ: Your Honour.
15 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, Ms. Kravetz, I still have one or two
16 evidentiary matters from the last witness. Are you moving on?
17 MS. KRAVETZ: No, no, no, I actually wanted to raise just a
18 housekeeping matter concerning exhibits that relate to this witness,
19 Ms. Marinkovic, before we move on to the next witness.
20 JUDGE PARKER: I think that's where I was wanting to go. So you
21 do yours first.
22 MS. KRAVETZ: Okay. Yesterday during the course of
23 cross-examination, Ms. Gopalan referred to an exhibit. This is 06078,
24 and it's a complaint by Fazli Balaj, the Defence lawyer Isak Aliu. This
25 was dealt with at transcript page 13029. We intended to tender this
1 exhibit yesterday, but just due to an oversight it wasn't tendered at the
2 time, so I move to tender this exhibit at this time.
3 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Djordjevic.
4 MR. DJORDJEVIC: [Interpretation] I haven't risen to object. The
5 reason why I rise is to point out that Ms. Gopalan showed the Trial
6 Chamber and the parties this document, and we are not opposed to it being
7 admitted. It was shown on the screen immediately before a break.
8 JUDGE PARKER: It will therefore be received as a Prosecution
10 THE REGISTRAR: P01579, Your Honour. Thank you.
11 MS. KRAVETZ: Your Honour, I have three other exhibits, and these
12 are exhibits that were tendered through during the testimony of Mrs.
13 Marinkovic in the Milutinovic case. They have not been used during her
14 testimony in this case, but for the sake of completeness of the record
15 and since the testimony has been tendered by the Defence, we seek to
16 tender those exhibits, and I can -- they are just three of them. I can
17 read out the 65 ter number and indicate the transcript page in the
18 Milutinovic case where each one is referred to, if that pleases the
20 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you. Mr. Djordjevic.
21 MR. DJORDJEVIC: [Interpretation] I lack understanding for this,
22 and the Defence objects because Ms. Gopalan could have shown this
23 document during the cross-examination. I believe that this is contrary
24 to the rules and, therefore, we oppose the admission of this document.
25 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you. I think you may have misunderstood
1 what is proposed. These are each documents that are -- were exhibited in
2 the course of the trial in the Milutinovic case. They were documents put
3 to this witness who then commented on them. You have tendered the
4 transcript. The Prosecution says, well, you ought to -- if you want to
5 understand parts of the transcript, you need to see the documents that
6 the witness was talking about, so it's really to fill out the transcript
7 that you have tendered that I understand these three exhibits are
9 MR. DJORDJEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, there has been an
10 identical situation and yet the Trial Chamber failed to show
11 understanding. Of course, it's up to the Bench to decide, but we persist
12 in opposition.
13 JUDGE PARKER: I can recall many occasions when exhibits that
14 were referred to in transcripts tendered both by the Defence and the
15 Prosecution have been received in evidence so that the tendered
16 transcript can be better understood.
17 So pursuing our consistent practice, we will receive these three
19 MS. KRAVETZ: Thank you, Your Honour. We'll proceed to read out
20 the 65 ter numbers. The first one is 03109, and in the Milutinovic case
21 this was Exhibit P3109, and it's referred to at transcript page 23597.
22 And I ask that that exhibit be received.
23 JUDGE PARKER: Yes.
24 THE REGISTRAR: It will be received as Exhibit P01580. Thank
25 you, Your Honours.
1 MS. KRAVETZ: The next exhibit is 65 ter 03106. In the
2 Milutinovic case this was P3106. And it's referred to at transcript page
3 23580 of the Milutinovic transcript. I ask that that exhibit be
5 JUDGE PARKER: It will be.
6 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit Number P01581. Thank you, Your Honours.
7 MS. KRAVETZ: And the last exhibit is 03095. In the Milutinovic
8 case it was P3095, and it's referred to at transcript page 23562. And I
9 ask that that exhibit be received. Thank you, Your Honour.
10 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.
11 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit Number P01582. Thank you, Your
13 JUDGE PARKER: There is outstanding a matter of the admissibility
14 of the video footage which is said to have been taken ... [Microphone not
15 activated] ... on 16th of January, 1999 at Racak. The Prosecution has
16 sought to tender this. The Defence has spoken briefly in opposition.
17 The issue is concerning the admissibility of this are not short or
18 simple. In the Chamber's view it would be appropriate to receive written
19 submissions from both parties so that we can give proper consideration to
20 the concerns expressed against the admission so that we would ask that
21 within by Wednesday of next week, if that is not unreasonable,
22 submissions be received from both Prosecution and Defence in the hope
23 that we can deal with that matter and reach a decision before we break
24 for the Easter break.
25 Was there any other evidentiary matter left unresolved in the
1 course of the evidence of the last witness? We are not aware of any.
2 Just checking. Very well. That concludes that phase. I believe the
3 next witness may be waiting.
4 [The witness takes the stand]
5 JUDGE PARKER: Good afternoon.
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good afternoon.
7 JUDGE PARKER: Would you please read aloud the affirmation shown
8 to you now.
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will
10 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
11 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you. Please sit down.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
13 JUDGE PARKER: I believe Mr. Djurdjic has some questions for you.
14 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.
15 WITNESS: VUKASIN JOKANOVIC
16 [Witness answered through interpreter]
17 Examination by Mr. Djurdjic:
18 Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Jokanovic.
19 A. Good afternoon.
20 Q. Please state for the transcript your personal information.
21 A. I am Vukasin Jokanovic. I was born on the 18th of November,
22 1939, in the village of Gornje Slatina, municipality Vitina in Kosovo.
23 Q. Thank you. Please tell us your current occupation.
24 A. I graduated from the faculty of law in Skopje, Macedonia. I
25 worked as a lawyer, and currently I am a pensioner.
1 Q. Thank you. Could you briefly tell us the main points of your
3 A. After graduating from university, I found a job at the tobacco
4 factory in Gnjilane. I worked there as a lawyer. After that, I worked
5 at a medical centre, also as a lawyer. In 1969, I was elected member of
6 the Municipal Assembly of Gnjilane. And in 1970 in April, I was elected
7 president of the Municipal Assembly of Gnjilane. I stayed in that
8 position for two terms of office, four years each, that is a total of
9 eight years.
10 After that, I was elected by the Provincial Assembly of Kosovo to
11 be a member of the executive committee of Kosovo, and at the same time I
12 was a provincial secretary for legislation and general administration. I
13 stayed in that position for four years. After that I was elected to be a
14 member of the provincial committee of the league of communists of Kosovo.
15 I was one of several executive secretaries in the dealing with the issues
16 of the political system and legal matters.
17 The Provincial Assembly of Kosovo also elected me a member of the
18 presidency of Kosovo. That was the highest ranking government body in
19 Kosovo, in the province of Kosovo. I stayed in that position until 1988,
20 early 1998, after which I was elected president of the Provincial
21 Assembly of Kosovo. I remained in that position for two terms in office,
22 each term of one year. So I stayed there throughout 1988 and 1989.
23 In late 1989 there were elections, and I was elected a member of
24 the Republican Assembly of Serbia from Kosovo for the constituency of
25 Gnjilane. So I was a member of Serbian parliament and vice-president of
1 parliament of Serbia.
2 After that I was member of parliament of the Federal Republic of
3 Yugoslavia. That was a truncated Yugoslavia which consisted only of
4 Serbia and Montenegro. In 1995, as far as I remember, I was elected
5 member of the cabinet, the federal cabinet of truncated Yugoslavia.
6 Apart from that, I was also minister of the interior. I stayed in that
7 position for three years.
8 After that the president of Yugoslavia, Zoran Lilic, and the
9 president of Montenegro as well as the president of Serbia proposed that
10 I be appointed state public prosecutor of Yugoslavia, and I remained in
11 that position for four years until the end of my term in office, and then
12 I retired.
13 Q. Thank you. We can see that most of your working career you spent
14 in Kosovo and Metohija. I would like to hear about the development of
15 the autonomy of Kosovo and Metohija.
16 A. I mostly worked on matters that had to do with that. After
17 Yugoslavia was created after the Second World War, the province was an
18 autonomous region by the name of Kosovo and Metohija, whereas Vojvodina
19 was a province. Later in 1963, Kosovo began to be called a province like
21 In the previous period, the highest-ranking legal act was its
22 statute, but under the new constitution as of 1963, the highest-ranking
23 legal act was the constitutional law. What followed were the amendments
24 in 1969, 1970, 1971, when the province received greater powers. And
25 under those amendments it was a province that was a constituent part of
1 the Republic of Serbia, but simultaneously it was a constituent element
2 of Yugoslavia. That position was reinforced by the 1974 constitution.
3 Q. Thank you. Can you tell us when you were first faced with
4 Albanian separatist demands?
5 A. I personally was faced with Albanian separatist demands in 1968
6 in Gnjilane for the first time. I worked and lived there at the time.
7 On the 27th of November, there were demonstrations. They started off
8 from the secondary school centre. That's a part of town where all the
9 secondary schools were. They started walking down the main street all
10 the way to the other end of town where they dispersed. They were
11 shouting out slogans like "Kosovo republic" for the most part, and
13 Q. Thank you.
14 A. I can add that these demonstrations were a huge surprise to us
15 who lived in Gnjilane at the time, but even beyond Gnjilane because
16 Yugoslavia was very well organised at the time and so was the League of
17 Communists, and that was a shock to many citizens and to everybody who
18 supported the communist system.
19 Q. Can you tell us what the goal of these demonstrations was?
20 A. I believe the goal was or the aim was what you could tell from
21 the slogans, namely, that the province receive the status of a republic,
22 so that it be transformed from a province to a republic. And the second
23 slogan, "unification" I understood to mean the unification of territories
24 inhabited by Albanians. So if a province becomes a republic, it
25 practically becomes a state as part of the SFRY which was also a state.
1 Q. Now, that slogan "Kosovo republic" what did it mean politically
2 and legally?
3 A. It meant that the constitutional system in force was being
4 validated. And these demonstrations were assessed as hostile
5 demonstrations because they were undermining the legal system,
6 undermining the equality, brotherhood and unity, all the values that were
7 especially upheld at the time. And such demonstrations took place not
8 only in Gnjilane, but also in Urosevac at that time. But also in
9 Pristina, and I know that there were such demonstrations in Tetovo
10 Macedonia, too, where the ethnic Albanians are the majority population.
11 The demonstrations were held on the eve of an Albanian public
12 holiday, the 28th of November. Some call it flag day, but it's actually
13 an Albanian national holiday.
14 Q. Thank you. What was the difference between the status of an
15 autonomous province and that of a republic at the time of these
17 A. There was an essential difference. The republics were states
18 with their borders and Yugoslavia as a state also had its borders.
19 Whereas, the provinces were parts of Serbia and they were social
20 political communities. That was the official term. So they didn't have
21 a stronger status than that.
22 Q. What were the consequences of these demonstrations?
23 A. Well, the inter-ethnic relations suffered most gravely from that
24 because tensions arose, and there was concern that the process that
25 started might be continued. I remember my father telling me, well, this
1 isn't all we've seen of it, this is going to spread. I was young at the
2 time and didn't believe him, but later I saw that it did spread indeed.
3 So inter-ethnic relations deteriorated and the process of leaving
4 Kosovo to relocate to other parts of Serbia began.
5 Q. Thank you.
6 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Djurdjic, we have reached the time when we
7 must have the break. I'm sorry, we must interrupt your evidence at this
8 point, but our tapes must be rewound. Because of another matter, we may
9 be five or so minutes late in returning. So we'll aim for 20 minutes
10 past 4.00. We'll have a break. A Court Officer will assist you during
11 the break.
12 [The witness stands down]
13 --- Recess taken at 3.47 p.m.
14 --- On resuming at 4.25 p.m.
15 [The witness takes the stand]
16 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, Mr. Djurdjic.
17 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.
18 Q. Mr. Jokanovic, a moment ago you told us that in 1974 a new
19 constitution of the SFRY was proclaimed as well as the constitutions of
20 Serbia and the Autonomous Province of Kosovo. By virtue of the new SFRY
21 constitution, what was the status of the province?
22 A. The SFRY constitution clearly prescribed that Yugoslavia
23 consisted of six republics, and that in one of the republics, i.e.,
24 Serbia, there were two provinces. These being Vojvodina and Kosovo.
25 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we please have document --
1 Defence document D011-4638.
2 Your Honours, could we be allowed to provide the witness with a
3 binder of documents in hard copy so as to speed things up?
4 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, Mr. Djurdjic, but can we make clear now that
5 we are content to receive a quick and general introduction to the
6 previous history but you will appreciate our concern in this indictment
7 commences in 1999. We do not want to spend a long time learning detail
8 of matters that are not going to assist us in our decision. I mention
9 that now because if you are going to a large bundle of documents, it may
10 be the case that a number of them are not really relevant to the
11 materials in this case. So we ask you to bear that in mind as you deal
12 with the evidence. Thank you.
13 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, we don't have a
14 great deal of documents. It is our intention to indicate the basic
15 elements concerning the status of the autonomous province within the
16 Federation constitutionally and legally speaking. We heard several
17 witnesses testify about the removal of certain powers from the autonomous
18 province and the causes of what ensued. I intended to go through these
19 documents in a general fashion only.
20 JUDGE PARKER: We are grateful for that. Please keep it strongly
21 in mind. Thank you.
22 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation]
23 Q. Witness --
24 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we first have page 31. Now
25 that we can see that this was the constitution. Can we go to page 31,
1 Article 1 in both versions.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Article 1?
3 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation]
4 Q. Yes.
5 A. Do you want me to comment?
6 Q. Witness, please provide us with brief comments of Articles 1 and
7 2 bearing in mind of what you have just explained to us.
8 A. Article 1, the basis of that article is, without going through
9 all of it, that the SFRY was a federal state of different peoples and
10 United Nations in the form of socialist republics and socialist
11 Autonomous Provinces of Vojvodina and Kosovo, which were constituent
12 parts of the socialist Republic of Serbia. That was the basis. As for
13 Article 2 --
14 Q. Could you please comment on Article 3?
15 A. Article 2 or 3?
16 Q. 3.
17 A. Each republic is a state based on the sovereignty of the people.
18 This is important.
19 Q. Thank you. What about Article 4, what does that prescribe?
20 A. It states that the socialist autonomous provinces are social
21 political communities. This stresses the difference between a republic
22 and a socio-political community.
23 Q. Thank you. Briefly, Article 5.
24 A. The territories are those of the republics, and they are not to
25 be changed without the consent of the republic in question. The same
1 goes for the territory of the autonomous provinces.
2 Q. Thank you. What about the following two articles, who has
4 A. Yugoslavia and the republics. This is not a happenstance, this
5 is the constitutional terminology put in there to underline the
6 difference between the republics and provinces.
7 Q. Thank you.
8 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we go to page 212 in the
9 English. That is Article 321 of the constitution.
10 Q. Can you comment briefly on this article by virtue of which the
11 Presidency of the SFRY ...
12 A. The briefest comment I can provide is that the most senior organ
13 in the Yugoslavia is the Presidency. That is to say, the collective
14 presidential institution comprising one member from each of the republics
15 and one member from each of the provinces who are to be elected by
16 members of the republican and provincial Assemblies. By secret ballot,
17 by all those present. In this most senior Yugoslavian body, there was
18 equal representation of all republics and provinces amounting to one
19 representative each.
20 Q. In the Assembly of the SFRY how many committees and councils were
21 there, and what was the representation of republics and provinces?
22 A. As far as I recall, the SFRY had the federal council, and in
23 each -- there were 30 deputies from each republic, and the provinces had
24 20 in it. The second council was the council of the republics and
25 provinces in which the republics had 12 deputies each and the provinces
1 8. This was to serve to stress the difference between the republics and
2 provinces in terms of numbers. In essence, this did not impact the
3 decision-making process because consensus was pursued in most cases.
4 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we please go to page 194 in
5 the English.
6 Q. This is Article 291 and 292.
7 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, these articles
8 prescribe the composition of the councils of the Chambers, both of which
9 have been explained by the witness. I seek to tender this document into
11 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.
12 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit Number D00902. Thank you, Your
14 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we please have D130.
15 Q. It is your tab 2. We are about to see the constitution of the
16 Socialist Republic of Serbia from 1974. Can you tell us briefly what was
17 the status of the autonomous provinces according to this constitution?
18 A. I can't read it from the screen. Can you please zoom in. In any
19 case, I think that the constitution of the Republic of Serbia --
20 Q. Just a moment.
21 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we go to page 16 in the
22 English and Article 1 in the Serbian. Page 16.
23 Q. In your binder, you have Article 1.
24 A. Of the Serbian constitution?
25 Q. Yes.
1 A. Let me see what page that is. Yes, I found it. Article 1. The
2 basic thing here is that the Socialist Republic of Serbia is a state of
3 the Serbian people and other nations and nationalities. The next article
4 states that, the next paragraph states that Serbia comprises the
5 Autonomous Provinces of Vojvodina and Kosovo, as well as that the
6 Socialist Republic of Serbia shall be a part of the Socialist Federal
7 Republic of Yugoslavia.
8 Q. Thank you.
9 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we go to page 17 in the
10 English, please.
11 Q. This is your Article 3.
12 A. The territory of the republic shall comprise the territories of
13 the municipalities as envisaged by the law. The borders of the republic
14 may be changed only on the basis of a decision by the Assembly of the
15 Socialist Republic of Serbia. The borders were key and each and every
16 change had to be decided on by the Assembly. That's the gist of this
18 Q. Thank you.
19 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Let's go to page 99 in the
21 Q. Article 291 in your binder.
22 A. Chapter 8, socialist autonomous provinces?
23 Q. Yes.
24 A. This is copied from the Yugoslav constitution stating that the
25 provinces were socio-political communities in which the nations and
1 nationalities exercised their sovereign rights except for those rights in
2 the common interests of the working people, citizens, nations and
3 nationalities of the republic as a whole. Such rights could only be
4 exercised within the republic as a whole.
5 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you. Could we next please
6 go to page 104 in the English.
7 Q. Article 300 in your binder. Just a brief comment, please.
8 A. Article 300 is the only article in the Serbian constitution which
9 enumerates the issues which may be applied uniformly across the territory
10 of the Republic of Serbia including the two provinces. Such issues and
11 laws pertaining to them are valid in the territory of the entire
12 republic. No other issues could be regulated by the republic save for
13 those enumerated in here. There were many problems concerning this
14 article, which I worked on as well.
15 Among other things, it envisaged the regulation of principles,
16 basic principles, as you can see in the items enumerated. In legal
17 interpretation, this posed many difficulties in the sense of what is the
18 concept and boundaries of a principle, a basic principle. There was much
19 discussion to come up with a universally accepted language of this
20 constitution. I was the secretary of the province, and I know that in
21 the technical legal process, there were many problems in how to interpret
22 the notion of principles, basic principles, et cetera. Basically all
23 matters which were not strictly prescribed.
24 Q. How were the delegates from the province of Kosovo represented in
25 the bodies of Serbia?
1 A. Concerning the Republic of Serbia, the autonomous provinces were
2 represented in the same way as any other part of Serbia's territory. It
3 depended on the population, the ethnic makeup, the number of
4 municipalities, and the number of workers because there were three
5 chambers. The provinces were represented in the Republic of Serbia in
6 such a way that Kosovo had its delegates. The number who are dependent
7 on the population, but there were three chambers, and one chamber was the
8 chamber of the municipalities.
9 Q. Did the delegates in Kosovo and Metohija take part in the
10 election of the Serbian member of the federal Presidency?
11 A. The delegates from Kosovo as well as those from Vojvodina were on
12 an equal footing with the other delegates from other parts of Serbia or
13 Serbia proper as it was called in the political lingo. They took part in
14 the elections for all structures, bodies, judges, in the legislative
15 process and in all matters about which the Assembly decided. So all
16 delegates from provinces or not took part in the decision-making process
17 on an equal footing.
18 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we now please see page 125
19 of the English version and Article 361 of the Serbian original. That is
20 page 125 of the English version. And Article 361 in the Serbian version.
21 Let's just wait for it to appear on the screen.
22 Q. Here we can see the composition of the Presidency of Serbia?
23 A. Well, I wouldn't say that is Article 361. 364 --
24 Q. Yes, I apologise. It's actually 364 on page 125.
25 A. It has 15 members, they are elected by the Assembly of Serbia, as
1 I said, and by virtue of their position, the Presidency shall include the
2 president of the Assembly of the SRS, the president of the central
3 committee of the League of Communists, and the presidents of the
4 presidencies of the provinces.
5 Q. Now, you've mentioned the members from the province as being
6 members of the Presidency of Serbia. Did it apply vice-versa?
7 A. No, there were no representatives of other parts of Serbia in the
8 Presidency of Kosovo.
9 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we please see D011-5078.
10 Your Honours, I wish to inform you that the translation of this document
11 is pending so we don't have an English version yet. It is just the basic
12 provisions upon which I would like to ask the witness to comment. This
13 is the constitution of the Socialist Autonomous Province of Kosovo, so
14 with the Chamber's leave, I would like to have this marked for
16 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, it will be marked.
17 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit Number D00903 marked for
18 identification. Thank you, Your Honours.
19 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation]
20 Q. Witness, please give us a brief comment on Article 1 of the
21 constitution of the province of Kosovo.
22 A. The constitutions of Yugoslavia, of Serbia, and of Kosovo are
23 interconnected and many provisions are harmonised. This Article 1
24 defines the province of Kosovo, and as of 1974, the province of Kosovo
25 has had a constitution. Until that time it only had a constitutional law
1 as the highest legal act. The province is a socio-political community of
2 Albanians, Serbs, Turks, and Montenegrins. This was an issue whether a
3 strong presence in political life and, therefore, it wasn't possible to
4 treat the province as a province of Albanians but rather as a province of
5 the peoples and nationalities listed here in an alphabetic order. In one
6 linguistic version it's Albanians, Muslims, et cetera, and in the other
7 linguistic version the sequence is difference, the Albanians are
8 mentioned last because in the Albanian language the word for Albanian is
10 Q. Thank you.
11 A. This also includes the provision from the constitution of Serbia
12 stipulating that the province of Kosovo is an integral part of the
13 Republic of Serbia and of the Federation of Yugoslavia.
14 Q. Thank you. Could we have a brief comment of Article 4?
15 A. Article 4. The territory of the province shall consist of the
16 territories of the municipalities. And the province of -- the territory
17 of the province of Kosovo cannot be changed without the approval of the
18 provincial Assembly.
19 Q. And what about Article 4?
20 A. Article 4 --
21 Q. And Article 5, please, too.
22 A. Well, they speak about equality, which is the starting point of
23 all constitutions, that is all citizens have the same rights and duties.
24 And Article 5 specifically speaks about the equality of languages. That
25 is the constitution of Kosovo, autonomously regulates the equality of the
1 Albanian, Serbian, and Turkish languages and their respective scripts,
2 and that is then regulated by the province which sees to it that this
3 principle is applied.
4 Q. Thank you. Take a brief look at Article 301, paragraph 1,
6 A. Of the constitution of Kosovo?
7 Q. Yes.
8 A. These are the powers of the Assembly, what the Assembly can
10 Q. Oh, I'm only interested in paragraph 1.
11 A. The Assembly of Kosovo decides about any amendments to the
12 constitution of the province of Kosovo. That is, paragraph 1 gives the
13 right to the province to decide autonomously about the constitution of
14 the Socialist Autonomous Province of Kosovo. It decides about amendments
15 to the constitution, yes. And that at the same time it gives its
16 approval to, and this is very important, its approval to amendments to
17 the constitution of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and the
18 Socialist Republic of Serbia. That is, the province has such strong
19 rights that without its approval neither the constitution of Serbia nor
20 the constitution of Yugoslavia can be amended.
21 Q. Did the bodies of Yugoslavia and the government bodies of Serbia
22 give their approval for the amendment of the constitution of Kosovo?
23 A. No. The province was autonomous here, but its constitution had
24 to be harmonised with these other constitutions of Serbia and that of
25 Yugoslavia. But there was no such participation.
1 Q. Could you now please go to Article 301, paragraph 20.
2 A. The Assembly of Kosovo shall elect a member of the Presidency of
3 the Yugoslavia. That is, its own member, one of a total of eight
4 members. And the Assembly of the province of Kosovo elects and the
5 members of its own Presidency, because Kosovo had its Presidency and
6 Serbia had its own and Yugoslavia had its own Presidency.
7 Q. Thank you.
8 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] We have already had this document
9 marked for identification.
10 Q. Please tell me now what the ethnic makeup of the government
11 bodies of the Socialist Autonomous Province of Kosovo was like?
12 A. The government bodies of the province of Kosovo had an ethnic
13 makeup which on the whole reflected the ethnic makeup of the population.
14 That ethnic makeup or we called it the key in our political jargon was
15 also applied to all other administrative bodies and to a certain extent
16 also in the economy, and this was also applied to municipal structures.
17 Depending on the ethnic make up, we strove to see that all ethnic
18 communities be proportionally represented. And as the percentage of
19 Albanians was about 70 per cent, we can see that in the bodies of the
20 province, the Albanians made up 70 per cent of the composition. Whereas,
21 the Serbs, Turks, Montenegrins took part with their respective shares.
22 Q. How did Kosovo and Metohija develop in the 1970s and 1980s?
23 A. As I lived and worked in Kosovo for the most part of my career,
24 starting from 1970 we witnessed rapid socio-economic development, which
25 made possible the establishment of a special fund at Yugoslav level which
1 was called, the fund for the development of the underdeveloped and
2 Kosovo. The province of Kosovo played an important part in that fund.
3 From that fund various economic operators were funded or health care,
4 et cetera, so the funds from this fund were used for development and for
5 the raising of the cultural educational level to a higher degree.
6 And as an immediate participant, I can say that Kosovo within a
7 brief time-period made such a leap in development for which other peoples
8 or nations needed decades. But owing to this fund to which all republics
9 contributed, such rapid social and economic development became possible.
10 We often stressed that in our political work and in our political
11 speeches. At the federal level, at the level of the republic, and also
12 at the level of the province. We also gave examples.
13 Q. What was the situation in education and science?
14 A. Education also expanded greatly. Many schools were built. More
15 pupils started attending schools, both primary and secondary, and then
16 some faculties were established. First they were organisationally part
17 of the university of Belgrade, but soon the university of Pristina was
18 established, which grew rapidly, and it became the third largest
19 university in Yugoslavia exceeded only by Zagreb and Belgrade, and this
20 applied to the number of students and to the number of faculties.
21 Q. Were national academies founded?
22 A. Once the number of scientists had grown and science had developed
23 there were doctors of science and then the Kosovo academy of sciences of
24 arts was founded, what included an institute called the Albanological
25 institute. It studied the history of the Albanian nationality, its
1 culture, et cetera, and that's why it was called the Albanological
2 institute. There was also an academy of sciences, and such academies
3 were found in Vojvodina and in other parts, that is republics, of
4 Yugoslavia at the time.
5 Q. What was the situation with the infrastructure like?
6 A. Kosovo was the least developed region and infrastructure was
7 poorly developed. But owing to the aid provided by the working class and
8 the working people of the entire country who contributed from their
9 salaries, a large number of facilities was built. Roads, irrigation
10 systems, as well as other public utilities that improved the quality of
11 life in Kosovo.
12 Q. Thank you. Can you tell us in the early 1980s were there
13 demonstrations and how did they come about?
14 A. In 1981 there were large demonstrations in Kosovo. They started
15 in March. I remember the exact date, it was the 11th of March, because
16 anniversaries have been celebrated since. And they lasted until early
17 April. These demonstrations started in the students centre, that is in
18 the students cafeteria, and they went on until the 3rd or 4th of April
19 with some interruptions, and they grew day by day.
20 These were very serious large demonstrations that also had a
21 destructive element, and there were serious clashes with the police. And
22 these demonstrations were the focus of many activities, and they were
23 much discussed.
24 Q. What triggered these demonstrations, and what were the
25 demonstrators demands?
1 A. The first time when the students gathered in the students mess,
2 the initial request concerned food, but once they were out in the street,
3 we began seeing the same slogans we had seen back in 1968. The basic one
4 was "Kosovo republic" and "unification." The largest demonstrations took
5 place in early April in Pristina, but there were demonstrations in other
6 cities and towns as well.
7 Many citizens from other towns came to Pristina and joined the
8 demonstrations so the state authorities were not able to suppress those
10 Q. Thank you. What was the nature of those demonstrations?
11 A. They were used by the various political foray in Kosovo, rather,
12 they were seen as hostile aiming at undermining the constitution and
13 territorial integrity of Serbia and Yugoslavia.
14 Q. Were these peaceful demonstrations?
15 A. Based on everything I said, they were not. They were quite
16 violent actually.
17 Q. Thank you. Who reacted to them and how?
18 A. The first ones to react were the security organs and the police
19 of Kosovo. They were unable to suppress them. Next, Serbian organs
20 offered assistance to their colleagues in Kosovo, however, the leaders in
21 Kosovo did not allow for that. The organs of Serbian police were
22 prevented from entering in the municipality of Kursumlija at the border
23 crossing. This created additional problems and a compromise was reached.
24 So-called joint security forces were created comprising members from all
25 the Yugoslav Republics and from the province of Vojvodina. It was then
1 that Serbian forces were allowed to participate as part of that joint
2 force and allowed to enter Kosovo in order to assist in the suppression
3 of the demonstrations. Those joint forces remained in Kosovo until 1990.
4 Given that the demonstrations were very violent and involved great -- a
5 great many people, the army intervened as well following a request made
6 by the committee for the defence of Kosovo. The army arrived from
7 Skopje, Macedonia. It was a tank unit. In order to protect all key
8 facilities in the province. The provincial Assembly, the chamber, the
9 banks, and radio and TV stations. The joint forces were trying to keep
10 law and order. These demonstrations were the cause for a state of
11 emergency in Kosovo.
12 Q. Can you tell us who were the sending parties to the joint forces
13 followed by the request of the counsel for the defence of Kosovo?
14 A. The federal government did through its federal interior ministry
15 with the previous agreement of all the republics. The commander of the
16 joint forces was from Croatian. I think he was Croatian.
17 As part of the joint forces there was a special unit commanded by
18 Slovenia. The joint forces had their staff and were located in different
19 towns and cities in Kosovo. Their staff was in Pristina and in Avajlija
20 and the environs of Pristina. The forces were deployed in such a way
21 that, for example, in Vitina where I hail from, there were Croatian
22 police forces in addition to the Kosovo ones. In Urosevac there were
23 policemen from Macedonia, Bosnia-Herzegovina.
24 Q. Thank you. You mentioned the Army of Yugoslavia. Did it
25 participate in the suppression of the demonstrations?
1 A. The Army of Yugoslavia was there to flex the muscle, to put a
2 show of force. The tanks arrived from Skopje to Pristina down the main
3 street in order to demonstrate its power. Pristina also saw sorties of
4 the Yugoslav air force. Their goal of which was to have a psychological
5 impact on those participating in the demonstrations, as well as on the
6 citizens in general.
7 Q. Thank you.
8 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we please have D011-4952.
9 Q. It is your tab 4. Can you tell us what this document is?
10 A. I kept this in my personal archive. This is an official pass.
11 Because of the state of emergency, one could not move about freely in
12 Pristina. At the time, I was a member of the Executive Council and even
13 I could not move about freely. I couldn't even go to work without a pass
14 such as this. It is clearly stated here why it was issued. It says that
15 it was issued for the person in question to be allowed to move freely.
16 It was drafted in both languages.
17 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] I seek to tender this into
19 JUDGE PARKER: Yes.
20 THE REGISTRAR: It will be received as Exhibit Number D00904.
21 Thank you, Your Honours.
22 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation]
23 Q. What were the consequences of the 1981 demonstrations?
24 A. Given their scope and nature, as well as their slogans and
25 numbers of those involved, all that had a very negative impact on the
1 political situation and inter-ethnic relations in Kosovo. A very
2 unfavourable climate was created, raising concerns with all those who
3 wanted to live in Yugoslavia and under the social political system as
4 existed at the time. This concern was shared by all the ethnicities.
5 However, there was growing insecurity, lack of trust, and fear of
6 the future because during the demonstrations as well as afterwards, there
7 were different attacks, individuals were attacked as well as their
8 property. All this had a grave impact on the inter-ethnic relations
9 which resulted in an increasing number of Serbs and Montenegrins moving
10 out of Kosovo in numbers greater than they had been after the
11 demonstrations in 1968.
12 The inter-ethnic relations worsened by far, and all this was
13 contrary to the existing policies and political system.
14 Q. Thank you. What was the position of the republican state organs
15 vis-a-vis the resolution of the Kosovo problem?
16 A. The problem was spotted relatively early on in the federal
17 institutions, Serbian institutions, as well as in Kosovo itself. The
18 party bodies as well as Assembly bodies from the state down to the
19 province and municipalities issued programmes in order to stop this
20 tendency of emigrating and trying to return those who had already moved
22 This problem was dealt with by the Yugoslav Serbian provincial
23 and municipal organs. There existed such the so-called Yugoslav
24 programme for the return of those who had immigrated and to stop this
1 Q. You have mentioned Pristina university, what was the ethnic
2 makeup until 1981 and afterwards?
3 A. The worsening inter-ethnic relations, the demonstrations, and the
4 participation of Albanian students in the demonstrations caused great
5 rifts at the university in particular. This raised concerns and
6 introduced a feeling of insecurity among Serbian, Turkish, and other
7 students. During that time, as far as I recall, according to the
8 information the provincial bodies had, 60 per cent of all teaching staff
9 who were not Albanians moved out of Kosovo.
10 Q. What was the situation like in rural areas?
11 A. There it was particularly pronounced because there was
12 harassment, damage to crops, and threats to people's safety and property.
13 There were also cases of physical attacks and even murders. I recall a
14 number of murders which occurred during that period. A Sarkic was killed
15 from the village of Mejic [phoen] near Malkovica [phoen]. I recall that
16 in particular because I was among others tasked by the president of the
17 Presidency of Kosovo to investigate it. This Sarkic person had
18 complained in written form, and he had foreseen his fate in a way. He
19 believed he would eventually be killed. People didn't believe him at
20 first, and we went to talk to the authorities in Djakovica and went to
21 his family home. I had information which indicated that there had been
22 shots fired at his house. It was actually before he was killed.
23 At that point in time he expressed his grave concern that he
24 would be killed and the Djakovica authorities promised to assist him.
25 Unfortunately, a little while later, he was killed indeed. I was badly
1 shaken up because I was involved in trying to help him.
2 There was another family where the father and son were killed in
3 Samodreza. I also remember the Martinovic case, but there were many
4 other attacks and cases which raised concerns and caused fear among the
6 Q. Thank you. What was the situation like in terms of the
7 functioning of the Republic of Serbia in its exercise of its powers
8 across the territory?
9 A. By virtue of the 1974 constitution, the republic could exercise
10 all of its functions and powers across the territory. I tried to
11 illustrate that by telling you that the Serbian policemen could not enter
12 the province on their own without previously consulting the federal
14 In all matters internal, it was the provincial organs who were in
15 charge of regulating the situation. Effectively the Serbian authorities
16 exercised their power only in Serbia proper. As for the implementation
17 of all provincial laws and regulation, it was the provincial organs that
18 were tasked with implementing them.
19 Q. Can you tell us, when were the first steps taken in order to
20 overcome this problem of functioning, and how was it resolved?
21 A. After the first set of amendments was proclaimed by which the
22 province received broadened powers and after the constitution in --
23 demonstrations after 1968, there were people in Kosovo who were opposed
24 to such processes, including Jova Sotra, Misa Sekulovic [phoen], Jevica
25 Pecinovic [phoen]. I recall them in particular because they were kicked
1 out of the League of Communists, and they actually moved since they were
2 left without work. One of them, Mr. Sotra, died soon afterwards.
3 There was opposition to the changes which were made to the
4 constitution in 1974. In the Republic of Serbia I seem to remember the
5 existence of something called the Blue Book in which I analysed the
6 constitutional status of Serbia. It was quickly set aside, but after
7 1981 and after all the events I have been discussing, it became topical
8 again because it became clear that the Serbian constitution had to be
9 changed in order for Serbia to regain its basic functions of statehood.
10 Q. Thank you. Can you tell us who reacted to the situation and how?
11 A. You mean the situation with the constitution?
12 Q. Yes.
13 A. Formally speaking, the first initiative came from the Presidency
14 of Serbia as the most senior body in Serbia. A group, a task force was
15 formed presided over by the president of the Serbian Presidency, Mr. Ivan
16 Stambolic. There were also two members, I believe it was Spiro Galovic,
17 and I don't seem to recall the other one. There were also
18 representatives from Vojvodina. I recall Vojadinovic [phoen], and there
19 were representatives from Kosovo including myself and two Albanians who
20 were constitutional experts.
21 The force was tasked with drafting a plan of changes to the
22 constitution in order to have it move in the direction desired.
23 Q. Can you tell us what the results of the work of that task force
24 of the Presidency of the SRS were?
25 A. There was a material that was sent to the Assembly of Serbia and
1 the Assembly accepted it and tasked the constitutional commission of the
2 Assembly to start drafting amendments to the constitution of Serbia based
3 on that material.
4 Q. Thank you. How did the work continue after the Assembly made its
6 A. The constitutional commission to be able to work on the
7 amendments to the constitution established a smaller group which was
8 shared by Bora Jovic, and they had a number of members from the
9 constitutional commission of Serbia, and members of that group were also
10 members from Kosovo and Vojvodina. They were also directly involved in
11 drafting the language of the amendments.
12 Q. When did the work on drafting the amendments begin, and how long
13 did it take?
14 A. It took three years. From 1986 until 1989. The work on the
15 constitutional amendments and the harmonisation took all that time
16 because the procedure was -- the process rather, was very complicated
17 because we had a unique system not to be found elsewhere in the world.
18 Q. Did these members of the constitutional commission have to
19 harmonise their proposals with what was called the basis at the time?
20 A. Yes, that was a duty. The members from Vojvodina and those from
21 Kosovo couldn't act on their own. They had to inform the official
22 authorities of the province, above all the Presidency and the executive
23 committee, and of course the League of Communists, because at the time
24 the League of Communists had what was called the leading role in our
1 Q. What was the essence of the amendments to the constitution of
3 A. Considering that the work took as much as three years, or rather,
4 although it took three years, we agreed that we should only change issues
5 regarding the functioning of the state, namely, matters that have to do
6 with the security of the entire republic. Furthermore, matters connected
7 with the people's defence of interest to the republic as a whole, and the
8 constitutional remit of the Republic of Serbia. Can the Republic of
9 Serbia adopt its constitution and can it do so independently,
10 autonomously, and what the procedure is.
11 Q. Did these amendments change the constitutional position of the
12 province and its powers with regard to the Republic of Serbia?
13 A. The constitutional position of the province in the Federation was
14 not changed by these amendments. The rights of the province in the
15 Federation remained intact. The province remained a constituent element
16 of the Federation with all rights and duties stemming therefrom. With
17 regard to the Republic of Serbia, the amendments changed the powers with
18 of --
19 Q. Thank you, we'll deal with that a bit later.
20 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I believe it's time
21 for the technical break.
22 JUDGE PARKER: It is so, Mr. Djurdjic. We must break now. We
23 resume at 6.00. It is too detailed and too long, if I could give you a
24 summary of what is happening to date. So if you can think about that
25 over the break. Thank you, we resume at 6.00.
1 [The witness stands down]
2 --- Recess taken at 5.32 p.m.
3 --- On resuming at 6.02 p.m.
4 [The witness takes the stand]
5 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Djurdjic.
6 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.
7 Q. Mr. Jokanovic, when the constitutional commission of the Assembly
8 of Serbia finished its work, what was the result?
9 A. The constitutional commission of the Assembly of Serbia submitted
10 its proposed amendments to the Assembly of Serbia to adopt, which the
11 Assembly of Serbia did and then a public discussion ensued.
12 Q. Thank you. What were the results of the public discussion?
13 A. In our system, that public discussion was very broad. The
14 constitutional amendments were discussed at all levels from villages to
15 town neighbourhoods to all elected bodies, as well as professional and
16 expert institutions, scientific institutes, especially legal --
17 organisations of legal scholars. I also took part in that discussion and
18 there were the statements of the president of the socialist league which
19 was a socio-protocol institution charged with moderating that discussion.
20 And about 400.000 people took part in that discussion, whereas over
21 30.000 actually contributed to it actively.
22 Q. What was the procedure after the public discussion?
23 A. After the public discussion all the comments and proposals were
24 summarised, some were founded, others unfounded. Some were
25 professionally relevant, others weren't. And all the most important
1 matters are singled out and forwarded to the constitutional commission of
2 Serbia to accept them or refuse, always giving an explanation.
3 Q. Who proposed the amendments to the constitution, to the
4 constitutional commission of Serbia?
5 A. The constitutional commission of Serbia which was the body in
6 charge received the amendments from the socialist league.
7 Q. Did the constitutional commission adopt these amendments?
8 A. Yes, all three chambers of the Assembly of Serbia accepted these
9 amendments, and these adopted amendments were also forwarded to the
10 Assemblies of Vojvodina and Kosovo to give their approval to these
11 amendments which was constitutional procedure.
12 Q. Before giving their approval to the amendments to the
13 constitution of the Republic of Serbia, were there any events in Kosovo?
14 A. Yes, there are. There was resistance to approving those
15 amendments. I remember the demonstrations in some towns, such as
16 Urosevac and elsewhere. The most important political protest was the
17 strike of the miners in Trepca because they demanded that all Albanian
18 officials in the Assembly of the Federation resign. Namely, all those
19 who supported the constitutional amendments.
20 One of them was Rrahman Morina, the president of the League of
21 Communists of Kosovo. Another one, Ali Shukrija was a member of the
22 presidency of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia. Then there was
23 Hysamedin Azemi who was also a high official in the province.
24 Q. Thank you. What was the reaction to those demonstrations?
25 A. The entire Yugoslav public was worried because of the strike of
1 the miners, and the miners received telegrams stating support to their
2 cause and the political consequences were very far reaching. Federal
3 authorities had to act to protect the constitutional order and carry out
4 its tasks and achieve the set goals. I remember that the Presidency of
5 Yugoslavia introduced so-called special measures.
6 Q. Thank you. Who had organised these demonstrations, and what
7 triggered them?
8 A. Well, they were triggered mostly by false information, namely
9 that the use of languages and scripts would be jeopardised by the
10 amendments. Even strange things that the wearing of the Albanian folk
11 hat would be prohibited, that normal life would no longer be the same,
12 that equality was at stake, that the language would no longer be used
13 officially. And the aim was to incite the people to resist
14 constitutional changes.
15 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we please see D008-6787.
16 Q. It's tab 5 in your binder. Tell us briefly what these
17 conclusions of the Assembly of the SFRY mean. They were published on the
18 3rd of March, 1989.
19 A. Well, as it says, for the purpose of protecting constitutional
20 order, public law and order, the personal safety and security of all
21 citizens, and also for the normalisation of the situation, the Assembly
22 of the SFRY supports the decisions of the Presidency as the collective
23 presidential body, and in these items the duties of the executive
24 committee are defined at their levels of the republics and the provinces.
25 The citizens are called upon to return to their regular work duties and
1 activities. That criminal and other proceedings be launched against the
2 organisers, of counter-revolutionary activity be launched. The Assembly
3 does not support the demands of the minors because they believe that only
4 the legal authorities can appoint officials or, et cetera.
5 Q. Thank you.
6 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] I seek to tender this document
7 into evidence.
8 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.
9 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit Number D00905.
10 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation]
11 Q. Thank you. Mr. Jokanovic, did the authorities of the Republic of
12 Serbia, or could they do anything about these events and developments in
13 February and March 1998?
14 A. The authorities of Serbia couldn't. The only thing that was in
15 existence at the time were the so-called joint forces. They were forces
16 from all republics and provinces, and the authorities from the Republic
17 of Serbia were only able to do something to raise certain issues through
18 federal institutions but not directly in Kosovo.
19 Q. Thank you. What was your position in March 1989?
20 A. As I said at the outset when I introduced myself, on that date
21 the 23rd of March, 1989, I was president of the Assembly of Kosovo.
22 Q. Thank you. When did the Assembly of Kosovo meet, at which
23 meeting did it support the amendments of the constitution of Serbia?
24 A. On the 23rd of March of that year. The Assembly of Vojvodina had
25 held its meeting on the 10th of March. They had already approved the
1 amendments to the constitution of Serbia.
2 Q. And which year was this, the 23rd of March of which year?
3 A. 1989.
4 Q. How many delegates took part in the work of the Assembly of
5 Kosovo on the 23rd of March, 1989?
6 A. The Assembly of Kosovo had a total of 190 delegates. The
7 majority of delegates from all three chambers were present. Some were
8 absent, that is three were absent, so that a total of 187 participated.
9 Q. What was the ethnic makeup of the Assembly of Kosovo in March
11 A. The ethnic makeup was in keeping with the ethnic makeup of the
12 population, I said as much in a previous answer. About 70 per cent were
13 Albanians and the 30 per cent were persons of other ethnic affiliations,
14 Serbs, Montenegrin, Turks, but 70 per cent were Albanians because that
15 was one of the principles upheld in Kosovo in the system that was in
16 existence then.
17 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we please see D006-4413,
19 Q. That's tab 6. The document we are about to see is a recording of
20 the joint session of all three chambers of the Assembly of Kosovo held on
21 the 23rd of March, 1989.
22 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] So could we now please see page 3
23 of the English version.
24 Q. Were there any guests at this session held on the 23rd of March,
25 and if so, who were they?
1 A. This tape recording was translated into writing, but as you can
2 see, I addressed those in attendance. Sinan Hasani was there, member of
3 the SFRY Presidency, which is the body I described before; then comrade
4 Sefcet Jasari, who was member of the presidency of Serbia; next Velimir
5 Vukmanovic and Ferat Ahmeti, who were vice-presidents of the Assembly of
6 the Republic of Serbia, one was Serbian and the other Albanian; next, it
7 was the deputy of the constitutional commission of Serbia, I don't know
8 who it was, as well as representatives of the Yugoslav People's Army and
9 the rest.
10 Q. Thank you. What was the media coverage this Assembly enjoyed?
11 A. I was surprised as the speaker of the president of the Assembly
12 by the exceptionally great interest for this session. There were 180
13 accredited journalists. Although I have had a rich political career, but
14 on this occasion I was supposed to face the greatest number of
15 journalists ever.
16 Q. Who gave the initial remarks?
17 A. I did, and you can see it in this tape recording.
18 Q. Thank you.
19 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we go to page 6 in the
21 Q. Which is your page 6 as well. This part has to do with your
22 introductory remarks. You can see here, but perhaps you can tell us as
23 well, what were the main points of your introductory remarks?
24 A. Do you mean what I can see on page 6 or what I can recall off the
1 Q. Tell us what you can recall.
2 A. I tried to briefly explain the gist of the problem and to point
3 out that these amendments were not aimed as changing the constitutional
4 status of the province of Kosovo within the federal state of Yugoslavia.
5 As well as that these amendments had no intention of changing the status
6 of the province in the Federation. Serbia was only to receive certain
7 competencies which were standard competencies or powers of a state, and
8 that the quality of languages and scripts in the province was to be
9 guaranteed and regulated by the provincial constitution and body of law.
10 The last thing I focused on, because it is important, was
11 Amendment 47. It changed any veto powers of the provincial Assembly in
12 favour of a more complex procedure which I can explain.
13 Q. Thank you. We'll get to that. After your remarks, was there any
14 discussion from the floor concerning this item on the agenda?
15 A. The session developed in keeping with the agenda. There were
16 contributions. Each delegate who request the floor had a chance to
17 address the others. I think there were around 30 delegates contributing.
18 They were all able to take the floor, and once the discussion was
19 finished, we voted.
20 Q. Thank you.
21 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] By way of illustration, perhaps we
22 can go to page 23 in the English and page 14 in the Serbian.
23 Q. You don't have to look for it in your hard copy, you have it on
24 the screen. Those people who wanted to contribute, were they free to do
25 so, and did they express their position concerning any item of the
2 A. All those who contributed were free to do so. No one was
3 interrupted, as you can see from the transcript. All those who voted
4 against wanted to take the floor. Those in favour did not request it.
5 That was rather indicative. Using the existing political system, the
6 representatives used the opportunity to address the Assembly not only on
7 their own behalf, but on behalf of their constituencies, these being
8 socio-political organisations, municipalities, trade unions, associations
9 of war veterans, youth associations, et cetera.
10 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we go to page 25 in the
11 B/C/S and 15 in the English version. Page 16, excuse me.
12 Q. Mr. Jokanovic, we see here Imer Dzafici taking the floor. Who
13 did he represent, and whose position did he express? You can see it on
14 the screen, Mr. Jokanovic.
15 A. I found it in my hard copy. The screen, yes. He was from the
16 working bodies and organs of the Prizren Municipal Assembly, and he
17 stated that there was intensive political discussion about the
18 amendments, and he supported their position and stated to the Assembly
19 that the Prizren municipal organ supported the changes.
20 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you. Could I please ask
21 that it be admitted.
22 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.
23 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit Number D00906. Thank you.
24 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we please have D011-4958.
25 Q. It is your tab 8. Mr. Jokanovic, your tab 8.
1 A. Number 8. Thank you. Do you want me to comment?
2 Q. Tell us what it is.
3 A. This is the newspaper "Politika" which was the newspaper with the
4 widest circulation in Serbia.
5 Q. Please look at the screen. This is not "Politika".
6 A. Oh, yes, that's number 9. This is the "Rilindja" newspaper. I
7 think they had the widest circulation in Kosovo in Albanian. And the
8 title in Albanian it says "Agreement to the Amendments of the Serbian
10 Q. What does the journalist say? How many people were there?
11 A. According to this information, it says 180.
12 Q. Thank you.
13 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we please go to the last
15 Q. Towards the bottom of the page, could we please see that. Who
16 were the reporters?
17 A. Z. Celaj, Y. Baja, R. Rugova, R. Bislimi, and M. Gjata. Photo
18 reporters, Skenderi and Bylykbashi.
19 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours, I seek
20 to -- could we please MFI this document pending its translation.
21 JUDGE PARKER: Yes.
22 THE REGISTRAR: This document which is D011-4658 shall be
23 exhibited as D00907 marked for identification. Thank you, Your Honours.
24 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we next have D011-4962.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, this is the "Politika". It is
1 similar to the "Rilindja" except that it was published in Belgrade. They
2 were reporting on the work of the Assembly stating that the amendments
3 were approved by the Municipal Assembly. They also referred to those in
4 attendance and have parts of the stenogram on the page.
5 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we please scroll down.
6 Q. The introductory part, can we see here the results of the
7 Assembly vote?
8 A. It says 24 people took the floor. I thought there were around
9 30. The amendments were adopted by a vast majority. Out of 180, 10 were
10 against and 2 abstained.
11 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, I seek to tender this.
12 JUDGE PARKER: Yes.
13 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Sorry, it should be marked for
14 identification pending translation.
15 JUDGE PARKER: Okay. Yes, it will be marked.
16 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit Number D00908 marked for
17 identification. Thank you.
18 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you. Could we next have
19 D011-5052, which is a video recording.
20 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: The booths did not receive
21 any transcript of the video.
22 [Video-clip played]
23 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation]
24 Q. Mr. Jokanovic, this excerpt, can you tell us what we just saw?
25 A. I saw myself, but I was much younger then. I stated that the
1 amendments were adopted, well, I looked sort of nice. I realise now that
2 it was more of a ceremony. The delegates after I declared the adoption
3 gave a standing ovation.
4 Q. Thank you. After it this portion of the session, did the
5 Assembly resume its work?
6 A. After a 20-minute break, we resumed work, but not in joint
7 session. I no longer presided it, the people broke up into chambers.
8 First of all, there were introductory remarks by the vice-president of
9 the government or by the deputy prime minister, Mr. Fusuri [phoen].
10 Other agenda items were discussed as well, and judges were appointed as
11 well as court presidents and prosecutors.
12 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, could we have P8.
13 Q. It is your tab 7.
14 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Before that, I seek to tender this
15 into evidence.
16 JUDGE PARKER: How is that going to help us, Mr. Djurdjic? It's
17 a short video. It shows a public gathering. We've been told by the
18 witness the effect of it and what it is. The extent of this detail
19 troubles us, but we are not stopping you, but this video is just too far.
20 The amendments were carried. That's the significant issue that I think
21 you want to put forward, and they were carried with wide support.
22 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Yes, I wanted to do all this
23 because I would later present certain statements to the witness so as to
24 comment on the contents. I simply wanted to provide a basis before that.
25 I don't want to explain it too widely in front of the witness. And we
1 are approaching that crucial moment.
2 [Trial Chamber confers]
3 JUDGE PARKER: We won't receive the video, Mr. Djurdjic.
4 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.
5 Q. Mr. Jokanovic, we have this exhibit, it's already part of the
6 case file. This was the decision to pass Amendments 9 to 49 to the
7 constitution of the Socialist Republic of Serbia. Could we only go
8 through those amendments which I believe are the most important. We have
9 touched upon it in the course of your testimony. Could we go to page 23
10 of the English. It is your Amendment 27. It is your page 317 in the
11 upper right-hand side corner.
12 A. 27, yes.
13 Q. A brief comment, please.
14 A. This amendment speaks of the equality of the languages and
15 scripts across the territory of Serbia. I believe it is important for
16 your case and in particular the last paragraph where we have a guarantee
17 of that equality. It says that under this constitution provincial
18 constitution shall identify which languages of the ethnic community shall
19 be equal and that the province shall ensure that equality of the
20 languages spoken and the alphabets as guaranteed by the republican
21 constitution, the provincial institution also provided guarantees of
23 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we go to page 31 in the
24 English version, and it's page 320 in the lower right corner. It's
25 Amendment 33.
1 Q. I am interested in items 3 and 4. Could you briefly comment.
2 A. Item 3, that's the essential thing about which I have already
3 spoken. Namely the issue of people's defence and the basis for the plans
4 and preparations for the defence of the country.
5 Q. And what about item 4?
6 A. Item 4, the Territorial Defence, namely the managing of the
7 Territorial Defence as a matter of interest for the entire republic, but
8 a Territorial Defence exists also in the province.
9 Q. Please turn the page and comment on the last paragraph. That's
10 on page 35 of the English version.
11 A. Which amendment?
12 Q. 33, the last paragraph of that amendment. And it ends on page
13 321. Before Amendment 34, the last paragraph.
14 A. Amendment 34 --
15 Q. The last paragraph before that amendment.
16 A. "This amendment shall supersede the relevant parts and supplement
17 the provisions of Article 300 and shall supersede Article 423 of the
18 constitution of Serbia."
19 This elaborates some matters which were not precisely defined and
20 some basic state functions are regulated here.
21 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we please see page 48 of the
22 English version.
23 Q. And in your binder, it's page 326. That's Amendment 45.
24 A. The Supreme Court?
25 Q. Yes.
1 A. Shall I comment?
2 Q. Yes.
3 A. The Supreme Court of Kosovo was in existence, and it still has
4 all its powers even after these amendments, but it is stated here that
5 the Supreme Court decides about legal issues, about things that are
6 regulated and the Criminal Code of the republic. And it also decides in
7 a third instance about the death penalty.
8 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we now please see page 49 of
9 the English version, and for you it's Amendment 47.
10 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Djurdjic, our translation is referring to the
11 Supreme Court of Serbia. The witness was speaking of the Supreme Court
12 of Kosovo.
13 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation]
14 Q. Witness, please tell us, what does the Supreme Court of Serbia
15 decide about under these amendments?
16 A. This is about the Supreme Court of Serbia. This amendment
17 defines the powers of the Supreme Court of Serbia to decide about
18 extraordinary legal remedies under the Criminal Code of Serbia, because
19 before these amendments, the Supreme Court of the province was the
20 highest legal instance. But I mentioned extraordinary legal remedies,
21 that and the death penalty are now matters decided upon by the Supreme
22 Court of Serbia in the third instance.
23 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we please see page 49 of the
24 English version.
25 Q. And its page 47 in your binder, the last amendment. Please
1 explain the essence of this amendment.
2 A. Amendment 47 changes the right of veto and the principle of
3 approval. It changes a complex procedure. If the Assemblies of the
4 provinces fail to approve, then a special group is established and within
5 six months --
6 THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness please repeat his last words.
7 JUDGE PARKER: I am afraid the interpreters missed part of that
8 answer. And it will need to be repeated, Mr. Djurdjic.
9 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation]
10 Q. You said here, or rather, it was recorded that after six
11 months -- don't you look at this but listen to me instead. So the last
12 thing that was recorded was within six months of what, please repeat your
13 entire answer about the essence of this amendment, but please slowly.
14 A. The essence of this amendment is to allow for the possibility
15 that the Republic of Serbia changes its constitution without being
16 prevented by veto. Instead of a veto, this amendment lays out a complex
17 procedure of finding agreement with a provincial Assemblies to find a
18 solution. And if that solution is not found, the proposal cannot go
19 before the Assembly of Serbia. The eventual, or rather, the last resort
20 is a referendum by which the decision on changing the constitution of
21 Serbia is carried.
22 Q. Thank you. After this Assembly session was held, was the
23 Assembly of SAP Kosovo visited by a delegation?
24 A. Immediately after this Assembly meeting, or rather, a few days
25 later, I don't recall exactly how much, we received a visit from the
1 parliamentary delegation of the council of Europe. We discussed the
2 situation in Kosovo and the constitutional changes. I informed the
3 delegation about the situation in Kosovo and about the session of the
4 provincial Assembly as well as of the adoption of these amendments. I
5 explained to them the essence of these changes. The talks were
6 constructive, and they were friendly.
7 Q. Were there any objections to the work of the Assembly of Kosovo
8 which carried the amendments to the constitution?
9 A. The parliamentary delegation raised no objections to me. After
10 the talk we had, they wanted to meet Mr. Rugova and Mr. Djosaj [phoen]
11 and another gentleman whose name escapes me now. I agreed and I promised
12 them that we would invite these persons to the Assembly, but a member of
13 that delegation called somebody up on the phone and said he would call
14 back. On the following day, I was informed that the talk with Rugova and
15 some other persons who were politically active at the time had taken
16 place in hotel rooms at the Grand Hotel.
17 Q. Did they speak to the delegates who voted against the amendments?
18 A. When the parliamentary delegation left for Belgrade and met the
19 president of the federal Executive Council Mr. Ante Markovic and other
20 high officials, I learned that this delegation wanted to speak to those
21 members of the Assembly subsequently. I said, Why not, we can make that
22 possible, but Ante Markovic replied, You are not in charge of foreign
23 policy, I am. And he sent a plane to Pristina so that these people
24 travelled to Belgrade and spoke to the parliamentary delegation of the
25 council of Europe.
1 Q. There's one more thing I would like to know, did the Assembly of
2 Kosovo also carry the amendments to the constitution of Kosovo?
3 A. In June or July, with regard to these amendments to the
4 constitution of Serbia, the, or rather, following up on these amendments,
5 the Assembly of Kosovo adopted its own amendments, they were carried and
6 harmonised to the amendments of the constitution of Serbia, and some
7 other amendments to the constitution of Yugoslavia which have to do with
8 the further development of self-management and social relations.
9 These amendments were carried by the Assembly of Kosovo
11 Q. Were there political tensions when these amendments to the
12 constitution of Kosovo were carried?
13 A. No. The Assembly session went normally and these amendments were
14 carried unanimously by the Kosovo Assembly.
15 Q. Thank you.
16 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we now please see our
17 transcript, namely page 248. That's the 28th of January, 2009. Page
18 248, as I said.
19 Q. I'll read to you, Mr. Jokanovic, part of the statement of witness
20 Surroi. To the question in March 1989 too was there a vote about these
21 amendments in the Assembly of Kosovo. The witness replied:
22 "Well, that's what they called it. They were carried, but it
23 wasn't that way because all around the building of the parliament there
24 were armoured vehicles. The entire Kosovo population was under pressure
25 and especially the members of the Assembly, and there were people in the
1 building who voted without even being members of the Assembly of Kosovo?"
2 Let me ask you, were there armoured vehicles around the building
3 of the Assembly of Kosovo on the 23rd of March, 1989?
4 A. There were no armoured vehicles around the Assembly building.
5 Q. Thank you. Were the members of the Assembly pressurized with
6 regard to their participation, debate, or their vote?
7 A. No, the members of the Assembly consulted their constituencies
8 and voted the way they thought fit. Some were in favour, some were
10 Q. Did persons vote without being members of the Assembly?
11 A. That wasn't possible. Whoever wasn't a member of the Assembly
12 couldn't vote. There were guests, but they didn't vote.
13 Q. As there were many journalists present, we have seen them, have
14 you seen any photograph of an armoured vehicle around the Assembly
15 building on the day of the vote?
16 A. If there had been armoured vehicles and the rest as stated by
17 this witness, then probably some of the numerous journalists would have
18 recorded that. That would have been very interesting to the domestic
19 public and especially to the international public because there were both
20 Yugoslav journalists from all over Yugoslavia and also foreign
22 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we now please see the
23 transcript of the 13th of March, 2009. Page 2201.
24 Q. We'll see part of the statement of witness Adnan Merovci who on
25 this page line 4 says, the constitutional amendments which were imposed
1 by force against the will of the people and although the part of the
2 public was against him, the regime implemented a measure to -- this
3 measure to the effect of destroying all the institutions from the lowest
4 to the highest levels including education system, health system, police
5 system, et cetera. Could you comment?
6 A. I think this statement is untrue because these amendments only
7 pertain to what I've already had the opportunity to speak about.
8 Q. Thank you.
9 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we now please see our
10 transcript of the 18th of June, 2009. Page 6250.
11 Q. It's part of the statement of the witness Baton Haxhiu who in
12 lines 1 through 3 says: "The entire problem started with the
13 constitutional changes in 1989. The main problem of Kosovo is dated the
14 23rd of March, 1989 when the constitution was changed."
15 Mr. Jokanovic, after the adoption of the constitution, were there
16 any changes to the autonomy of Kosovo? Were any institutions of
17 Autonomous Province of Kosovo abolished or suspended?
18 A. After these amendments there were amendments to the constitution
19 of Kosovo. Following that, Reza Suponji [phoen] was elected a member of
20 the Presidency of the Yugoslavia. After these amendments, the
21 constitution of Kosovo was changed and the Assembly -- and I was
22 re-elected for another one year as president of the Assembly. I
23 expressed my gratitude to the Assembly for the co-operation and for the
24 results we achieved. And toward the end of the year, in December, 1989,
25 new elections were held.
1 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you. Could we now please
2 see Exhibit P286.
3 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Djurdjic, given the hour, I don't think we
4 should go to another document. We must finish. We have to adjourn for
5 the weekend. We will resume on Monday. A Court Officer will assist you
6 out, and on Monday we are to sit at 2.15. We now adjourn.
7 [The witness stands down]
8 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.00 p.m.
9 to be reconvened on Monday, the 22nd day of March,
10 2010, at 2.15 p.m.