1 Wednesday, 18 April 2007
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness entered court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 2.18 p.m.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar, would you please call the case.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Good afternoon, Your Honours. This is case
8 number IT-04-84-T, the Prosecutor versus Ramush Haradinaj et al.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you very much, Madam Registrar.
10 Good afternoon to everyone.
11 Mr. Emmerson, you're on your feet.
12 MR. EMMERSON: Simply because --
13 JUDGE ORIE: You would like to continue your cross-examination.
14 Yes, that's fine. Could you give us an indication on how much time you
15 would still need?
16 MR. EMMERSON: Yes. Can Your Honours hear me?
17 JUDGE ORIE: I can hear you.
18 MR. EMMERSON: We had a communication from the Trial Chamber
19 indicating that the first session would be set aside for concluding the
20 cross-examination of this witness.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
22 MR. EMMERSON: And having consulted with my colleagues, as I say,
23 my colleagues at the Defence bar, we are confident that we will conclude
24 cross-examination within the first session.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, and if there would be some time left for
1 Mr. Dutertre for re-examination.
2 Mr. Dutertre, as matters stand now, how much time do you think -
3 of course, it should be a calculated guess - to re-examine the witness?
4 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] Some 15 minutes, slightly more,
5 but I can try to adapt to the needs of the Court.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Need of the Court, also the need of the parties.
7 And, Mr. Kearney, you're confident for the next witness videolink
8 that -- how much time?
9 MR. KEARNEY: Again, Your Honour, this is not my witness --
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
11 MR. KEARNEY: -- but I'm informed by Mr. Di Fazio that the
12 examination-in-chief, he hopes to have it done in an hour, but certainly
13 no more than an hour and a half.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Okay.
15 MR. KEARNEY: I've spoken with the Defence before Court today,
16 and I'm -- their latest estimate is that their cross-examination will not
17 be long, perhaps no more than an hour or --
18 MR. EMMERSON: Less than an hour.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Let's get started.
20 Mr. Emmerson, to the extent possible, if you could finish within
21 the first session, even a bit shorter, it would be appreciated.
22 MR. EMMERSON: I'll aim for that.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
24 I'll first instruct the witness.
25 Witness 21, I remind you that you are still bound by the solemn
1 declaration you gave at the beginning of your testimony that you would
2 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, and I also
3 remind you that what happened yesterday when you were reluctant to give a
4 name -- we asked on an open session, where you were reluctant to give a
5 name, better to say that you're reluctant rather than that you don't know
6 the name because that was not the truth. But I take it -- I do
7 understand why you did it, but nevertheless tell us everything, even if
8 you know something you do not want to say.
9 We turn into private session.
10 [Private session]
11 Pages 2802-2872 redacted. Private session.
20 [Open session]
21 JUDGE ORIE: We will now proceed with the examination of the next
22 witness to be called by the Prosecution.
23 Mr. Di Fazio, are you ready to call your next witness?
24 MR. DI FAZIO: I am indeed.
25 JUDGE ORIE: And that would be -- because I do understand there
1 are no protective measures.
2 MR. DI FAZIO: That's correct. If Your Honours please, I call
3 Qaush Sadikaj.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
5 Mr. Sadikaj, at least I take it you are Mr. Sadikaj --
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
7 JUDGE ORIE: -- can you see me?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Can you hear me in a language you understand?
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I can hear you, but I don't
11 know who is talking to me at the moment.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Talking to you is the --
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] However, I can hear you very
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Can you see me on the screen?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The Judge, yes.
17 JUDGE ORIE: The Judge is talking to you at this moment. Could I
18 seek confirmation by the representative of the registry about the
19 videolink. Is there someone present from the registry?
20 THE REGISTRAR: [In Pristina] Yes, Your Honour, good afternoon.
21 My name is Ram Doraiswamy. I am the court officer present on the
23 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Doraiswamy. Are there any other
24 persons present in the room apart from you and the witness?
25 THE REGISTRAR: [In Pristina] I also have Gavin Cheyne present
1 here from ITSS, who is addressing all the technical issues if and when
2 they arise.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
4 Mr. Sadikaj, before you give evidence, the Rules of Procedure and
5 Evidence require you to make a solemn declaration that you will speak the
6 truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. The text is now
7 handed out to you. May I invite you to make that solemn declaration.
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. I solemnly declare that I
9 will speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you very much. You'll first be examined by
11 Mr. Di Fazio, who is counsel for the Prosecution. Listen carefully to
12 his questions and answer them -- please answer them as concisely as
14 Mr. Di Fazio, you may proceed.
15 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you, Your Honours.
16 WITNESS: QAUSH SADIKAJ
17 [Witness answered through interpreter]
18 [Witness appeared via videolink]
19 Examination by Mr. Di Fazio:
20 Q. Mr. Sadikaj, I just need yes or no answers and ask you some
21 questions about yourself.
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Your name is Qaush Sadikaj. You were born on the 7th of July,
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. You are Albanian. You were born in Dashinoc, in Decane
2 municipality --
3 A. Yes, yes.
4 Q. Just let me get to the end of my question, and then I'll ask you
5 for an answer, and thank you for confirming all those particulars that
6 I've given to you so far. Now, I'll just continue, and then I'll ask you
7 to give a yes or no, if you may.
8 Continuing your personal particulars, you have four sons and two
9 daughters. You attended the police academy in Belgrade, and you
10 graduated in 1968. You were first stationed as a policeman in Gjakove in
11 Kosovo, and in 1973, you were relocated to Mitrovica. In 1978, you were
12 made a shift leader at the Dubrava prison, and you remained in that
13 position until 1991 when you retired.
14 Are those personal particulars and details all correct?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Thank you. I want to ask you just some very brief questions
17 about the village that you lived in. In 1998, were you residing in the
18 village of Dashinoc?
19 A. In 1998, yes.
20 Q. Can you remember in early -- and I mean very early, I mean in the
21 first half of January 1998, how many Serbs were living in that village?
22 A. I can't remember any dates at all.
23 Q. I'm not asking you to remember a date. I'm putting a time to
24 you. Just listen to my question. In the very first half of January
25 1998, how many Serbs lived in your village?
1 A. I don't know the exact number, but that -- but there were about
2 12 or 13 houses, and you're asking before the war, aren't you?
3 Q. Yes, very well. Before the war, in January 1998, how many Serbs
4 lived in your village? And I think you say 12 or 13 families. Is that
6 A. Yes, that's correct, households.
7 Q. All right. About that time, how many Albanians lived in your
9 A. About 50 households.
10 Q. Thank you. Do you know Milos Radunovic and Slobodan Radosevic?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. In 1998, were they Serbs residing in your village?
13 A. In 1998? Yes, of course they were.
14 Q. How long had you known them at that time?
15 A. I knew them from my childhood. I knew them because they lived in
16 my village.
17 [Prosecution counsel confer]
18 MR. DI FAZIO:
19 Q. Thank you. I'd just like you to look at 65 ter 3, please.
20 MR. DI FAZIO: I understand that there's a hard copy down in --
21 down in the location where the witness is, and if the witness could be
22 shown that particular exhibit, which is a photograph.
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Milos and Mika or Milica, his wife,
24 but we called her Mika.
25 MR. DI FAZIO:
1 Q. Thank you. So you identified a person in the -- the two people
2 that you can see in the photograph as Milos Radunovic and his wife Mika
3 or Milica; correct?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Thank you.
6 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, I seek to tender the
8 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar ...
9 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this will be Exhibit Number P68,
10 marked for identification.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
12 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you.
13 Q. Both of these men that I've mentioned to you, Radunovic and
14 Radosevic, did they own houses and reside in the village of Dashinoc?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. When was the last time you saw either of those men?
17 A. I used to see them almost every day before the war. They walked
18 past my place, and they lived in my village. So my village is not a very
19 big one, and we could see each other.
20 Q. Thank you. Were you seeing them on that sort of basis in early
21 1998; that is, just before the war broke out and after the war broke out?
22 A. No, not then because we were apart at that time. Things were
23 different at the time because of the anti-Albanian politics and policies
24 that were followed. They were armed and were doing things that they
25 never did before.
1 JUDGE ORIE: May I just interfere for one second. If there's any
2 opportunity to adjust the balance between the words spoken by the witness
3 and the translation, then ... Yes, I see that it's my mistake. I should
4 have adjusted it myself.
5 Please proceed.
6 MR. EMMERSON: I'm sorry. I wonder whether in view of that last
7 answer it might be clarified when he -- the witness says "they were armed
8 and were doing things they never did before," if it might be clarified
9 who the "they" is.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Di Fazio --
11 MR. DI FAZIO: That's a matter that Mr. Emmerson can clarify in
12 his cross-examination. I've got to get on with my examination-in-chief.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. At the same time, you should understand,
14 Mr. Di Fazio, that if something is really unclear that it certainly would
15 assist the Chamber in understanding and appreciating the remainder of the
16 evidence on a basis of -- of a good understanding of what was already in
18 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you.
19 Q. Who was armed? Who were you talking about as being armed?
20 A. In general, all the Serbs were armed. Everybody had one weapon
21 or even two.
22 Q. Thank you. When was the last time you saw either
23 Slobodan Radosevic or Milos Radunovic? When was the last time you saw
24 them, either one?
25 A. A week before this happened, the trees close to my house were set
1 on fire, and Slobo and Milos came. Slobo said after the trees now were
2 burned, This is a clear territory. And Milos told him, Don't speak.
3 Please keep quiet because neighbour is here. That was the last time I
4 saw them.
5 Q. You started your answer with: "A week before this happened ...",
6 before what happened?
7 A. About a week or ten days.
8 Q. What happened about a week or ten days -- you referred to an
9 event or something that happened a week before this happened --
10 A. My trees were set on fire, were burnt.
11 Q. Okay. What happened a week after your trees were burned or set
12 on fire? That's what I'm interested in, not your trees. What happened a
13 week after this episode?
14 A. The question was: When was the last time you saw them? And I
15 explained to you when was the last time. And then what happened later
16 you know.
17 Q. Are you telling this Trial Chamber, the three Judges who are
18 listening to you, that you saw them, either one of those two men, about a
19 week after your trees were burnt? Is that what you're saying? Could you
20 kindly explain that to the three Judges who are listening to you.
21 A. Whether -- whether it was one week or ten days, I'm not sure.
22 Q. You've told us that your trees were burned; correct? Just answer
23 yes or no. Correct?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Right. In relation to when your trees were burned --
1 A. Yes, of course.
2 Q. In fact, in relation to when your trees were burned, when did you
3 see either Slobodan Radosevic or Milos Radunovic in relation to that
4 episode? When was it? A week later? Ten days later? A week before?
5 Ten days before? Explain to the Trial Judges, who are keen to know?
6 A. The same day the woods were burned.
7 Q. So you saw Milos Radunovic and Slobodan Radosevic on the same day
8 that your trees were burned. Is that right?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Right. Did you ever see them again?
11 A. Yes, that's correct.
12 Q. Did you ever see either one of them again, after that episode?
13 A. No, no.
14 Q. I see. And you're quite sure of that?
15 A. Very sure.
16 Q. And when you last saw them -- when you last saw them, were they
17 in company with any other people?
18 A. Listen, you should not misunderstand me. They were walking by,
19 and I saw them from a distance. I was not close to them. I was not
20 close to them when I saw them.
21 Q. Is this the day on which your trees were set fire?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Okay. You said they were walking by and you saw them from a
24 distance. Were they in company with anyone else, these two men,
25 Slobodan Radosevic and Milos Radunovic, anyone else with them when you
1 saw them from a distance?
2 A. No, no. I think you're mixing things up. Slobodan came from his
3 house towards the woods, and he wanted to see the trees that were burned,
4 while Milos came from his house because their houses are in different
5 directions and they were not accompanied by anyone, at the time.
6 Q. And was that the last time you saw them?
7 A. Yes, the last time from close, from close-up, that was the last
9 Q. Thank you for clarifying that. When was the last time you saw
10 them from any distance, close or from a distance?
11 A. I don't even remember when I saw my own father, let alone them.
12 It was difficult at the time. It was dangerous. We did not go out.
13 Q. I'm not asking you about when the last time you saw your own
14 father or whether the times were dangerous. My question is this: When
15 is the last time you saw them, either from close or from a distance?
16 A. I saw them probably every day or sometimes I didn't see them for
17 some time. I saw them with their guns on their shoulders. Where they
18 went, I don't know. I don't know what to tell you now.
19 Q. Did you give a statement to OTP, Office of the Prosecutor,
20 investigators in October of 2005? Did you do that?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. You said you can't remember events very clearly today; that's
23 been the thrust of your evidence. Would it help you, Mr. Sadikaj, if I
24 were to show you your statement? Would that help refresh your memory?
25 Would you like to look at it?
1 A. There are mistakes in the statement, translation mistakes.
2 Q. I'm not asking you if there are mistakes in the statement. I'm
3 asking you if you would like to look at it to help refresh your memory.
4 Would that assist you?
5 A. Yes, I can have a look at it. Yes.
6 Q. Thank you.
7 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, the Prosecution is going
8 to have to make -- I would ask that I now address you with the headphones
9 taken off the head of this witness. I need to address you about a matter
10 that he should not be listening to.
11 JUDGE ORIE: The representative of the registry at the videolink
12 location - yes - has assisted us. I see now the witness is taking off
13 his earphones.
14 MR. DI FAZIO: Would Your Honour just also give me a moment? I
15 need to ask my case manager a matter.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
17 [Prosecution counsel confer]
18 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you.
19 If Your Honours please, it's pretty clear that this witness is
20 now hostile to the Prosecution, in my submission. In addition to
21 which --
22 MR. GUY-SMITH: Absolutely not.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Guy-Smith, perhaps we first give an opportunity
24 to Mr. Di Fazio to -- to complete his sentence.
25 Mr. Di Fazio.
1 MR. DI FAZIO: The general tenure of what he -- of what he's been
2 saying is to claim that he can't remember anything about it when he's
3 given -- provided the Prosecution with a statement where he can clearly
4 provide details of events he saw.
5 Furthermore -- furthermore, the Prosecution proofed this witness,
6 and he essentially confirmed the -- the essentials of what was in his
7 statement. So on that basis, I want to be able to cross-examine him.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
9 May I have a response from the Defence --
10 MR. DI FAZIO: But I might also add that, as a practical matter,
11 I understand that may not be possible today, even if you were to rule in
12 my favour, because he doesn't have his statement down there. I
13 understand that it's not been --
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I would like the Defence to include also any
15 comment for the possibility that this witness is -- didn't turn hostile
16 but is rather a bit confused in the present situation in which some
17 leading might help out, rather than to treat him as a hostile witness.
18 MR. EMMERSON: Can I respond first? There are many steps to go
19 through before one reaches the position of declaring a witness hostile.
20 The first one is to clarify with the witness whether he thinks he's
21 having difficulties in recollection, which might be prompted by
22 refreshing his memory.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
24 MR. EMMERSON: And as I understand it, that was the question that
25 Mr. Di Fazio asked and received an answer to. I have no objection to --
1 speaking for myself, I obviously can't speak for other counsel, but I
2 would have no objection to the witness being shown his witness statement
3 and refreshing his memory.
4 Equally, I would have no objection to one or two suitably short
5 leading questions designed to direct his attention to the incident
6 without prompting any account from him as to what incident he is
7 referring to. But the fact that he may be a frustrating witness to
8 examine in chief isn't a reason for declaring him hostile.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
10 MR. DI FAZIO: It's not a question of frustration and if Your
11 Honours --
12 JUDGE ORIE: Let's -- I would first like to hear from all Defence
14 Mr. Guy-Smith.
15 MR. GUY-SMITH: Yes. I think it's -- it's always important when
16 considering how best to deal with a witness who seemingly is not
17 responding in the fashion that the questioner wishes to figure out
18 whether or not there's a methodology by which that can be achieved, and
19 the first way of doing that is, of course, by seeing whether he can have
20 his present memory refreshed.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
22 MR. GUY-SMITH: And that would require, of course, him reviewing
23 his statement or -- or perhaps -- or perhaps leading questions, either
24 one. And I understand that Mr. Di Fazio is under the pressure of time.
25 But, quite frankly, there's nothing that's happened so far in this record
1 that establishes that this gentleman is hostile. And there are a series
2 of -- there are a series of steps that we need to go through which I
3 don't think we need to discuss quite yet, but I'm happy to do that having
4 gone through this before at the Tribunal with regard to hostile
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. When seeking a response, I already alluded to
7 or suggested that it might be less -- less --
8 MR. HARVEY: Coercive.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Harvey, is that your contribution or would you
10 like to add something else?
11 MR. HARVEY: I would certainly suggest that there are far less
12 coercive approaches that need to be taken before we get anywhere close to
13 the threshold of hostility, which this witness has so far failed to
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
16 Mr. Di Fazio, I do understand from Defence counsel that they have
17 an open eye for the problems you are facing at this moment, and at the
18 same time that they would not oppose against lesser coercive or at least
19 lesser means to get -- may I say this way, to get the witness on the
20 right track at least.
21 MR. EMMERSON: May I make one very practical suggestion. I
22 personally would have no objection using the witness's own words from his
23 witness statement to a question that asks: Do you remember a night when
24 there was an exchange of fire that you heard from Slobodan Radosevic's
25 house? Those are to use his words.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Try to get him -- yes.
2 Mr. Di Fazio, do you still insist on a decision of the Chamber to
3 declare the witness hostile or would you follow the suggestions?
4 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes, he -- he said that the statement -- I can't
5 find it at the moment, but I heard him say that his statement has
6 inaccuracies in it.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
8 MR. DI FAZIO: I heard him say that.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I understood this to be perhaps reference to a
10 proofing session in which he may have corrected some portions of the
11 statement or clarified the issues. Let me just --
12 MR. HARVEY: Page 82, line 17.
13 [Trial Chamber confers]
14 MR. DI FAZIO: You see ...
15 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Di Fazio, since you insist on a ruling, the
17 Chamber denies your request and suggests that you get the witness on the
18 right track by perhaps a bit more leading or refreshing his memory, but
19 not at this moment by treat -- by cross-examining him.
20 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Could we please ask the witness to put his earphones
22 on again.
23 Mr. Sadikaj, Mr. Di Fazio will put further questions to you. Try
24 to listen them very carefully and answer them focussed on what the
25 specific question is.
1 Please proceed, Mr. Di Fazio.
2 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you.
3 Just before I do that, there's just one or two matters I want to
4 ask the witness concerning his statement.
5 Q. Witness, I asked you if you had given a statement to the Office
6 of the Prosecutor in October of 2005, and you said, yes, that you had.
7 And I then asked you that -- reminded you that you said you couldn't
8 remember events very clearly and asked you if it would help if I were to
9 show you your statement, would that help to refresh your memory? And you
10 said there are mistakes in the statement, translation mistakes.
11 Can you tell the Trial Chamber what mistakes there are in your
12 statement? Could you provide a list of them, please, to the Trial
13 Chamber, or at least the topics where the mistakes were made?
14 MR. EMMERSON: I'm so sorry.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
16 MR. EMMERSON: It does seem, if I may say, so --
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] May I have a look at my statement,
19 MR. EMMERSON: It does seem, if I may say so, as if Mr. Di Fazio
20 is trying to make life difficult for this witness rather than trying to
21 make it easy. We offered a very simple solution, to ask a leading
22 question. Trying to test a witness by cross-examining him on what he
23 thinks are a list of mistakes in his statement really isn't a very
24 helpful way of going about it.
25 MR. DI FAZIO: No, I'm not cross-examining him. Mr. Emmerson
1 should know better. It was a very simple question. Very, very simple.
2 It wasn't leading. It was just asking him to provide you, the Trial
3 Chamber, with a list of mistakes in the statement. That's all I wanted.
4 I just wanted an elucidation of what he said very clearly in his
5 evidence. It's not cross-examination.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Di Fazio, it may serve you as guidance
7 that the Chamber would, as a matter of fact, prefer if you first try to
8 get the witness on track, that is, to draw his attention to the events
9 that will be -- at least is expected to be the core of his evidence. And
10 if we have any further problems with the translation, we will find them
11 on our way through.
12 Would you please proceed.
13 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you.
14 Q. Mr. Sadikaj, was there ever an occasion in your village where you
15 saw Milos Radunovic walking towards the house of Slobodan Radosevic in
16 company with armed men followed by an exchange of gun-fire at the house
17 of Radosevic shortly thereafter? Do you ever remember such an occasion?
18 A. Yes, I remember, but it was not like this. I was in my yard 200
19 or 300 yards away from them. As with whom they were, you can ask me
20 further questions about things how they developed.
21 Q. Well, I would like you now to try and help this Trial Chamber,
22 please. I'd like you to tell the Trial Chamber exactly what you saw and
23 observed on this occasion, and start from the beginning from when you saw
24 Mr. Radunovic walking towards the house of -- or walking in the direction
25 of the house of Slobodan Radosevic. Try and provide as much detail as
1 you can, please, to the three Judges who are here listening to you. Tell
2 them who Mr. Radunovic was walking with. Tell the Trial Chamber who the
3 men were, if you recognised them. Tell the Trial Chamber if the men were
4 armed or not armed or in uniform.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Perhaps ...
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I was in my courtyard. I was in my
7 courtyard. I heard some exchange of words, and then I looked towards the
8 noise. I saw a white car which stopped there. There were five or six
9 persons, three or so were wearing camouflage uniforms, Yugoslav Army
10 uniforms. I know because I did my military service. I know that
12 They talked with Milos in Albanian and in Serbian. Then they
13 went in the direction of Milos's house. After a while, I saw them
14 returning, going to Slobo's, and they were talking with each other. It
15 was a normal conversation, without any threats or anything.
16 As to who they were, I can't tell you because they were 2 or 300
17 metres away, and I can't tell you and nobody can tell you who they were.
18 Q. Thank you. Could you hear any of the topics of conversation
19 between the men and Milos?
20 A. No, no, I couldn't because, as I told you, they were 2, 300
21 metres away. It was a normal exchange of words. They were not shouting.
22 Maybe I caught one or two words here and there, but I couldn't tell you.
23 Q. Thank you. Did you hear any words to the -- concerning the
24 whereabouts of the home of Slobodan Radosevic uttered by any of the men
25 that day?
1 A. When they came closer, I heard them mentioning the name of
2 Slobodan and I saw them heading towards his house, which is situated
3 about 800 metres from my house. But I couldn't see them from close up
4 because there is a wall and you cannot -- it prevents you from seeing.
5 And I only heard some words, but I was afraid to go out and look at them
6 from close up.
7 Q. I see. So you could not see them at all; is that what you're
9 A. No, no. I couldn't see them.
10 Q. Thank you. And did you hear any weapons being fired in your
11 village on this day?
12 A. After they went in the direction of Slobodan's house, after ten
13 minutes, I heard five or six shots. Then they stopped.
14 Q. What was the duration --
15 A. And after a while, the car headed that way.
16 Q. What was the duration of the shots? What was the duration of the
17 firing, the time -- time-period?
18 A. About half an hour. In half an hour, two battalions can fight
19 with each other. That lasted for three, four minutes.
20 Q. Can you tell the Trial Chamber what time-period they should rely
21 on? Was it -- was the firing half an hour, or three or four minutes?
22 I'm not quite sure. Could you clarify that?
23 A. The firing lasted -- I told -- I stated that after half an hour,
24 not that the firing lasted half an hour. This is what I meant, because
25 that happened on the same day, and maybe they have understood it to mean
1 half an hour, but I didn't mean half an hour, because it's a long time
2 for exchange of fire, a few shots.
3 Q. Who is "they"? Who understood it to mean half an hour? What do
4 you mean by that?
5 A. The persons you are asking me about. I don't know why they went
6 there. I only heard six, seven, eight shots, not more than that.
7 Q. Did you see Milos or Slobodan ever again?
8 A. No, no, no. What are you saying?
9 Q. What I'm saying is this, listen carefully, and I'll say it again.
10 A. Yes, sir.
11 Q. Did you ever see Milos or Slobodan again?
12 A. No.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Di Fazio, could I seek one clarification which
14 seems that dealt with the issue.
15 Mr. Sadikaj, you earlier - and I'm now reading what you said -
16 you earlier said: "After they went in the direction of Slobodan's house,
17 after ten minutes I heard five or six shots, then they stopped."
18 A couple of lines later, you say that the shooting started after
19 half an hour.
20 Now, could you tell us, when they were heading for Slobodan's
21 house how much time passed before you heard the five or six shots? Was
22 that ten minutes or was that more?
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] More than half an hour later.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
25 Please proceed, Mr. Di Fazio.
1 MR. DI FAZIO:
2 Q. Did you ever hear any reports from anyone in your area as to what
3 had happened to them? In case you don't know who I'm talking about, I'm
4 talking about Slobodan and Milos?
5 A. That day when that happened to them, we didn't know who the
6 perpetrators were, who they were dealing with, because we knew that they
7 had agreement with the police and the army to defend them. That day we
8 fled the village, all of us, old and young and children --
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. --
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- because we knew that they had an
12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Sadikaj, could you please --
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, sir.
14 JUDGE ORIE: -- focus on the question. The question was whether
15 you ever heard any reports from anyone in your area as to what happened
16 to Slobodan and Milos. Did any -- did anyone ever tell you what happened
17 to them?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] After two or three days, we heard
19 from a person. He came there by a tractor, and he said that he had seen
20 two corpses. He didn't know who they were. Then afterwards we heard on
21 Pristina Television who they were, also from Belgrade Television who they
22 were, because we didn't dare leave our houses.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Were the bodies reported to be those of Slobodan and
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Di Fazio.
2 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you.
3 Q. But apart from the media, did you ever hear from anyone, any
4 persons, as to what had happened to them, to Slobodan and Milos?
5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Di Fazio, would you please look at page 92, line
6 20, 21, and 22, and perhaps --
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Unless -- because you were only saying "apart from
9 the media," this is of course not media source.
10 MR. DI FAZIO: No.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Please proceed.
12 MR. DI FAZIO: The witness --
13 Q. Witness, you just said that somebody on a tractor came and told
14 you about two corpses, didn't know who they were. That's interesting.
15 And later you told us that you heard about to -- what happened to Milos
16 Radunovic and Radosevic from the media. Now, my question is: Apart from
17 the media, did anyone ever provide you with any information as to the
18 fate of Milos Radunovic and Slobodan Radosevic?
19 A. No. I only heard rumours, but I wasn't interested in learning
20 anything about that. I don't know who the person who said the rumours
21 was. I heard only -- heard the rumours in the village.
22 Q. Rumours about what?
23 A. I just heard that there were two dead bodies, but not that they
24 were the dead bodies of these two persons you are asking me. Because the
25 person who came there on a tractor didn't recognise them, didn't know
2 Q. Right. Thank you. Now, you've got a good clear memory of that,
3 have you, of this report that you received about two dead bodies? Would
4 you answer my question, please?
5 A. I didn't hear the question.
6 Q. Very well. I'll repeat it. You've got a good clear memory of
7 someone telling you about two dead bodies?
8 A. It was not that he told me personally. He said it in the
9 village, that there were two dead bodies found in Kodralija village,
10 about 200 kilometres away from Dashinoc, where I was.
11 Q. So what you were told, you've got a good clear memory of this
12 haven't you, is that you were informed that two bodies, 200 kilometres --
13 THE INTERPRETER: Correction, he said 2 kilometres. Correction.
14 MR. DI FAZIO: I see. Okay.
15 Q. And you're sure, are you, that you weren't provided with any
16 information as to the identity of these two bodies?
17 A. They didn't need to tell me who they were. Why should they.
18 Q. Do I take it from that answer that you weren't provided with any
19 information as to the identity of these two bodies?
20 MR. EMMERSON: Sorry, before the witness answers that question.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
22 MR. EMMERSON: Provided -- there's a great deal of potential for
23 confusion in this exchange. The witness has described a man on a tractor
24 who referred to two bodies being found nearby, 2 kilometres away. He's
25 also --
1 JUDGE ORIE: The witness may hear all of this. I don't know
2 whether that's your --
3 MR. DI FAZIO: I'd like his headphones to be taken off.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
5 Could the representative of the -- yes, headphones is off.
6 MR. EMMERSON: He's also referred to rumours. Now, I didn't
7 interject when Mr. Di Fazio started to probe the rumours, although it has
8 generally been our practice in this trial so far to avoid matters that
9 were described as pure rumour. But be that as it may, if he's going to
10 be putting questions to this witness about who said what to whom or when
11 things were said, it's extremely important that it be put clearly. And
12 the last question asks in a very round-about sort of way: Are you sure
13 that you weren't provided with any information as to the identity of
14 these two bodies. Well, the question is: By whom? Is he referring to
15 the man on the tractor or the rumours in the village --
16 JUDGE ORIE: I think you made your point.
17 Mr. Di Fazio, it certainly would assist the Chamber to have
18 matters as clear as possible and I am aware that you are trying to seek
19 clear answers. Could you please intensify those efforts.
20 Could the witness put his earphones on again?
21 Mr. Di Fazio, you may proceed.
22 MR. DI FAZIO:
23 Q. Were you ever provided with the identity as to these two dead
24 bodies, either by the man on the tractor or by rumour?
25 A. A moment came when I found out who they were, but not at that
1 moment. We left, we went to Vranoq village. We left on the same night.
2 All of us left the village.
3 Q. When was the moment that you found out who they were, and how did
4 you find out who they were?
5 A. After three days, I heard that there were two dead bodies in the
6 territory of Kodralija far from our village, but I didn't know who they
8 Q. Thank you. And --
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Sadikaj, Mr. Di Fazio clearly asked you to tell
10 us when you learned that the bodies that were found were those of these
11 two men. Could you tell us?
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] To tell you the truth, I don't
13 remember when.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Yes.
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Because it was an unclear event,
16 confusing situation.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Do you remember who told you or how you learned that
18 two persons -- the two bodies found were those of Milos and Slobodan?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Passer-by -- passers-by -- there
20 was a passer-by who came. I don't know whether he came from Bardhaniq or
21 other village. He had seen the two bodies and told someone on the
22 street, and the rumour was spread immediately all over the village that
23 someone was dead. That is it.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And did that person who had seen those bodies,
25 did he tell who they were?
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I didn't see that person at all
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I just heard the rumour in the
6 JUDGE ORIE: Was the rumour about the bodies found or also that
7 the bodies found were Slobodan and Milos?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] At that time, we didn't know who
9 they were. I told you, we were 10 kilometres away in another village.
10 We had taken shelter there. Then after that, we heard this news; that
11 is, that there were two dead persons. And it was afterwards that it was
12 learned who they were.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And you said it was afterwards it was learned
14 who they were. Do you remember how and at what moment you learned who
15 these bodies were?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I really can't remember.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Was it after one or two weeks?
18 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter could not hear what the witness
19 said just now.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
21 Mr. Sadikaj, was it after one or two weeks, or was it half a
22 year, or was it after a year, or was it only recently that you learned
23 that these bodies were Milos and Slobodan?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I swore that I would tell the
25 truth, so I cannot tell you whether it was yesterday or what day it was
1 because I don't know. I told the investigators of the Tribunal the same
2 thing, that these were only approximations.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But even approximations -- I'm asking for
4 nothing more than that. Approximate two weeks? Approximate one year?
5 Approximate after five years? Please tell us.
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, possibly two or three weeks
7 later or maybe a month later because TV Belgrade was working at the
8 moment, B1, B2, and the newspapers as well.
9 JUDGE ORIE: And you learned it from the media?
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mostly from the media because we
11 did not dare leave our homes. It's a small village. It's very remote.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Di Fazio, please proceed.
13 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you, Your Honour.
14 Q. What precisely did you tell the investigators that were -- from
15 the Tribunal that were approximations? What matters?
16 A. I don't understand the question.
17 MR. EMMERSON: Can I interrupt for a moment? It may well be that
18 if Your Honours were to look at paragraphs 17 and 18 of this witness's
19 witness statement and in particular the first sentence at
20 paragraph 18 ...
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
22 MR. DI FAZIO: I'd like the witness to have his earphones off, if
23 Your Honours please.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Could the witness take his earphones off for a
1 Earphones are off.
2 Yes. Mr. Di Fazio, would you like to -- Mr. Emmerson have drawn
3 our attention to --
4 MR. DI FAZIO: I'm waiting for Mr. Emmerson --
5 JUDGE ORIE: -- 17 -- 17 and 18.
6 MR. DI FAZIO: I am just happy for Mr. Emmerson to continue, I
7 just don't want this --
8 MR. EMMERSON: -- it's just that Mr. Di Fazio is beginning to
9 press the witness on what it was that he had told the investigators with
10 a lack of certainty, and I'm simply drawing perhaps his and Your Honours'
11 attention to that paragraph.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
13 May the witness put his earphones on again.
14 MR. DI FAZIO:
15 Q. And, Witness, you've just finalised -- I just want to finalise
16 one particular matter. You -- the essence of what you've told these
17 three Judges of the Trial Chamber is that you weren't told anything about
18 the identity of some bodies that were found near you -- near your village
19 in Kodralija, neither by rumour, or by a man on a tractor, or from any
20 other source; right?
21 A. No -- oh, yes, yes, that's right. That's correct.
22 Q. No one's ever told you anything about the identity of the bodies?
23 A. No.
24 Q. And do you remember the TV broadcasts that mentioned the finding
25 of the bodies of Milos Radunovic and Slobodan Radosevic? Do you remember
2 A. Yes, I remember.
3 Q. Thank you.
4 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, I have no further
5 questions but before I -- let me rephrase that. I renew my application
6 that I made earlier and I think I should address you now in the
7 absence -- with the witness taking his earphones off.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Could the witness take his earphones off?
9 Mr. Di Fazio, you were invited to refresh the witness's memory,
10 and I do not know what exactly is bothering you. Could you refer us to
11 the paragraphs where you think that the witness --
12 MR. DI FAZIO: He's now given --
13 JUDGE ORIE: -- deviates from his early statement because we have
14 the statement in front of us.
15 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes.
16 JUDGE ORIE: If you would just refer to the paragraphs.
17 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes. He provides an extraordinary amount of
18 detail in his statement in paragraph 16.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
20 MR. DI FAZIO: He says he heard shooting from the direction of
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
23 MR. DI FAZIO: He is able to say with --
24 JUDGE ORIE: That's the next day after the incident?
25 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Of course -- yes.
2 MR. DI FAZIO: He's able to say that there was -- either the next
3 day or the day after --
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
5 MR. DI FAZIO: -- villagers from Dasinovac came and told -- and
6 said -- they provided information that they had seen the dead bodies and
7 according to these villagers they had been shot dead because they had
8 seen bullet-holes on the bodies --
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Is there any problem if the witness would
10 be -- would be directed to whether anything was said about those who
11 could not identify, perhaps, the persons, whether they had seen anything
12 on the body as far as the course of --
13 MR. EMMERSON: No, as long as it's done fairly.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
15 MR. EMMERSON: The reason why I directed Your Honours' and
16 Mr. Di Fazio's attention to paragraphs 17 and 18 is because on being
17 pressed for more information about that account in paragraphs 17 and 18,
18 it's perfectly clear that the witness was uncertain of the sources of the
19 information. For -- he says on paragraph 18 on being asked if I can
20 remember --
21 MR. DI FAZIO: No. That's not -- simply not correct.
22 MR. EMMERSON: Please don't interrupt.
23 MR. DI FAZIO: It's simply not correct.
24 MR. EMMERSON: Please don't interrupt.
25 MR. DI FAZIO: You're being mislead.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Di Fazio, what I see in paragraph 18 there are
2 two different matters approximations -- I very much at that moment
3 focused on time rather than anything else. I would consider in 18 are
4 guesses rather than approximations.
5 MR. EMMERSON: Yes, I'm simply saying it's -- the witness has
6 given evidence that there is a disagree of uncertainty and lack of
7 clarity in his memory about who was saying what and what the basis of it
8 was and one can see that reflected in his witness statement. I have no
9 objection to any passage of his witness statement being put to him to see
10 if he can refresh his memory but if he's unable to remember the details
11 now, that's not a basis for declaring him hostile.
12 [Trial Chamber confers]
13 JUDGE ORIE: The request to declare the witness hostile is
15 I'd like to put a few more questions to the witness if he puts on
16 his earphones again.
17 Witness, Mr. Sadikaj, do you remember anything happening the day
18 after the incident with Slobodan?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can't remember. I was in Vranoq.
20 This village is 10 kilometres from my village. We left at night because
21 we were afraid that the police and the army -- the Serb police and army
22 would attack us --
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- because of what happened.
25 JUDGE ORIE: On that next day once, as you said, you had left,
1 did you notice any firing at any moment?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Not the next day, no. The same day
3 I heard about 1 or 2 kilometres away, but this was, as I said, 1 or 2
4 kilometres away from my house. There were different kinds of shots. I
5 could hear them from my house.
6 JUDGE ORIE: And do you remember from what direction you heard
7 this firing?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] From Decane. It's above my
9 village. It's in a distance from my village.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Do you remember any further details about this
11 firing as to how strong the sound was or -- or whether the, as you said,
12 the different kinds of weapons? How could you -- how could you
13 distinguish that there were different kind of weapons involved?
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The larger weapons have a different
15 kind of sound, and the smaller guns have a different kind of sound. So I
16 can distinguish the rifle shot and then I can distinguish the
17 machine-guns and so on. I've been in the army.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, was it on that same day that you learned
19 that bodies were found?
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, no. Three days later -- two or
21 three days later we learned about this because we were not there. As I
22 said, we left at night. We left the village that night.
23 JUDGE ORIE: When you learned about the dead bodies, did you
24 learn anything about what may have caused these persons to die?
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. No, because I did not see the
1 person who said this. I don't know, because of the armament. And he
2 said, I think, they were killed.
3 JUDGE ORIE: And the person who said that, did he give any reason
4 or did he give any indication on how they were killed?
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, no.
6 JUDGE ORIE: You --
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] How could he have known? He was
8 just passing by. He just saw the body on the street or somewhere. Well,
9 I told you already that I did not meet this person myself.
10 JUDGE ORIE: No, but you seem to know some details as that the
11 person just passed by. And isn't it true that a dead body, a victim of a
12 traffic incident, looks different from a dead body that died in another
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Of course. That's correct.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And was there any indication of how these two
16 people, how these two dead bodies, might have been killed?
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I did not see them myself. I'm
18 repeating this again. The passer-by had seen the bodies. You should
19 know that somebody who sees dead bodies is afraid, and I'm sure that he
20 tried to escape as soon as possible. This is my speculation, because I
21 did not speak with him. He told this somebody else, and I heard it from
22 other people.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, in the statement you gave in October
24 2005, and I just read one line from that statement. It says: "According
25 to the villagers, Milos and Slobodan were shot dead because they saw
1 bullet-holes on the bodies." And you added to that: "I did not see the
2 bodies personally."
3 That's what you stated -- at least that's what's written down as
4 your statement, and from what I understand you signed that statement in
5 October 2005. You just told us that you had no indication on how these
6 people died. Could you tell us why you gave a statement in October 2005
7 which seems to be different from what you're telling us now?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There is no difference. They have
9 written it differently. I said this: I learned after the war that they
10 had been killed by bullets. And what's written there is that that was
11 seen on the same day. That's not true. The sentence was changed -- the
12 meaning of the sentence was changed.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
14 Mr. Di Fazio, any further questions for the witness?
15 MR. DI FAZIO: Not one, if Your Honours please.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson. Mr. Sadikaj, you'll now be
17 cross-examined by Mr. Emmerson, who's counsel for Mr. Haradinaj.
18 Mr. Emmerson, please proceed.
19 MR. EMMERSON: Might I inquire whether Your Honours have it in
20 mind that I should conclude by 7.00 p.m.? I shan't be very much beyond
21 that, but --
22 JUDGE ORIE: If we could finish today, of course, the videolink
23 will not be available anymore tomorrow. Could the -- is there a
24 possibility that the interpreters and technicians could assist us for a
25 couple of moments? I see nodding yes, but it seems not to -- yes.
1 THE INTERPRETER: Yes, Your Honour.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you very much.
3 MR. EMMERSON: May I expresses my thanks to the technicians for
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
6 Please proceed.
7 Cross-examination by Mr. Emmerson:
8 Q. Mr. Sadikaj, I just want to ask you some questions, first of all,
9 about Slobodan Radosevic and Milos Radunovic as your neighbours. You
10 have told the Prosecution that at one time you got on well with them, but
11 that there came a time when the relationships went bad. And you've also
12 told the Prosecution that relations went bad at a time when both men
13 joined the police reserve.
14 Can I ask you a few more questions about that, please. First of
15 all, did you know whether or not Slobodan Radosevic or Milos Radunovic
16 carried weapons in the village?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Did you ever see them with weapons?
19 A. I saw them with weapons and I saw what kinds of guns they had.
20 Q. What kinds of guns did they have?
21 A. Slobo had a rifle -- a Russian machine-gun, a Zastava; two
22 automatic weapons; two sniper rifles, one was Russian and one was
23 Zastava; I think that's it.
24 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
25 MR. EMMERSON:
1 Q. You --
2 A. I am trying to speak quickly because we want to finish at 7.00,
3 as you said.
4 Q. Thank you very much for that. You have told the Prosecution, I
5 think I'm right in saying -- just bear with me a moment. Yes, you told
6 the Prosecution that Slobodan Radosevic had built a bunker in the yard of
7 his house. Can you tell us a little bit more about the bunker? What was
8 it and what did he use it for?
9 A. He had a bunker right in front of his house and one in his
10 backyard, and he kept his arms -- his gun there -- guns there.
11 Q. Can you clarify for us a comment that you are recorded as having
12 made to the Prosecution earlier this month. You're recorded as having
13 told the Prosecution that both Milos Radunovic and Slobodan Radosevic
14 joined the police reserve. Could you explain that comment, please, for
15 us? Were they members of the police reserve or has that been
17 A. Yes, they were, all the time. And they also had police uniforms.
18 They had weaponry. I don't know who gave the weapons to them, whether it
19 was the police or someone else.
20 Q. A little earlier in your evidence for the Prosecution you said
21 that there was a time when relationships were good and then relationships
22 got a bit bad with these men. Can I ask you just generally, how did they
23 treat their Albanian neighbours in the months or years before this
24 incident took place?
25 A. From Milosevic's speech in Gracanica, the Serbs changed their
1 opinions, and everybody began to get arms, and they kept a distance from
2 us and there were threats as well.
3 Q. Just focusing on these two men individually, never mind the other
4 Serbs in the village, just focusing on those two men individually, did
5 you ever see or hear them issuing threats to people?
6 A. He told my father, but my father is not alive to testify. What
7 he told my father was, If I find somebody in the street that I suspect is
8 linked to the KLA, I will kill that person. That's what he said.
9 Q. Do you remember when he told your father that?
10 A. Two or three months earlier. He told myself as well the same
12 Q. I'm sorry, you say --
13 A. Because I was there.
14 Q. You say "he." Who was it who was speaking to your father in your
15 presence? Was it Slobodan or Milos?
16 A. Milos.
17 Q. Now, you've mentioned earlier in your evidence something about
18 trees being burnt. Can I just ask you this -- simple yes or no, because
19 I've looked at some notes of a conversation you had with the Prosecution.
20 I don't want to go into it in any detail at all, but do you know who
21 burnt your trees down; yes or no?
22 A. No, I did not see the person who burned the trees.
23 Q. Very well. Thank you. In your witness statement that you made
24 to the Prosecution, that the Judge has read a passage to you from, you
25 described the shooting on the night where you had seen Milos walking with
1 some men, and you described it as an exchange of fire -- as an exchange
2 of fire, that took place shortly after you saw Milos from your house.
3 Can I ask you this, please: Why did you describe it as an exchange of
4 fire? How could you tell it was an exchange of fire?
5 A. Well, according to me - and that's what I told the investigators
6 as well - when Milos went there, they knew that Slobodan was there.
7 Slobodan was armed, and he had the bunker. I think that they went there
8 to talk to him, and then they couldn't, and there was this firing.
9 Q. Please -- I'm not asking you to speculate about what you think.
10 When you described it in your statement as an exchange of fire, are you
11 intending to suggest that one party was firing at the other and that the
12 other party was returning fire? Is that what you are intending to
13 suggest, that there were two sides firing at each other? Is that what
14 you mean by the word "exchange"?
15 A. According to me, yes.
16 Q. Now, was there anything from what you heard that made you think
17 it was an exchange of fire?
18 A. Later -- later on we heard that they were killed, but that was
19 later, as I told you. Whether they were killed on the same day or not, I
20 cannot tell you.
21 Q. Sorry, that's my mistake in the way I formulated the question.
22 You heard the sound of gun-fire that night. Was there anything about the
23 sound of gun-fire that you heard that made you think it was two sides
24 shooting at one another, rather than one side shooting only?
25 A. That's how it was.
1 Q. I'm sorry. Could you just explain that answer a little bit more
3 A. This was in a distance. The terrain was, as I can describe it,
4 an open terrain.
5 Q. Yes --
6 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, Mr. Sadikaj, could you tell us exactly then
7 what you heard, what made you believe that these were two parties firing
8 at each other rather than one firing at other people?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] According to the shots, because
10 these that were there had only light armament, and then I could hear
11 heavy armament, heavy weapons. And that's why I concluded that there was
12 an exchange. I was not there. I am just supposing that that happened.
13 MR. EMMERSON:
14 Q. Just pause there. Who was it that had only light weapons?
15 A. These people who went together with Milos in that direction.
16 They only had automatic rifles.
17 Q. And what then was it about the sound of the gun-fire that made
18 you think that you were hearing a weapon that was not one of the weapons
19 they were carrying?
20 A. Well, I could hear it very clearly. Everybody could hear it. It
21 was very easy to hear what was going on. It was only 1 and a half
22 kilometres away.
23 Q. Very well.
24 A. It's only 800 metres away from my house. I don't know what they
25 talked or what they said to each other.
1 Q. Very well. Also in your statement, you said this. You said: "I
2 assumed, from the intensity of the shooting, that there were a number of
4 MR. EMMERSON: This is paragraph 13.
5 Q. You said to the Prosecution that having heard the shooting that
6 night, you assumed from the intensity of it that there were a number of
7 casualties. Could you just explain what you meant by the "intensity" of
9 A. Well, this exchange of fire had its own intensity, and this is
10 something I assumed that there might have been victims. But to tell you
11 the truth, I did not dare to go close to the place. We feared the
12 Serbian police; we feared that they would come to the village.
13 Q. Finally this: You gave evidence just a little while ago in
14 answer to some questions from the Judge about some different shots later
15 on that night that you'd heard from the direction of Decane from, you
16 thought, 1 to 2 kilometres away. And you said to the Judge that you know
17 the sound of different guns and that larger guns make a different sound.
18 Can I understand, please, the shooting that you heard from Decane
19 later that evening, was that artillery fire or was it an exchange of
20 machine-gun fire or light weapons? Just what sort of shooting was it
21 that you heard later that night?
22 A. Light weapons. The artillery fire could be heard all night long
23 from Decane in that area.
24 Q. I'm sorry. I think we may have missed part of your answer,
25 because I'm not entirely sure I've understood the answer that you've
1 given at least.
2 You talked about there being firing from the Decane area later
3 that night. Very simply, was that firing then artillery fire or was it
4 light weapons from Decane?
5 A. Artillery fire.
6 Q. So when you said to the Judge, Larger guns make a different
7 sound, you meant heavy guns, artillery guns. Is that it?
8 A. No. Heavy weapons, machine-guns, they are heavier guns.
9 Q. All right. Just finally to see if we can just clarify what seems
10 to be a confusion, the shooting you -- I'm sorry?
11 JUDGE ORIE: It is consistent with the earlier testimony of the
12 witness. Of course, he has his own perception of --
13 MR. EMMERSON: Yes.
14 JUDGE ORIE: -- what he calls heavy weapons, and he earlier
15 referred to machine-guns in that respect.
16 MR. EMMERSON: Yes. I'm simply trying to understand what it is
17 he's saying he heard later. If Your Honours are satisfied thus far, then
18 I'm happy to leave it.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Well at the same time I would like to ask one
20 question in this respect.
21 When you heard that fire during that night in the direction of
22 Decani, were you still in Dasinovac?
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson, we're talking at quite a distance.
25 MR. EMMERSON: Yes.
1 JUDGE ORIE: I wonder whether it's --
2 MR. EMMERSON: I agree.
3 JUDGE ORIE: This serves the Chamber to further hear questions --
4 MR. EMMERSON: I'm entirely happy to take that position, and I
5 have no further questions for the witness.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Di Fazio, do you have any further questions to
7 the witness --
8 MR. HARVEY: Your Honours.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Oh, I'm sorry, Mr. Harvey. I'm --
10 MR. HARVEY: It would be -- at this time of day, it would be --
11 the witness, who in other respects has nothing to say about my client,
12 but I do have one question. It may shock the Court.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. No, I apologise. It should not become a bad
15 MR. HARVEY: It was a reasonable expectation.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, Mr. Harvey has a question for you, who is
17 counsel for Mr. Brahimaj.
18 Please proceed.
19 Cross-examination by Mr. Harvey:
20 Q. Just one question, Mr. Sadikaj, it is this: A little earlier on
21 this afternoon, you were asked a question and you gave this answer --
22 MR. HARVEY: And, Your Honours, I'm at page 79, line -- line 15
23 of the transcript.
24 Q. This was your answer, sir: "A week before this happened, the
25 trees close to my house were set on fire and Slob and Milos came."
1 Now, this is the point I want to focus on, sir: "Slobo said,
2 After the trees now were burned, this is a clear territory. And Milos
3 told him, Don't speak. Please keep quiet because the neighbour is here."
4 I want to ask you, sir, what did you mean -- what did you
5 understand him to mean when he said, This is a clear territory?
6 A. Clear to shoot. It is clear to shoot, to use weapons.
7 Q. I'm sorry. I was listening to your answer. Did you say clear to
8 shoot from Decane? I may have misheard you.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. You may even have misheard the translation,
10 Mr. Harvey.
11 MR. HARVEY: Yes, I may have done.
12 Q. Clear -- let me put the question again --
13 A. Close up not from Decane.
14 Q. Clear to shoot from where, sir, or to where?
15 A. You may take it from Decane or from close, but from close, it's
16 clear to shoot from that place because there were no obstacles. That's
17 why they set fire to the forest --
18 Q. So that it would be clear to shoot into your village --
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Harvey.
20 MR. HARVEY: Yes.
21 JUDGE ORIE: You find the full answer on page 114, line 1.
22 MR. HARVEY: Then if it's clear, Your Honours, I have nothing
23 more to ask. Thank you.
24 MR. EMMERSON: I do apologise. There is one topic that I
25 completely in error should have put to this witness and it needs properly
1 to be put to him, I'm afraid, and it will take a moment with Your
2 Honours' permission.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but please keep it short.
4 MR. EMMERSON: Very short indeed.
5 Further cross-examination by Mr. Emmerson:
6 Q. Mr. Sadikaj, did there come a time, later that year, when houses
7 in your village were burned and looted?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Were you there at that time?
10 A. No, I was in Irzniq.
11 Q. Very well.
12 MR. EMMERSON: Thank you.
13 A. In another village.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
15 Thank you.
16 MR. DI FAZIO: None at all.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Sorry, Mr. Di Fazio. I'm treating you as badly as I
18 treat some Defence counsel, and I'm ashamed of it.
19 MR. DI FAZIO: No, not at all, Your Honours, and I can indicate I
20 have no re-examination.
21 MR. HARVEY: [Microphone not activated]
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Thank you for that.
23 Mr. Sadikaj, this concludes your testimony. I'd like to thank
24 you for having answered all the questions, and you are excused. This
25 will also conclude the videolink.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, sir.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson.
3 MR. EMMERSON: Your Honour there's one matter I need to mention
4 very briefly. I had a discussion with Mr. Re on the telephone this
5 morning about the witness that is to come tomorrow.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, if you do not mind, I would like to say a few
7 words about that before and see whether there's any matter remaining.
8 First of all, talking about protective measures in accordance
9 with -- I think it is Rule 75(F), protective measures granted by other
10 Trial Chambers are --
11 MR. EMMERSON: No objection as far as I'm concerned.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Well, apart from that, they continue to apply.
13 These are the rules. So therefore, that should be clear to everyone.
14 Then when talking about 92 ter, the Chamber observes the
15 following. We have received Limaj transcripts. As far as the Chamber is
16 aware, we have not received the exhibits to which the testimony refers
17 and there are quite a lot. We have received, however, a list giving
18 numbers of those exhibits.
19 Then we are in the possession of a statement by the next witness,
20 but we did not receive any proofing notes, although the Chamber is aware
21 that proofing took place because we were informed about it, quite a while
22 ago. Then I think the Chamber received information that it was the
23 intention to prepare a consolidated 92 ter statement, which the Chamber
24 has not received. This puts the Chamber at this moment in a situation in
25 which the Chamber just cannot decide on any 92 ter request.
1 We would suggest to the parties - but of course if we are wrong
2 we will hear from you - but we would suggest to the parties that they
3 have discussions on how to proceed tomorrow. Would that be on the
4 assumption that finally -- I can imagine that the Defence would not
5 oppose certain elements of the 92 ter material to be admitted into
6 evidence. Then I think it would not be hazardous to proceed tomorrow on
7 the basis that the Chamber would follow this agreement between the
9 At the same time, the Chamber at this moment, not having seen all
10 the material, cannot in any way anticipate on its decision, but it's a
11 general rule that where the parties agree that the Chamber is more
12 inclined to grant requests. To the extent the parties would be
13 unsuccessful in agreeing on how to proceed tomorrow, the March list
14 indicates that two hours viva voce would be required for the next
15 witness. We have a request from -- the Defence indicated that it would
16 need relatively ample time for cross-examination. Therefore, the two
17 days should be sufficient.
18 The Chamber expects the Prosecution to use its two hours, and if
19 there would be any application for more time -- and, of course, we are
20 limited in time because the witness is available only for two days, then
21 certainly -- of course, application should be made then tomorrow, and I
22 don't know whether the Bench at that time would -- would grant any
23 further time. But certainly the Chamber, as composed now, would not have
24 in mind more than two sessions, which would be altogether three hours if
25 an application was made for more time than the three hours. That would
1 leave quite some time for cross-examination and some time for questions
2 of the Judges as well.
3 I just express this in order to inform the parties what we have
4 considered the position.
5 MR. EMMERSON: Can I then report back to the Trial Chamber on the
6 discussions between myself and Mr. Re on much the same areas.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
8 MR. EMMERSON: The Rule 92 application in respect of the
9 transcript, certainly as far as the Haradinaj Defence team is concerned,
10 is unopposed. The -- there has, as Your Honour rightly points out, been
11 no formal Rule 92 application in respect of the consolidated statement.
12 There is, in fact, no consolidated statement. The Prosecution's notified
13 intention is to seek certain paragraphs of one of the witness's prior OTP
14 witness statements made, I think, in 2006, certain selected paragraphs to
15 be admitted under Rule 92, and we'll obviously take that matter under
16 consideration overnight.
17 There is a new statement which reflects proofing notes, it's a
18 signed statement from the witness. There are a large number of witness
19 statements from this witness, and he's given evidence in three trials so
21 Can I simply say this as far as timing is concerned, because this
22 was also the subject of the discussion between the parties this morning.
23 I think Mr. Re has come to the view that even with the benefit of
24 any Rule 92 agreements or rulings, it is not going to be possible for him
25 to meet the estimate that he has currently put forward; in other words,
1 that he's very, very likely to need considerable further time.
2 I simply want to say as far as the Defence are concerned that
3 this is a witness whose potential relevance and importance it would be
4 wrong to underestimate. He has daily reports throughout his time in
5 western Kosovo, and although the Limaj transcript deals with many of
6 them, it does not, in fact, focus on those portions of the reports that
7 deal with the area of our indictment; as well as that, he has
8 considerable evidence about command and control within the Serb side and
9 to deployments and considerable evidence about the canal scene which he
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
12 MR. EMMERSON: And I think we're all concerned simply this, Your
13 Honour, that it may come -- the point may arrive at which his evidence is
14 under pressure if it needs to be concluded for sure within two days.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson, may I stop you there, because we can't
16 ask more from interpreters and technicians. The Chamber invites the
17 parties to inform the Chamber by tomorrow morning, not later than --
18 well, let's say quarter past 10.00 -- half past 10.00, about where the
19 parties agree; and to the extent they do not agree what their wishes,
20 concerns, whatever are, and preferably not, so that the Chamber can
21 anticipate and certainly the Chamber then -- that we can think about how
22 to proceed and also think about what -- if we are unable or if everyone
23 expects that we are unable to finish within two days, so that we can
24 start thinking about -- well, we gave it some thoughts already --
25 MR. EMMERSON: He arrives tonight, and he's going to be asked
1 whether he can come back on Monday or not, and if not what other dates he
2 might be in a position to come back on.
3 JUDGE ORIE: That's -- that's exactly the kind of information the
4 Chamber would like to hear.
5 Then with many apologies to technicians and interpreters, we
6 adjourn until tomorrow, quarter past 2.00, same courtroom.
7 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.22 p.m.,
8 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 19th day of
9 April, 2007, at 2.15 p.m.