1 Monday, 16 July 2007
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.20 a.m.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning to everyone.
6 Madam Registrar, would you please call the case.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. This is case number
8 IT-04-84-T, the Prosecutor versus Ramush Haradinaj et al.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
10 The reason why we have a late start this morning is because there
11 was a meeting between the parties and the Presiding Judge in Chambers to
12 see to what extent problems over the 92 ter statement of Witness Zlatkovic
13 could be resolved. I think we -- although we start a bit later, that we
14 may have saved a lot of time.
15 Meanwhile, I can inform the parties that the Chamber accepts that
16 where the parties have reached an agreement, an agreement to some extent
17 already reached before the meeting this morning between the parties and
18 myself. Some of the agreements even reached during the meeting. Two
19 issues prominently remaining, that is paragraph 13 and paragraph 20. The
20 ruling of the Chamber is that paragraph 20 is not admissible. As far as
21 paragraph 13 is concerned, those portions on which the parties had not
22 reached an agreement, there the Chamber admits those remaining paragraphs
23 and annexes, with the exception -- or I should say the reservation that
24 the Chamber would still like to pay further attention to annexes 4 and
25 annex -- annexes 4 and 10. These are documents for -- we had not yet
1 during the weekend the translation available so we have to read it. Annex
2 10 is a rather lengthy document which we would like to re-read before we
3 finally decide whether or not to admit the paragraph in which annex 10 is
4 presented. This is guidance for the parties.
5 Mr. Dutertre, I take it that you will provide the Chamber with an
6 amended -- a corrected document.
7 Of course, if we are talking about admission, the Chamber has not
8 yet received the attestations. So whatever I just said is of course
9 subject to the attestations to be given by the witness.
10 Mr. Dutertre, are you ready to call your next witness, which I do
11 understand will be Mr. Zlatkovic?
12 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] Yes, I am. I will file in due
13 course a consolidated version of the statement that could be admitted
14 temporarily once the witness has recognised it, if you agree with this.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, and has attested to it. Of course, there's no
16 problem, I think, with attestations if only portions are taken out.
17 Because if the witness says that whatever he said is properly reflected in
18 the document and he would give the same answers, that of course does not
19 preclude the Chamber from partly admitting only and the Prosecution from
20 only partly tendering that document.
21 Then -- I see Madam Usher has left the courtroom already.
22 MR. GUY-SMITH: Excuse me, if I might.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
24 MR. GUY-SMITH: While we're waiting. I briefly had a conversation
25 with Mr. Dutertre to make sure that there - just because of the way that
1 this witness comes to us - that there's no further Rule 68 disclosure with
2 regard to this witness, and I have been told that there is not. I just
3 got confirmation --
4 JUDGE ORIE: That's on the record.
5 MR. GUY-SMITH: Thank you.
6 [The witness entered court]
7 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] Yes, as far as I know, that's the
9 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning, Mr. Zlatkovic.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning, Your Honour.
11 JUDGE ORIE: From your answer, I understand that you can hear me
12 in a language you understand. Mr. Zlatkovic, before you give evidence in
13 this court, the Rules of Procedure and Evidence require you to make a
14 solemn declaration that you will speak the truth, the whole truth, and
15 nothing but the truth. The -- Madam Usher now hands out to you the text
16 of the solemn declaration, and I would like to invite you to make that
17 solemn declaration.
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will speak
19 the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Zlatkovic. Please be seated.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Zlatkovic, you'll first be examined by
23 Mr. Dutertre, who is counsel for the Prosecution. And I take it that he
24 has informed you already about the procedure, mainly that your written
25 statement is already presented to the Chamber, which allows us to avoid
1 that you have to give your whole story again but that on major parts we
2 can read it from your statement.
3 Mr. Dutertre, please proceed.
4 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
5 WITNESS: RADOVAN ZLATKOVIC
6 [Witness answered through interpreter]
7 Examination by Mr. Dutertre:
8 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Zlatkovic. First of all, is
9 your name Radovan Zlatkovic, you were born on the 19th of November, 1948,
10 in Lepcince, in the municipality of Vranje and you are a retired police
11 officer; is that right?
12 A. I am Radovan Zlatkovic, born in 1948 in Vranje, and, yes, I am a
13 retired policeman.
14 Q. Thank you, Mr. Zlatkovic. Do you remember giving an interview in
15 May and in June of last year?
16 A. Yes, I do remember.
17 Q. Mr. Zlatkovic, can you have a look at the binder that is to your
18 right and tell me if that -- these documents are related to the interview
19 you gave with the relevant annexes. In this binder, you should find the
20 statement in your own language as well as the translation into English.
21 JUDGE ORIE: When Mr. Zlatkovic views the document, on the
22 transcript it says "last year," whereas I take it you meant to say this
23 year, Mr. Dutertre. I don't know what you said in French; I was listening
24 to the translation.
25 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] I said last May or last June. It's
1 a translation error.
2 JUDGE ORIE: That's now corrected.
3 And I would like to express my appreciation that we only so little
4 have to spend any time on small and quite understandable translation
6 Please proceed, Mr. Dutertre.
7 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation]
8 Q. Mr. Zlatkovic, do you remember this document, is this your
9 consolidated interview -- the annexes?
10 A. Yes, that is my consolidated interview, statement, and I do
11 recognise it as being my own.
12 Q. Thank you. Does this statement reflect your testimony in relation
13 to the facts that are mentioned in the statement?
14 A. Fully.
15 Q. One last question on this matter. If these same questions, the
16 questions were put to you in May and June, if these questions were put to
17 you again today, would you give the same answers?
18 A. Certainly.
19 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] I would like to tender this 104
20 first statements -- paragraphs of the statement. We have an index with
21 the various annexes, and that will be consolidated as well to take into
22 account the agreement reached by the parties.
23 Q. Mr. Zlatkovic, I have a number of questions to put to you about a
24 number of issues. I'm going to ask you to give me very specific and
25 concise answers. I'm going to deal with a number of issues, starting with
1 the attack in Glodjane on the 24th of March, 1998. Please look at
2 paragraph 23 of your statement. You state that you arrived whilst the
3 fighting was still going on. Can you tell us roughly how long the
4 fighting had been going on when you arrived on site in Glodjane on the
5 24th of March, 1998?
6 A. When I arrived on the 24th of March, 1998, the fighting had been
7 going on for about an hour, two hours at the most, and I was sent there to
8 carry an on-site investigation after the deaths -- or death of a
9 policeman, Miodrag Otovic.
10 Q. Thank you. How long did the fighting start -- or last after you
11 arrived on site?
12 A. The fighting went on until our forces withdrew, which was at
13 around 2000 hours in the evening, because it carried on not in front of
14 Ramush Haradinaj's house but two houses away, some 500 metres away from
15 Ramush Haradinaj's house. There are two stone houses where the fighting
16 was taking place.
17 Q. I'll come back to that later. You're saying that the fighting
18 lasted until 2000 hours. At what time did you arrive in Glodjane
20 A. Yes, that's right, and I arrived at about -- well, I had breakfast
21 at about 10.00. When I was having breakfast I heard that this policeman
22 had been killed over the radio. I took half an hour to prepare, which
23 means I was there in about an hour, 11.00 or 12.00 at the latest.
24 Q. Thank you. You are talking about the radios, is that the police
25 radio or the public radio station?
1 A. No, the radio communication line, police communication.
2 Q. Thank you. At paragraph 22, you state that there were 50 or 60
3 police officers who came there as a reinforcement. Can you tell us what
4 units these police officers belonged to?
5 A. That's right, they -- first of all the policemen from Decani
6 arrived to help out, to help the police patrol, which happened to be there
7 when Otovic was killed. Then the Djakovica police arrived, and when
8 nothing else was done the MUP specials arrived but they were not deployed
9 in that fighting because it grew dark.
10 Q. What role did these special units play then?
11 A. The special unit was an anti-terrorist unit, which was supposed to
12 capture the perpetrators of this crime, but as it grew dark the unit was
13 not deployed because it was dark and they couldn't be deployed because
14 there would have been even more casualties. There were quite a few
15 casualties on our side already, so actually the unit was not deployed and
16 they were ordered to withdraw to Djakovica and they went off towards
17 Belgrade and Pristina.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Dutertre, it's not entirely clear to me.
19 Mr. Zlatkovic, could you please repeat at what time did you
20 withdraw in the evening?
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Sometime around 2000 hours, that's
22 when we withdrew. It might have been 2030 hours or perhaps 2100 hours,
23 but thereabouts.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
25 Please proceed.
1 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
2 Q. Mr. Zlatkovic, you have just stated that you had a number of
3 casualties in your ranks. Can you give us a figure, an approximate
4 figure, of the number of people who were injured amongst you?
5 A. Miodrag Otovic was killed, the commander of the police department
6 in Rznic or squad; and three or four policemen were wounded, I can't
7 remember exactly, I think there were three or four of them. I know that
8 there were policemen who were wounded and, as I say, three or four.
9 Q. I understand that Mr. Otovic and the chief of the Irzniq police
10 was killed; is that what you're saying?
11 A. The chief of police, the head of the department, Mr. Otovic, was
12 in Rznic, and he was killed on the road itself, in front of Ramush's
14 Q. Fine. So it's the one and the same person, Mr. Otovic and the
15 chief of police?
16 A. He was killed, and there were three or four policemen who were
17 wounded during combat. And there were two young men who were terrorists
18 with weapons, and they were killed, and they were Ramush's men. And I
19 even think that one of them might have been related to him.
20 Q. Can you tell us what sort of weapons were used by the Serb police
21 that came there as a reinforcement?
22 A. The members of the Serb police force who came as reinforcements
23 used rifles, semi-automatic and automatic rifles. They didn't have any
24 other weapons, and hand-grenades, of course, they did have those and
25 that's what was used on both sides over there by those stone houses where
1 this conflict came about. After -- in front of Ramush's house, when they
2 moved on to the other two houses, both sides over there used
3 hand-grenades, and I think that Mr. Ramush was wounded on that occasion as
5 Q. Thank you. You've just mentioned two other houses. Can you
6 describe these houses in which the fighters from the other side had gone?
7 A. The houses were the old-fashioned type of house, built of stone,
8 and they were about 500 to 700 metres away from Ramush's house. They had
9 been built -- well, quite a long time ago, built of strong stone blocks
10 and - how shall I put this? - they had some openings, apertures on the
11 side which were used -- I wasn't there myself but I was told by my
12 colleagues that those openings were used by Ramush's men as points from
13 which they could fire from.
14 Q. Can you tell us who told you that, what colleagues told you that?
15 A. His name is Zoran, he took part in that. He was born in Pec, he's
16 a policeman.
17 Q. Do you know his last name?
18 A. I think his surname was Djordjevic, Zoran Djordjevic, and he was
19 the commander of a squad.
20 Q. At that time, how far away were you from these two houses?
21 A. I was -- well, I carried out the on-site investigation in the yard
22 of Ramush Haradinaj's house, along the road, where Otovic was found,
23 Milorad [as interpreted] Otovic. And then we took shelter in the house
24 opposite -- right by the road. Mr. Ramush, I'm sure, knows whose house
25 that was. It's right opposite his own house at a distance of maybe 150
1 metres. And we were in that yard, and we were sheltered because it has
2 high walls, concrete walls, maybe from concrete blocks and there was some
3 straw, some hay, there.
4 Q. So when you were in that house, how far away were you from the two
5 stone houses you've just described for us?
6 A. 500 metres. The distance is the same from Ramush's house and this
7 house and -- it's the same distance, 5 to 700 metres.
8 Q. Fine. Why did you take shelter in that particular house, can you
9 give us an explanation about that?
10 A. Well, we took refuge there in the yard of the house, not in the
11 house, and we were in the yard because there was shooting from all sides.
12 There was shooting coming from other Albanian houses, too, shooting at the
13 members of the police force. So we took shelter to protect ourselves from
14 the in-coming bullets because the ammunition that was used was the type
15 that explodes in the air. Mostly it was that kind of ammunition, the
16 projectiles explode in midair.
17 Q. How do you know that these were explosive bullets, did you see
18 them yourself, with your own eyes?
19 A. I saw them myself when they exploded in midair.
20 Q. Fine. Can you tell us about the frequency of firing. Are we
21 talking about continuous fire or sporadic fire? Can you describe that for
23 A. When we arrived, there was sporadic shooting, but while we were on
24 the spot investigating at Ramush's house, then they started throwing
25 hand-grenades, and you could hear that. And my colleagues later on told
1 me that Ramush's men would throw the hand-grenades behind the walls
2 because both houses were surrounded on all sides. So they threw these
3 hand-grenades, and our people retaliated, of course, across -- over the
4 walls, and that's how the policemen were wounded, in this general melee.
5 Q. Could you be more specific, the shooting did not just come from
6 the two houses you've described but also from other houses. Is that what
7 you mean?
8 A. Yes, the shooting also came from other houses, more intensive
9 firing. As it fell dark, more intensive firing came from other houses,
10 which means that the population was armed, perhaps not the entire
11 population of those villages, but there were armed individuals who took
12 the opportunity. They made use of the conflict between Mr. Ramush and the
13 police to open fire, in order to assist Ramush and get the police to
14 withdraw, which is what we did in order to avoid more bloodshed.
15 Q. Thank you. You personally, had you found yourself in a situation
16 where there was so much resistance in your previous police activity?
17 A. Not before that time, but later on I did, yes, on more than one
18 occasion. I was attacked by terrorist groups when going to carry out
19 on-site investigations, and I will explain where this happened.
20 Q. Yes, we'll get back to this later, indeed. In your view,
21 Mr. Zlatkovic, the resistance against the police force, could that be
23 MR. EMMERSON: I'm sorry.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson.
25 MR. EMMERSON: I object to the form of the question in the sense
1 that it's asking, as I understand it, for an expression of opinion without
2 a foundation having been laid at this stage. And the word "improvised" in
3 itself is a word that lacks precision. I think if Mr. Dutertre is seeking
4 to elicit is whether there was --
5 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] I can ask another question.
6 MR. EMMERSON: Yes.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Please do so.
8 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation]
9 Q. Mr. Zlatkovic, how would you describe the degree of organisation,
10 of coordination, of the -- of your opponents on that day in Glodjane?
11 A. This is what I was like. It was certainly not improvised. A
12 conflict broke out for the following reasons. A few days before that,
13 individual Roma arrived and even some Albanians and Serbs to complain that
14 they were being ambushed by armed groups on the roads at night and
15 mistreated. Among them, a few days before that, a young man had been
16 caught. I cannot recall his name now, but I think his father was a
17 taxi-driver. He was the son of Ali Baraba and Mr. Ramush probably knows
18 the man and he knows the young man. The young man was caught, and when
19 interviewed in Decani he said that this was being done by Mr. Haradinaj,
20 Ramush's group, that he had engaged a group which was mistreating Serbs,
21 disobedient Albanians and Roma, in order to drive them out of the village.
22 When my colleagues from the state security received this
23 information and this young man, who was Ali Baraba's son took part in
24 that, the police started surveillance over the inhabitants of that
25 village. There were several Serb houses in Dubrava, several in
1 Gornje Ratiste and several in Donje Ratiste, and there were Serb houses in
2 those villages. So the patrol was told to watch over those people, to see
3 if they had problems. On that day, they set out. Milorad [as
4 interpreted] Otovic, as the commander, and another policeman -- in fact,
5 there was several policemen. When they got to the house, not right in
6 front of the house but on the road to the house opposite Ramush
7 Haradinaj's house, there was a young man there and another man. They
8 wanted to start a conversation --
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Dutertre --
10 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation]
11 Q. Sorry for interrupting you --
12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Dutertre, in view of the ruling of the Chamber on
13 paragraph 20, you're invited to fully explore the source of knowledge in
14 every detail in relation to what the witness just testified. Please
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] When they got to the -- a point near
17 Ramush Haradinaj's house, there's a road --
18 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation]
19 Q. Sorry, sorry, I'd like to go one step back and to proceed
20 methodically. How did you have any knowledge about the statements made by
21 Ali Baraba's sons?
22 A. Ali Baraba's son said that, and I held his statement in my hand --
23 in my hands. Later on it was used to find terrorists. It was handed to
24 me, and I read it because I was dealing with terrorism in that
25 secretariat. That's how it was.
1 Q. Who is the person providing you with the statement?
2 A. I received the statement from the state security.
3 Q. When did you -- when you had this statement in your hands, did you
4 see whether it was signed or not by Mr. Ali Baraba's son, of course?
5 A. Yes, yes, it was signed, and that young man was in detention, he
6 was in custody.
7 Q. Thank you. Let's go back to my initial question. I'd asked you
8 what the degree of organisation was --
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Dutertre, I asked you to fully explore in
10 relation to what the witness testified. I remember that the witness
11 testified what happened on the road before Mr. Haradinaj's house, but the
12 source of knowledge for that has not yet been established. And apart from
13 that, the houses, what is Mr. Haradinaj's, what is the house of others
14 nearby where the police sought -- sought to -- refuge, to protect
15 themselves against gun-fire. What are the houses from which shooting took
16 place, the old stone houses? It's not entirely clear to the Chamber, also
17 in relation to the report that appears as I think annex 12 and which, as
18 far as I remember, I've seen that before, so that might be already in
19 evidence. Could you try to establish that as clearly as possible.
20 MR. EMMERSON: And, Your Honour --
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson.
22 MR. EMMERSON: -- might I just be heard in respect of the
23 testimony that's been given concerning the interview with Ali Baraba's
24 son. Simply this: It's unclear to me at this stage in the light of the
25 answers that have been given whether this is evidence that the Prosecution
1 is seeking to rely upon to go into the truth of its contents; but if so,
2 it involves tendering the contents of the statement, despite the fact that
3 the person to whom the statement was made is not identified as a witness.
4 So I wonder if Mr. Dutertre may clarify that. If it's simply being
5 tendered as part of a process of investigation, then that's a different
7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Dutertre.
8 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] Yes, yes. Initially I wanted to
9 know how well the opponents were organised. The witness answered in an --
10 and in so doing he spoke about Mr. Ali Baraba's son so I did take due note
11 that there was a decision by the Trial Chamber in this respect. I did not
12 plan to explore this particularly. I wanted to focus, rather, indeed on
13 the actual fighting, but I could, of course, deal with your questions more
14 specifically, asking questions of this witness.
15 JUDGE ORIE: I think, as a matter of fact, what Mr. Emmerson would
16 like to know is whether you used this information, that is, the arrest and
17 the statements, which I think we don't have on paper, received from the
18 state security by yourself. If this is introduced as the reasons why
19 surveillance and patrolling was intensified, that's a different matter
20 than to use this information as evidence of the truth of what was stated
21 in those statements, that is -- I don't know exactly -- of course I know
22 what is in paragraph 20 but I have to check now the transcript.
23 For example, whether you wanted to use this as evidence, and I'm
24 now quoting from page 12, lines 19: "He said that this was being done by
25 Mr. Haradinaj, Ramush's group, that he had engaged a group which was
1 mistreating Serbs."
2 I mean, if you want to -- I think that's -- Mr. Emmerson's
3 question is whether you want to prove this, these activities were
4 undertaken by a group formed by Mr. Haradinaj, or whether you just want to
5 introduce this information, this reporting to the witness, as the reasons
6 why they went there, intensified patrolling, et cetera.
7 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] Only to know why they intensified
8 the patrol -- patrolling activity.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I see, Mr. Emmerson, you are nodding yes. So we
10 can proceed.
11 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
12 Q. Mr. Zlatkovic, regarding the conditions or the circumstances of
13 Mr. Otovic's death when he arrived to Glodjane, where do you have this
14 information from? Who told you that?
15 A. When I arrived on the spot, I found Otovic lying dead on the road.
16 We recorded that in the record of the on-site investigation. A record
17 was drawn-up, photo documentation was adduced, and I saw this myself. I
18 saw the man lying dead only the road with his rifle underneath him.
19 Q. And where was he in relation to Ramush Haradinaj's house?
20 A. On the road some 20 or 25 metres away, maybe a little more. It's
21 been nine years since then, and also I was not a local man. So I can't be
22 very precise, but it was on the road in front of Ramush Haradinaj's house,
23 maybe 50 or a hundred metres away or less, not more.
24 Q. Thank you. Paragraph 22, there you say that police officers,
25 including Mr. Otovic, wanted to put questions to Mr. Haradinaj's father
1 about his sons, and once they were in Glodjane they approached a group of
2 people to ask about the location of Mr. Haradinaj's father's house. And
3 you say that a young man ran towards the house and that immediately after
4 that, fire was opened from that house. And the police asked for backup.
5 How are you aware of these details?
6 A. When we arrived on the spot to carry out an investigation, we used
7 the people who were there as witnesses even though they were officials.
8 So we asked the policemen who was -- who were present what happened.
9 Among these policemen, there was some who said that they had arrived in a
10 vehicle, stopped on the road in front of the house because they saw a
11 group of people standing there. Among them was a youngish man, 25, 26
12 years old, perhaps, and when they approached to inquire, this man started
13 running towards Ramush Haradinaj's house and the other ones started
14 running in the opposite direction. And Momcilo Stijovic ran after him and
15 caught the man, and it turned out that the man was the president of the
16 LDK. The young man who was running towards Ramush Haradinaj's house, it
17 turned out that that was allegedly the brother of Mr. Ramush Haradinaj,
18 Daut. Whether he really was Daut or not, we never established. But then
19 fire was opened from the house and Otovic -- Miodrag Otovic was hit on the
21 Q. Agreed. Could you give us the names of the policemen who told you
22 about that?
23 A. Momcilo Stijovic.
24 Q. Thank you. Let's go back to the houses of which you said that
25 there were a number of people firing from the houses, to be more specific
1 as to the location. How many houses are we talking about when you said
2 that there was firing from houses, and that's the reason you said why you
3 sought shelter in the courtyard of the dwelling, the house, that was
4 opposite Mr. Haradinaj's father's house?
5 A. The attack started from the house of the father of Mr. Ramush
6 Haradinaj, Mr. Hilmi Haradinaj. A group of about 40 men ran to those two
7 houses which were in the village but near the edge of the village, some
8 500 metres away. I don't know exactly whose houses those were. We
9 couldn't establish that because we couldn't come close. Only the
10 policemen fighting there were there. The investigating judge and I, as
11 the inspector for terrorism and the technicians working with me, carried
12 out an on-site investigation only on the spot where Otovic was killed,
13 where the fighting took place, and that was Mr. Hilmi Haradinaj's house
14 where we found a large quantity of grenades, automatic machine-guns,
15 empty -- spent shell-casings. That's the area we covered, and we carried
16 out an on-site investigation with Mr. Veselin Cadzanovic, an investigating
17 judge from Pec.
18 Q. Thank you. Let's speak about the spent shell-casings. What did
19 you do with them, did you collect them? Did you leave them on the spot?
20 MR. EMMERSON: I'm sorry to keep interrupting. Before
21 Mr. Dutertre moves on, the witness at line 10 and onwards on page 18 has
22 given a lengthy account of how this incident is said to have begun of a
23 group of 40 men running to certain houses some distance away. Again, we
24 have to no evidence at all as to the basis for that information, unless
25 the witness is claiming that he was present at the time.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
2 Mr. Dutertre, apart from what Mr. Emmerson said, I can't say that
3 matters become clearer to me. Which house belongs to whom? I mean, if
4 I'm talking about house A or B, I'd rather know what house it is than to
5 whom it belongs. I do understand that Mr. Otovic, that's at least the
6 gist of the testimony, went to the house of Mr. Ramush Haradinaj; that he
7 was killed in front of that house, being on the road. But where these
8 other houses are located and where the attack started and what is
9 considered to be the attack, was that the attack on Mr. Otovic, was
10 that -- it's -- could we approach it in a more systematic way, and I'm now
11 speaking for myself, for me photographs of the village and the nearby area
12 has always very much helped me to understand the situation. And these
13 photographs are already in evidence, so you could even invite the witness
14 to mark them when he talks about the house of Hilmi, which house he
15 exactly has in mind. I also know that some of the photographs depict
16 rather how the situation is now compared to how it used to be, but could
17 you try to bring me to the right houses; and, of course, also lay a
18 foundation as far as the knowledge of the witness is concerned.
19 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] Of course, Mr. President. It's a
20 matter of time. I have a lot of subjects to deal with. Of course, I can
21 go into detail, but if I do so I can't sort of tackle other questions in
22 depth. So I'll make sure that we see an aerial photograph of Glodjane for
23 it to be more specific, for the witness.
24 Q. But before we do so, Mr. Zlatkovic, tell me, could you tell us in
25 relation to the house in front of which Mr. Otovic was killed, you sought
1 refuge opposite that house. You said there was firing from other houses.
2 Where were those other houses located in relation to the house in front of
3 which Mr. Otovic was killed?
4 A. Those houses were on the eastern side of the house of
5 Mr. Haradinaj and on the north side towards Decani, or rather, that's west
6 towards Decani. But shots did not come from the direction of Dubrava,
7 Babaloc, and so on, but from Rznic, onwards, there was shooting from every
8 side but that was later on when it was already dark. I was some 500
9 metres away from those two houses where the fighting took place, and I
10 observed that myself. I could see fighting going on there, but to whom
11 the houses belonged, I really don't know from whose houses they were
12 shooting and whose houses they were surrounded. Otovic was killed and the
13 fighting began in front of Ramush Haradinaj's house, or rather, from
14 Ramush Haradinaj's house, and that's where he was killed. Just a minute,
15 please. Mr. Ramush must know, it's a house --
16 Q. Mr. Zlatkovic, let's go step by step.
17 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] Can we please show on the screen
18 Exhibit D35. This is an aerial photograph.
19 Q. And I shall ask you to mark various locations, the locations you
20 have spoken about. You're going to see it in your screen in a few
21 seconds. Mr. Witness -- Mr. Zlatkovic, now you can see this photograph on
22 your screen?
23 A. Yes, but these are new houses.
24 Q. Do you recognise the village in question? That's my first
1 A. I think it's Rznic, judging by this here, I think it's Rznic.
2 This is all new.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Dutertre, would it not be most logical where the
4 story starts at Mr. Haradinaj's house, to perhaps see whether there's any
5 picture where Mr. Haradinaj's house would be on it? Or do you consider
6 this to be a picture where Mr. Haradinaj's house is on it?
7 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] No, I -- well, I'm trying to find
8 the reference. In the meantime can we move to another topic in order not
9 to waste any time. I will come back to this later, if you so please.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Please do so.
11 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] Thank you.
12 Q. Mr. Zlatkovic, you testified that in the house opposite of which
13 Mr. Otovic had been found, you had found a number of weapons, ammunition,
14 and spent shell-casings. What did you do with all this? More
15 specifically, what did you do with the spent shell-casings?
16 A. The spent shell-casings were gathered up by the forensic
17 technicians and delivered to the institute for ballistic forensics in
18 Pristina. We received information because we also collected some weapons
19 that we found there, and it was established --
20 MR. EMMERSON: Sorry --
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- that --
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson.
23 MR. EMMERSON: I'm sorry, as I think Mr. Dutertre knows, there is
24 an objection which has been the subject of agreement about the witness
25 testifying to his recollection of what the product of reports he doesn't
1 produce said. This is the second half of the original paragraph 24 of the
2 consolidated witness statement which has been removed by agreement.
3 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] Absolutely so. You're quite right,
4 but you know when I put a question I can't control his answer. This was
5 not the meaning of my question. I was not interested in the product of
6 the report, so I have received my answer.
7 Q. Before we are able to find better photographs of the houses and
8 the village, we'll come back to this, I'd like to move to another topic.
9 Mr. Zlatkovic, who's Isuf Hoxha?
10 A. Isuf Hoxha is an Albanian. He was a fairly poor man and lived on
11 some farm over there, but as we say in the Balkans he liked to have both
12 fingers in the pie. He lived -- he was on good terms with the Serbs and
13 on good terms with the Albanians, too. And if you want me to make this
14 more vivid for you, he had a photograph of Slobodan Milosevic in his house
15 and Shote Galica the Albanian hero and they were framed in one frame. So
16 when the Albanians -- when some Albanians came by and knocked on the door
17 he would turn the picture around to face the Albanian heroine,
18 Shote Galica. When the Serbs came visiting he would turn the picture
19 around to the side where there was the photograph of Slobodan Milosevic.
20 So he was on very good terms with both sides and collaborated with the
21 police a little as well, and that's the kind of man he was. He is
22 divorced. His wife lives, I think, somewhere in Belgium, I think, and he
23 was living with some of his children at home.
24 Q. Fine. Now how come you knew about this, about this picture with
25 photographs on either side? How come you are aware of this?
1 A. He came to see me in my office. We talked. I talked to him
2 personally, and he himself said that that's the kind of man he was and he
3 lived that way, had been living that way for a long time. And as he was
4 poor, he helped the police out and we would take him a little coffee and
5 sugar, and he was the one who showed me the picture himself. I saw it.
6 Q. Where did he show it to you?
7 A. In his house on the wall, that's where the picture -- the
8 photograph was displayed.
9 Q. I see. When did this happen?
10 A. It happened before he was kidnapped. I think it might have been
11 May when we visited him, yes, in May, and it was in June or July when he
12 was kidnapped between Prizren and Suva Reka. That's the information I
13 received from his son, that that's where he was kidnapped.
14 Q. No, what I meant was this: When did you have this conversation
15 with him? When did he show you this picture frame?
16 A. In May.
17 Q. Of which year?
18 A. 1998. He died sometime in July.
19 Q. You said that he would help the police. What did you mean
21 A. What I wanted to say was that he helped out the police in this
22 area, but when it came to theft or things like that, then he moved among
23 the local criminals. I'm not speaking about major crime, just petty crime
24 and where young boys would steal cars, bicycles, break windows, so he
25 helped out. He was sometimes involved in things like that.
1 Q. Thank you. Let me move to another part of your statement --
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Dutertre, let me try to understand fully the last
3 answer given.
4 "What I wanted to say," the witness said, "was that he helped out
5 the police in this area, but when it came to theft or things like that,
6 then he moved among the local criminals."
7 Now, what exactly did he help you out with? Would he report
8 thefts committed by others or would he report other matters to you, such
9 as activities of armed groups or whatever?
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. He helped out with the theft
11 side of it. He was a petty criminal himself, but when it came to theft
12 and the criminals usually used that money to gamble, and he was a gambler
13 himself, and then he would tell us, Last night so-and-so gambled and lost
14 so much money and then the police always had reason to believe that the
15 money had came from some kind of theft but he didn't understand much about
16 police matters. But he was also a member of the socialist party, let me
17 tell you.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed -- so he was not in any way assisting
19 the police in discovering any other kind of activity, that is, not
20 ordinary small criminality, but other matters?
21 MR. GUY-SMITH: I'm wondering if we could get further
22 amplification with regard to page 23, line 22, the answer that's given
24 JUDGE ORIE: I think you could ask that in cross-examination,
25 Mr. Guy-Smith.
1 Could you, therefore, confirm that he was only assisting in these,
2 as you called it, these small theft matters and not in other matters?
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] With regard to other matters, no,
4 but the Albanians couldn't forgive him for being a member of the socialist
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that's your interpretation.
7 Please proceed, Mr. Dutertre.
8 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
9 Q. Let me deal with paragraph 13, subparagraph 4, which deals with
10 the kidnapping of Mr. Rade Popadic. Here's my question: Did you
11 personally carry out any investigation on this case?
12 A. Rade Popadic and Nikola Jovanovic were policemen. One was from
13 Bogotic, the other was from Sabac, but they were in the same unit. And
14 on that day when they were kidnapped they were going to get some food.
15 They were on their way to Djakovica. Their vehicle broke down, they
16 arrived at Babaloc --
17 Q. [Microphone not activated]
18 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters can't hear Mr. Dutertre.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Rade Popadic --
20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Dutertre, could you please, the interpreters
21 couldn't hear you. I take it that your microphone was not activated.
22 Could you please repeat your question therefore so that it's on the
24 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] Of course, Mr. President.
25 Q. I wanted to know simply, and we were going step by step, whether
1 you did personally take part in the investigation on Mr. Popadic and his
2 colleague Mr. Jovanovic?
3 A. I personally took part in the investigation of Rade -- the late
4 Rade Popadic and Nikola Jovanovic, and I arrived at the following
5 information. At the time they were working in Junik, and as they were out
6 of food they went to Djakovica --
7 Q. Just step by step, Mr. Zlatkovic. You said that they were
8 kidnapped around 10.30, and you explained why or how you knew that it was
9 around 10.30, but you say it happened at the intersection of Rastavica.
10 How did you learn that they were kidnapped in Rastavica or what is your
11 foundation to claim this?
12 A. I say that they were kidnapped at 10.30 because they set out two
13 or three minutes from Babaloc -- two or three minutes before 10.30 from
14 Babaloc, from the refugee camp or settlement in Babaloc to Rastavica, and
15 you can do that distance in two or three minutes. It takes you two or
16 three minutes to get there, and they were kidnapped at Rastavica. Later
17 on, I received information about the way in which this happened.
18 Allegedly, the terrorists threw some salt on the road, on the surface of
19 the road, and herded the sheep over the road.
20 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... step by step. On what basis
21 do you know that the kidnapping took place in Rastavica? What is the
22 information you have that led you to this conclusion?
23 A. I drew this conclusion on the basis of some statements made by
24 Albanians, what Albanians said when I interviewed them, not only me but my
25 colleagues as well. And that's how we reached this conclusion, that the
1 kidnapping had taken place exactly at that spot, at the junction at
3 MR. EMMERSON: I'm sorry -- I'm sorry, before Mr. Dutertre
4 continues, the same questions arises. We don't have these witness
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
7 MR. EMMERSON: We don't have --
8 JUDGE ORIE: Could I ask Mr. Zlatkovic --
9 Mr. Zlatkovic, we have seen a rather short report of the 26th of
10 May, at least the Chamber is reading this and considering whether it
11 should be admitted into evidence. Now that only very briefly describes
12 without a lot of details that these two police officers were kidnapped and
13 that at least they changed car because they set off in a Kadett and later
14 on continued driving a Mitsubishi. Now, when you talk about these
15 statements given by Albanians, were they put on paper? When were they
16 given? To whom were they given?
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The statements were recorded and
18 given to the state security staff, and I used them.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Are they still available? Because we have seen some
20 of these reports. Do they still exist, these statements?
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm certain they do within the
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Dutertre, have you tried to -- I mean, if there
24 are detailed statements about how this all happened, including details as
25 salt on the road and sheep licking the salt and thus obstructing the
1 passage of cars, that would give at least more details than we find in the
2 annex 4.
3 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] Absolutely, Mr. President. I did
4 provide in the annex the information I had, and it seems as though there
5 is more information, as is stated by the witness.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson.
7 MR. EMMERSON: Can I indicate my objection goes rather deeper in
8 the sense, again, the question I'm putting is whether or not this -- the
9 contents of these accounts are being tendered as evidence of the truth of
10 their contents, because if they are then frankly the right course would be
11 to identify the witnesses and have them as part of the Prosecution case so
12 they can be cross-examined.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Dutertre, it seems that Mr. Emmerson would not
14 insist on receiving the other statements if you don't use them, or at
15 least if you don't use this hearsay evidence as evidence which could
16 establish the truth of -- well, let's say the story with -- about the
18 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I do not have such
19 statements here and now, but the witness himself carried out the
20 investigation, he said, and today in this courtroom this is the best
21 evidence I have to give you. So this is a matter of weight which will
22 have to be considered.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Of course, the witness says there's better evidence,
24 but the question is not whether this is the best evidence, yes or no, but
25 whether you introduce this evidence as -- for the purposes of establishing
1 what happened to the two police officers or for other reasons, such as
2 tension at that time in the area in May. I mean, are you --
3 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] Yes, indeed, Mr. President. This
4 is to establish what really happened with regard to these two police
5 officers, and we are of the view that this information, such as it is, is
6 such that it can help -- help the Judges have a better idea as to the
7 truth with relation to these two police officers.
8 MR. EMMERSON: I wonder if the witness might be asked to remove
9 his headphones at this moment.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, let's first ask.
11 Mr. Zlatkovic, do you understand any English?
12 Let's move in a different way. Mr. Zlatkovic, we are at a time
13 when we need --
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, no, no, I don't understand
16 JUDGE ORIE: We are at a time when we need a break anyhow, and
17 since the parties would like to exchange some views on procedural matters,
18 perhaps I already give you an opportunity to start the break now.
19 Madam Usher, could you -- we'll have a break of approximately a
20 half an hour, Mr. Zlatkovic, and we'd like to see you back after the
22 Madam Usher, could you escort Mr. Zlatkovic out of the courtroom.
23 [The witness stands down]
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Dutertre, when you tell us that you want to use
25 this evidence in order to give -- to assist the Chamber in getting to the
1 truth, the issue is what truth are you actually trying to establish. I
2 notice that the kidnapping, as it is said, of these police officers are
3 not incidents which are specifically mentioned in the indictment; to that
4 extent, it -- one could wonder why it is important to know who exactly and
5 in what way kidnapped these two persons. Another way of establishing the
6 truth is to say, Well, what happened in these times is that people
7 disappeared, and perhaps it is not without importance that it -- here
8 there were two police officers that disappeared on that-and-that day, as
9 it was reported to us, rather than to emphasise who had done it, whether
10 it was with sheep or without sheep. And I think that that's what's
11 bothering Mr. Emmerson mainly.
12 Mr. Emmerson, is that more or less --
13 MR. EMMERSON: The concern --
14 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] Just one point, Mr. President.
15 Mr. Rade Popadic was identified as being the body R-31. So this is the
16 reason why we wanted to expand on his case and know more about the
17 circumstances of his disappearance. If he has been somebody not listed in
18 the indictment, quite rightly so, Mr. President, we'd just have made sure
19 the date was mentioned. But he happens to be under Count -- Counts 21 and
20 22, and I'd like to seek as much evidence as possible from this witness,
21 who carried out the investigations, even if we do not have all the reports
22 he refers to.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Emmerson.
24 MR. EMMERSON: Can I respond briefly. R-31 has been DNA
25 identified as Rade Popadic. The evidence that the Prosecution proposes to
1 adduce provides no account as to the circumstances of his death at all,
2 other than the fact that his wife is in a position to identify when it was
3 she last saw him and his commanding officer, who is a witness that the
4 Prosecution does propose to call, can give evidence as to the instructions
5 that he was given when he left to -- left Junik and was due to return and
6 spoke to him by telephone from Babaloc. That witness is called Rade
7 Ripic. As far as I understand, there's been no suggestion that there's a
8 protective measures application in respect of him. I see -- before I go
9 any further.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I do agree. I must admit that I overlooked
11 paragraph 79 of the -- at this very moment.
12 MR. EMMERSON: Yes. But the concern I have is this --
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
14 MR. EMMERSON: -- if the evidence that is currently being elicited
15 is elicited with a view to assisting the Trial Chamber to understand what
16 happened to an armed police officer and how he met his death, then hearing
17 from this witness third-hand accounts from individuals that he claims to
18 have interviewed where we don't have the witness statement, we have no
19 means of knowing whether the individuals themselves were recounting things
20 they had seen or things they'd heard or who had told them, and where we
21 have seen in other instances already in this case, accounts recorded in
22 witness statements taken allegedly at Gjakove police station, which are
23 then disavowed for reasons explained by the persons who are supposed to
24 have made them, for the Prosecution at this stage to be seeking to prove
25 the circumstances in which these two individuals met their deaths, if
1 indeed the second one is dead because there's no evidence of the recovery
2 of remains in respect of the other police officer, through evidence of
3 this quality, in our submission, is objectionable.
4 It doesn't assist the Trial Chamber. I'm not making a bland
5 hearsay objection; we're simply not in a position to test it. I mean, the
6 right way -- if the Prosecution wants to put this as part of its case the
7 right way would be to identify the people concerned and to call them as
8 witnesses so they can be cross-examined. Not to seek to do the very thing
9 that the Prosecution has done or attempted to do now on a number of
10 occasions which, in the event, they've each time backed down; namely, to
11 get an investigator to try to tell the Trial Chamber what someone they've
12 interviewed would have said if they'd been a witness in the case. It's
13 not a proper way to proceed, in our submission.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Dutertre.
15 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] I take note of the submissions of
16 the Defence. Nevertheless, this is some kind of evidence with regard to
17 what happened. We've had statements taken by this witness with various
18 individuals, and I keep thinking that the matter is -- is a matter of
19 weight rather than admissibility. And today, this is the best evidence
20 available regarding this event in addition to the two statements made by
21 the wife of one of the two police officers and Mr. Ripic, the superior of
22 the two police officers. Now, of course, I do agree it is up for the
23 Trial Chamber to assess the weight to give to this evidence.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Guy-Smith.
25 MR. GUY-SMITH: Yes, the Prosecution is seeking to enter this
1 evidence for the truth of the matter asserted. There is -- as
2 Mr. Emmerson said, there is no way for this evidence to be tested. This
3 is the precise difficulty that we were having earlier when we were dealing
4 with this particular paragraph and the subparagraphs, paragraph 13. It is
5 inadmissible under the Rules of Evidence of this Tribunal.
6 JUDGE ORIE: That's the position of Mr. Guy-Smith.
7 Mr. Dutertre, I noticed that you had been present during all these
8 interviews. I just put a question to the witness about whether he --
9 whether he did put on paper or whether the statement of those who reported
10 the events, that is, how this person and when and where he was kidnapped,
11 whether this was put on paper. The witness says, Yes. Did you ever put
12 that question to the witness when preparing for his testimony?
13 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] Well, it was implicit when we had
14 the statement, but the question as such was not put to him.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but did you try to obtain these statements of
16 those who were at the source of -- of these findings or this -- rather,
17 these conclusions?
18 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] I would have to look at our RFAs to
19 know about that more exactly.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Because the witness already in his report gives
21 quite some details as -- for example, as to where exactly these people
22 were kidnapped in annex 4, which is dated the 26th of May, where the
23 events are supposed to have taken place on the 24th. So therefore, you
24 would expect at least that this information to be made available in two
25 days. The Chamber will further consider the matter to what extent it
1 will --
2 MR. EMMERSON: Could --
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Emmerson.
4 MR. EMMERSON: Could I have one further sentence in relation to
5 this because it does seem to be a recurring problem and it came into focus
6 during the evidence of the investigator Pekka Haverinen. At one point it
7 looked as though the Prosecution was seeking, through the evidence of a
8 witness testifying about photo-boards, to elicit in substance the
9 testimony which is recorded in the statements to which the photo-boards
10 related. And I can -- Your Honours will recall at the time excited some
11 anxiety on the part of the Defence, that what the Prosecution was
12 effectively assuming was that there was a permissible mechanism for
13 adducing evidence before this Tribunal whereby direct evidence of
14 witnesses whose testimony would go to the acts and conduct of the accused
15 can be called not by putting a witness in the witness box but simply by
16 calling the person who took their statement.
17 JUDGE ORIE: We're not talking about "simply," Mr. Emmerson;
18 matters are more complicated. This annex 4 at least establishes that by
19 whatever means on the 26th of May, that there was knowledge or a
20 presumption on what happened with some details, which may have some
21 probative value, either against or in favour of the accused. So
22 therefore, the -- I do understand the concern of the Defence expressed
23 repeatedly, that by just giving a rather vague report that the Chamber
24 should not admit that or use that as to establish what is in that report.
25 At the same time, if you say it's not admissible evidence, then you could
1 use it in no way. And as you may be aware, the Chamber will, very
2 cautiously, see how to evaluate the evidence, including such reports as
3 this one, and as I said several times before, if someone writes down, I
4 heard from Mr. A, B, and C, of which I do not remember the name, that five
5 persons were killed by accused Q, Y, or Z on the 25th of March, 1998, the
6 Chamber will not use that as accepting that this is what happened.
7 At the same time, such a report, for example, could establish that
8 at a certain moment those who wrote that report lived in the assumption
9 that people were killed or at least not alive anymore. So therefore,
10 evaluation --
11 MR. EMMERSON: I don't for a second seek to go behind the summary
12 that Your Honour has just put to me, indeed, I wouldn't quarrel with it
13 for a moment. The distinction, though, is between whether the document is
14 tendered as to the truth of its contents or not. Because plainly if it's
15 tendered to show the state of mind of the person writing it, that is one
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, and then of course, if we later hear six
18 witnesses who in person testify that they gave a statement at that time to
19 the police in which they said so and so and so, then of course the
20 documents could confirm that. And if a witness at any moment would change
21 his statement, then the mere fact that at that time they gave a statement
22 could be used with all caution to either choose from the one version or
23 the other version. So to that extent there is no one full hundred per
24 cent of saying it's excluded forever.
25 MR. EMMERSON: And I wasn't really -- just to make it absolutely
1 clear --
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
3 MR. EMMERSON: -- that the purpose of my submission at this stage
4 was not to press upon the Trial Chamber an application to exclude annex 4.
5 The purpose of my submission was, as I thought I'd indicated right at
6 the outset, to seek clarification about whether the account that's being
7 elicited from this witness is being tendered to show the truth of its
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
10 MR. EMMERSON: If the answer to that is no, I'll sit down --
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I do understand. And if the answer is yes, then
12 that still doesn't mean that the Chamber would adopt the same view when
13 evaluating his evidence.
14 MR. EMMERSON: Thank you.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Guy-Smith.
16 MR. GUY-SMITH: Just so the Chamber is clear about my position, my
17 concern is once again if the document is being offered for the truth of
18 the matter asserted then my concern is being voiced as being something
19 that presently is inadmissible. I understand the Chamber's analysis and I
20 once again -- I don't disagree with that either. The difficulty that I'm
21 having at the present time is precisely that the concerns that have been
22 voiced by Mr. Emmerson at present and was voiced previously, which it
23 seems is it what is occurring here is the Prosecution is seeking to
24 introduce evidence in an impermissible fashion to establish the truth of
25 the contents or the truth of the assertion and therein lies the rub. And
1 if they're doing it for some other purpose, then I too will not rise.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Whether the intention of the party presenting
3 the evidence is decisive or whether the interpretation of the Chamber
4 receiving the evidence is decisive is, however, another matter.
5 Mr. Dutertre, would you like to add anything before the break?
6 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. I just wanted to
7 say that we want to offer this document in order to establish and to prove
8 what happened to these two police officers. It's a relevant document. It
9 has a degree of probative value, and hearsay evidence is not inadmissible
10 before this Tribunal. It's up to the Judges to give the appropriate
11 weight to the exhibit. Hearsay is perfectly acceptable in this Tribunal.
12 JUDGE ORIE: We'll have a break until quarter past 11.00.
13 --- Recess taken at 10.48 a.m.
14 [The witness takes the stand]
15 --- On resuming at 11.27 a.m.
16 [Trial Chamber and legal officer confer]
17 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber apologises to the parties to the late
18 restart, at the same time the Chamber hopes that the parties rest assured
19 that there are usually rather urgent matters that keep us out of court.
20 Mr. Dutertre, you may proceed, and the objections received in
21 distinct ways so as not to admit or not to exclude or -- are not ignored
22 by the Chamber, but the Chamber allows you to continue as you did before.
23 Please proceed.
24 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. I will be
25 rather brief. I've already used up all the time allocated to me. I will
1 deal with four issues.
2 Q. And, Mr. Zlatkovic, I will ask you to give me very concise
3 answers. Page 25, line 10 of your testimony today on the transcript you
4 say: [In English] "With regard to other matters, no, but the Albanians
5 could not forgive for being a member of the socialist party."
6 [Interpretation] Could you give us the name of the socialist party
7 you're referring to, the entire name?
8 A. The Socialist Party of Serbia.
9 Q. Thank you. Could you please tell us what you mean by that the
10 Albanians could not forgive him, what do you mean by that? What could
11 they not forgive him?
12 A. They couldn't forgive him that because the Albanians had already
13 established the VSK party, under the leadership of the late Mr. Rugova, so
14 they had a party of their own through which they fought for their alleged
15 rights. But this man was on the side of the socialist party, that's why,
16 nothing else.
17 Q. Fine --
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Dutertre, they couldn't forgive him -- I mean, I
19 do understand that this is an explanation you consider to be a likely
20 explanation. Could you give us any more details about -- did anyone tell
21 you this or is it just your interpretation of what you observed or -- it's
22 not clear if you say the Albanians could not forgive him, that, if you
23 take it literally, would mean all Albanians being aware and not willing to
24 forgive. Could you give us some more details or to tell us whether it's
25 just your impression of what happened.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I will give some more details about
2 this. I heard this from his son. When he was kidnapped between Prizren
3 and Suva Reka, when the Hoxha set out towards Suva Reka to gamble --
4 THE INTERPRETER: Hoxha, not the Hoxha, Interpreter's correction.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- a group of Albanians came along
6 which searched the bus looking for Serbs among them. Hoxha was there, and
7 while they were looking at personal identity papers he threw away his
8 membership card of the Socialist Party of Serbia through the window.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Is this what the son told you?
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, his son told me that.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Was his son present when it happened?
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know whether his son heard
13 it from someone else or whether he was present, but he came to report his
14 father as missing. When Hoxha was on his way back, when the Albanians got
15 out, the terrorist group, when they left the bus, they found the
16 membership card, Hoxha's membership card in the socialist party. His name
17 was on it. On the following day or a few days later, they ambushed him
18 again, they found him, and then they kidnapped him. But I really don't
19 know how his son learned this, but his son personally told me about this
20 when he came to report his father missing, and then he talked to me on
21 that occasion.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
23 Please proceed, Mr. Dutertre.
24 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
25 Q. Let me go back to the Glodjane incident, paragraph 23 of your
1 statement you state that you arrived on site, that the fighting had
2 already started, and that the police officers on site told you that there
3 were around 40 armed men who had left Mr. Haradinaj's house. Based on
4 your experience of the events on that particular day and based of what you
5 saw of the fighting, what is your estimate about the number of fighters on
6 Mr. Haradinaj's side?
7 A. On that day there were about 40 men, about 40.
8 Q. And when you give us this figure, it's based on what you saw
9 yourself or on the fierceness of the fighting? How do you come to this
10 figure of 40 people?
11 A. I base this figure on what the policemen told me when they were --
12 when the policemen were going forward, they withdrew towards the houses.
13 And in late February, when one policeman from the neighbouring village
14 Dubrava, Dragan Stojanovic was a neighbor of Mr. Haradinaj's, was out
15 hunting. He found a round, an empty round, in the Biteska forest, and I
16 was ordered by my supervisor to take a group of policemen and to search
17 that forest.
18 In the forest I found three fires burning in different places,
19 about eight or ten empty cases for ammunition. Then I found empty tins of
20 where they had had fish and I found old boots, and I found cigarette
21 butts. And then I wrote a report and said that 30 or 40 men had been in
22 that forest, and then a few days later this tragic murder happened and the
23 conflict with Ramush Haradinaj's group. And about 40 men came out of his
24 house, maybe not all of them were fighters. Maybe Mr. Hilmi Haradinaj was
25 among them, he was an elderly man at the time. Maybe there were children
1 among them, but about 40 people left the house of Ramush Haradinaj.
2 Q. This is what the police officers told you. I'd like you to be
3 shown 65 ter Exhibit 1766. It's an aerial photograph --
4 JUDGE ORIE: Not yet in evidence, Mr. Dutertre, I understand?
5 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] No, not yet in evidence.
6 Scroll down a bit. Yes.
7 Q. Mr. Zlatkovic, do you recognise the place that is depicted in this
9 A. Yes, that's Glodjane.
10 Q. You have a marker, and the usher may be able to help you in this,
11 could you please mark on this photograph the location of the house of the
12 Haradinaj family?
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Dutertre, we have talked about Ramush Haradinaj's
14 house, the family house, I think his father's house. Could you just ask
15 the witness to mark whatever he recognises on this village -- on this
16 photograph and then tell us whether that is a house which he described as
17 one of the Haradinaj houses.
18 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.
19 Q. Mr. Zlatkovic, we see a house in -- on the -- in the lower parts
20 of this photograph. Do you recognise this house?
21 A. There were several unfinished houses in that area. They hadn't
22 been whitewashed on the outside. They hadn't been plastered. If this is
23 the road leading through Dubrava, then this house would be
24 Ramush Haradinaj's house, and this is the house where we took shelter.
25 But I think it doesn't have a roof now, the one up there.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Could we invite the witness to mark it as such
2 because I do not see -- no, I don't see anything at this moment on the
4 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] Yes, I was about to ask him to do
6 Q. Witness, can you please mark these locations --
7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Dutertre, he has --
8 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation]
9 Q. Witness, you've marked things on this photograph before we've
10 asked you anything. What have you marked with the figure number "1" on
11 this photograph?
12 A. I marked what I assume is Ramush Haradinaj's house at the time,
13 but -- and this is the house we took shelter in while the fighting was
14 going on up there.
15 Q. Is it the house you marked with "2"?
16 A. Number "2", but I don't see a roof on it now. I see just the
17 wall, but that's what it was like more or less.
18 Q. Fine --
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Dutertre, again, I think the witness testified
20 there were two houses they took refuge. Could you ask the witness to
21 identify, if it's on the photograph, the other house they used to protect
23 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] Are you referring to the houses
24 where the fighters on the side of Mr. Haradinaj's took shelter or --
25 JUDGE ORIE: No, I was not. I was --
1 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation]
2 Q. Mr. Zlatkovic, would you please mark on the photograph the
3 location of the second house where you took shelter on that particular
5 A. Number 2, if that's the road. There were some other houses at the
6 time which were not finished, but if this was taken after the war, it
7 doesn't correspond.
8 Q. [No interpretation]
9 A. I'm not receiving interpretation.
10 Q. In how many houses did you take refuge on that day, one house?
11 Two houses? Three houses?
12 A. In one house. We took shelter in one house, and next to the house
13 was the anti-terrorist unit which arrived. It was -- it was near the
14 house, but it didn't look like this then.
15 Q. One last question. Would you be able to mark on this photograph
16 the two stone houses where you said that the people who left
17 Mr. Haradinaj's house then went and took shelter? Can you please write
18 the following numbers: 3 and 4 on these two houses if you find them.
19 A. I don't see them, but they're somewhere around here, around here.
20 But I don't see that clearly on the photograph.
21 Q. Thank you.
22 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] I'd like to tender this photograph,
23 and I don't have any further questions for this witness.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar, that would be number ...?
25 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this will be Exhibit Number P818,
1 marked for identification.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
3 Any objection against admission? I don't hear any objection, then
4 it is admitted into evidence.
5 Please proceed.
6 Mr. Emmerson, are you ready to cross-examine the witness?
7 MR. EMMERSON: Your Honour, I am.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Zlatkovic, you'll now be cross-examined by
9 Mr. Emmerson, who is counsel for Mr. Haradinaj.
10 Please proceed, Mr. Emmerson.
11 Cross-examination by Mr. Emmerson:
12 Q. Mr. Zlatkovic, can we start, please, by looking at your witness
13 statement that you have in front of you at paragraph 28.
14 A. If it can assist --
15 THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness repeat what he said; the
16 interpreter did not hear clearly.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Zlatkovic, you earlier said something the
18 interpreters could not hear. Could you please repeat that.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I said I need help to find paragraph
20 28, but now I've found it.
21 MR. EMMERSON:
22 Q. I'm going to be asking you some questions about a number of
23 paragraphs in your statement, and as you can see each one has a separate
24 number. So I want to start please with paragraph 28 and with the first
25 sentence in that paragraph. Does it read as follows: "From the 24th of
1 March, 1998, when Miodrag Otovic was killed, until September 1998, the
2 police never returned to Glodjane"?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. And is that the truth?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Can you turn to paragraph 31, please, where you describe in the
7 paragraph 31 and the paragraphs which follow two occasions when there
8 were, you say, attempts by the MUP to enter the territory on the eastern
9 side of the main Peje to Gjakove road; is that right?
10 A. It's true that the MUP tried to enter on the 2nd of August, 1998,
11 in order to get a terrorist group out and free up the communication, that
12 the Serbs in Djakovica and the other population that were not involved in
13 terrorist activities were using to get supplies of food and other
15 Q. Just pause there. You describe in paragraph 31 an attempt that
16 was made by the MUP on the 2nd of August, and in paragraph 33 a second
17 operation conducted on the 9th of August. Do you see those two operations
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Now, in relation to the first one at paragraph 31 you say at the
21 bottom of that paragraph, last few lines, you say that: "The MUP could
22 reach the junction between the main road," the Gjakove-Decan road, "and
23 the Prilep road." And you say a little further on: "As the terrorists
24 were numerous and well organised, the MUP had to withdraw."
25 Is that right?
1 A. Yes, that's right. The MUP had to withdraw because they had
2 losses on their side.
3 Q. I see. So is it your evidence then that on that 2nd of August
4 attempt, the MUP did not succeed in penetrating at all into the territory
5 to the east of the main road?
6 A. Neither to the east nor to the west.
7 Q. Thank you. And then looking at the second operation you describe
8 at paragraph 33, you say that the MUP managed to enter Prilep. You say
9 that three police officers were killed in Prilep. And then you go on to
10 say that: "During this second operation, the MUP did not go to the Lake
11 Radonjic area," you say, "that was not possible." You say that: "The
12 terrorists were controlling that area."
13 And then a little further down in paragraph 35 you say that:
14 "Prilep was the furthest point reached."
15 Is that correct?
16 A. That's correct, because the terrorists were defending the Radonjic
17 Lake, they concentrated there around the hazelnut farm and around the
18 school, and then they set out towards Dasinovac and that whole area up to
19 Jablanica was held by them so the MUP could no longer enter that area.
20 Q. Just to be absolutely clear, those were the only two attempts made
21 by the MUP to enter the territory east of the main road at any time
22 between the 24th of March and September; is that your evidence?
23 A. My evidence is that on those two occasions there were organised
24 attempts to enter because there was operative information that people had
25 been kidnapped and killed in the Radonjic Lake area. There were
1 operations from time to time, but it was not possible to penetrate into
2 the area.
3 Q. Yes, I just want to be absolutely crystal clear about this,
4 Mr. Zlatkovic. You agree that in paragraph 28 of your statement: "It is
5 true," you say, "that the police never returned to Gllogjan between the
6 24th of March and September." Correct?
7 A. It's correct, yes. They only established roads so that the
8 population from Pec towards Decani, Djakovica, Prizren, and so on could
9 get supplies. But on both sides there were terrorist groups,
10 well-organised groups, so that nobody could use those roads because the
11 Albanians were informed through their media that they couldn't move along
12 the roads at such and such a time --
13 Q. I don't --
14 A. -- people knew that and didn't move. Some Serbs --
15 Q. Forgive me, Mr. Zlatkovic. I don't need a lengthy explanation
16 from you. I just need confirmation from you --
17 A. All right.
18 Q. -- I just need confirmation from you that your testimony before
19 the Trial Chamber is, first of all, that the MUP never entered Gllogjan
20 between March and September, and you've agreed that that is the case; yes?
21 A. Yes, it could not enter.
22 Q. Thank you. And your testimony is also that during the 9th of
23 August operation the MUP could not get any further east than Prilep, which
24 is on the main road; is that correct?
25 A. Yes, it's correct, because if the MUP had come to Radonjic Lake,
1 we would have found those victims in August, not in September.
2 Q. Thank you. I'd like, if you would, please, to ask you to look
3 at -- you should have a brown folder. You haven't got it. I'll ask that
4 it be handed to you. If you could turn, please, to tab 35 in that folder.
5 Do you have that document?
6 A. Yes.
7 MR. EMMERSON: And for Your Honours, this is annex 10 to
8 Mr. Zlatkovic's witness statement.
9 Q. Can we just be clear, Mr. Zlatkovic, that this is a document you,
10 yourself, wrote, isn't it?
11 A. Yes, it is. This is in the form of a report delivered to the
12 district public prosecutor in Pec along with the criminal report.
13 Q. Thank you. And in this report you record a significant number of
14 what you say are attacks by the KLA on Serb MUP patrols, don't you,
15 amongst other things?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Now, I want to just look at some of those with you, if I may, for
18 a moment or two. Now, the first one I want -- and I'm going to go through
19 them as far as I can in chronological order. I think you can confirm, can
20 you, please, that the entries in your record here are not, in fact, in
21 chronological order. They jump about in time a little.
22 A. It's possible.
23 Q. Yes. Well, the first -- the first entry I want to ask you about
24 is in the English translation at page 8, and for you, if you look at the
25 numbers in the top right-hand corner of the B/C/S version, can you see
1 that there is a number beginning U0167, do you see that, at the top
2 right-hand corner of each page? Do you see that number beginning --
3 A. 0167, is that it?
4 Q. Yes, that's the one.
5 A. 7573?
6 Q. Yes, what I -- that is, in fact, the page I want to ask you to
7 look at but if you can concentrate on the last three digits, I'm going to
8 take you to a number of pages. And if you just look at the last three
9 digits at the top right-hand corner, we're looking now at the one that
10 ends 573, and that's an entry which bears a reference of KU 196/98. Do
11 you have that one? Do you see that? It's the second full paragraph on
12 573, Mr. Zlatkovic. Are you on page 573? Do you see the second full
13 entry? Each of them has a separate serial number --
14 A. Yes. 196 through 198, yes.
15 Q. Yes, that's the one. I want you to remind yourself about the
16 format of this document because we're going to need to go through quite a
17 number of those entries, and I would like you to start with that one,
18 please. Does that record that on the 9th of August, at about 7.30 in the
19 evening in the Biteska Cuka sector, Gjakove municipality, an ethnic
20 Albanian DTG carried out a terrorist attack, firing at members of the
21 Serbian MUP. Do you see that?
22 A. Yes, I do.
23 Q. Can you tell us where is the Biteska Cuka sector?
24 A. Biteska Cuka is above Babaloc, between the villages of Babaloca,
25 Glodjane, Savara [phoen] and Erec?
1 Q. Let's just be clear: There were two large hills between
2 Lake Radoniq and the main road. There's Erecka Suka which is next to the
3 village of Babaloc?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. And there's -- and there is Suka Bitesh which is immediately on
6 the banks of the lake, on the western side. Is that correct?
7 A. Above Babaloc itself and it stretches towards Lake Radonjic, it
8 stretches in the direction of Lake Radonjic. But Radonjic Lake is on the
9 left-hand side. Lake Radonjic touches on Biteska Cuka and the bodies were
10 found at the entrance to the canal, that's when we look towards the east
11 on the left-hand side, that's where the corpses were found.
12 Q. I understand. Lake Radoniq is immediately adjacent to Biteska
13 Cuka, do you agree with that?
14 A. Yes, I do.
15 Q. So does it follow from this entry that on the 9th of August there
16 was a Serbian MUP unit in the Suka Bitesh sector?
17 A. It's possible. I wasn't there at the time, but it's possible,
18 yes, because preparations were carried out for the final assault against
19 the terrorists, and to get to Lake Radonjic at any cost because there was
20 information that there were corpses there.
21 Q. Yes, I see, but you've told us just a few moments ago that on the
22 9th of August the MUP did not manage to penetrate any further east of the
23 main road than Prilep. That was your evidence just a few moments ago.
24 It's not true, is it, Mr. Zlatkovic?
25 A. The truth is that from Prilep you couldn't enter; that's the
1 truth. But we reached Biteska Cuka with the fighting because Stojan was a
2 wounded policeman and several other policemen were wounded, so one unit
3 reached Biteska Cuka.
4 Q. Just one unit?
5 A. Well, that unit, the one where the man was wounded. Perhaps there
6 was another unit that arrived. I don't know. I wasn't there. I just
7 conducted an on-site investigation where the people had been killed and
8 gathered the necessary information to file criminal reports, operational
9 information I mean.
10 Q. So you conducted an on-site --
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. And when was that done?
13 A. After the fighting had stopped.
14 Q. I see. And when was that? How long after the incident occurred?
15 A. As soon as it was reported. The team from Djakovica set out
16 straight away for the location. We couldn't find the man there because
17 he'd been transported to hospital straight away and he's an invalid to
18 this day. He comes from the region I come from.
19 Q. So you managed to get there on the same day, did you, the 9th of
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. And just exactly where was it that this incident had happened in
23 relation to Suka Bitesh?
24 A. Behind Biteska Cuka is the village of Erec. Now, how far it is,
25 how many kilometres, I really can't say. I don't know.
1 Q. Just help us, was it in the village of Erec that this alleged
2 attack took place?
3 A. The police prepared its units to launch an assault on the
4 terrorist groups, and it set out in the early hours of the morning. The
5 first incident took place in Erec village when the terrorist group
6 attacked the police that was moving along the Djakovica-Decani road, and
7 that's where they started out from.
8 Q. Could you help me for a moment, please, by looking at entry
9 KU 220, which you will find --
10 MR. EMMERSON: For Your Honours, it is page 10 of the English.
11 Q. And for you, Mr. Zlatkovic, it is page 574. And you'll find it --
12 you'll find it just about -- just below halfway down page 574.
13 A. KU, what did you say?
14 Q. KU 220/98. Do you have that one?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Does that record that on the same day, on the 9th of August, an
17 ethnic Albanian DTG carried out a terrorist attack on members of the
18 Serbian MUP who were carrying out regular assignments near Gllogjan [sic]
19 village, Decani municipality?
20 A. That's what it says, yes. "In this terrorist attack
21 Slobodan Veljkovic, Pristina policeman, sustained a injury."
22 Q. What does the word "regular assignments" when you use it in this
23 report, Mr. Zlatkovic?
24 A. In this report, when the term "regular assignments" is used,
25 regular assignments of the police force mean to maintain law and order and
1 to patrol the area and uncover the perpetrators of crimes. At this point
2 in time the perpetrators of the crimes were terrorists because they had
3 kidnapped people previously and killed people and mistreated people, and
4 so on and so forth. So it was the task of the police to find them and to
5 arrest them, and if they put up resistance then quite obviously the police
6 would retaliate in that case.
7 Q. So it was a regular patrol in the area near to Gllogjan; is that
9 A. A regular unit set out from Djakovica with the intention of
10 liberating the road, and then they divided up into different patrols and
11 that's how the conflict and clash came about.
12 Q. Perhaps if we could just, whilst we're on the same -- in the same
13 approximate area, if we could look at page 578 for you and page 6 in the
14 English translation -- I'm sorry, I do apologise, page 15 in the English
15 translation. Do you see an entry that reads KU 406?
16 A. Yes, I do, 406/98, the 9th of August, 1998, at around 1300 hours.
17 Q. So does it appear from that entry that there was a MUP patrol in
18 Dujak on the 9th of August?
19 A. Yes, in all villages. It blocked off all the villages.
20 Q. Sorry, what blocked off all the villages?
21 A. The members of the police force, and I said at the beginning that
22 the communication route between Pec, the road between Pec, Decani, and
23 Djakovica had been taken over for months. Now, in addition to the fact
24 that the road had been taken control of, many people had also been
25 kidnapped, a lot of people had been kidnapped. So the police decided to
1 settle accounts with the terrorists and uncover the perpetrators and free
2 the people who had been kidnapped. So that's why they set out in
3 organised fashion and the units were divided up into patrols and other
4 smaller units, whatever you like to call them --
5 Q. Thank you --
6 A. -- squads, et cetera.
7 Q. Thank you, thank you --
8 A. -- But there was shooting from all these villages.
9 Q. Thank you. Could you look at the following entry, please, 430/98.
10 Does that indicate that on the 10th of August there was a MUP patrol in
11 the village of Bitesh?
12 A. Yes, that's right.
13 Q. Thank you. And there were two Biteshes, both very close to one
14 another. Donji Bites and then there's a very small village called Gornji
15 Bites. Which Bites would this be a reference to in your document?
16 A. In this document it is Donji Bites.
17 Q. Donji Bites is immediately on the banks of Lake Radoniq, isn't it?
18 A. No, no. Gornji Bites is on the banks of Lake Radonjic, whereas
19 Donji Bites is near Biteska Cuka, above this --
20 Q. Well, Mr. Zlatkovic, we --
21 A. -- Above this.
22 Q. Mr. Zlatkovic, we all have maps in this case in this courtroom and
23 I'm not going to take time showing you a map, but I suggest to you that
24 Donji Bites is immediately to the western side of Lake Radoniq and,
25 indeed, the closest village to the shores of Lake Radoniq on its western
1 side. That's true, isn't it?
2 A. Possibly, possibly. I spent there a year and a half -- well, you
3 can see it from the map and I'll point out where it happened, if you like.
4 Q. Why did you say in your witness statement at paragraph 34 that
5 during the operation on the 9th of August, the MUP did not go to the
6 Lake Radoniq area, Mr. Zlatkovic, why did you say that in your witness
8 A. Well, I said it because you couldn't reach Lake Radonjic because
9 it was fiercely defended. Lake Radonjic was fiercely defended.
10 Q. There were Serbian forces stationed on Suka Bitesh, the hill
11 immediately to the west of Lake Radoniq and overlooking Bitesh village,
12 weren't there?
13 A. Yes, but do you know how far the distance is from that point to
14 the site where the dead people were found?
15 Q. I'm not asking about dead people; I'm asking about your witness
16 statement, Mr. Zlatkovic, where you categorically state that: On the 9th
17 of August operation, the MUP did not go to the Lake Radoniq area and did
18 not enter any further than Prilep, and it's not true, is it?
19 A. That is true, but you're trying to mislead me now.
20 Q. No I'm not. You're, with respect, trying to mislead us, with
21 respect --
22 A. -- trying to confuse me.
23 Q. Not at all --
24 A. No, I'm speaking very sincerely, most sincerely. I don't wish to
25 add anything because I've taken the solemn declaration not to add anything
1 or to subtract anything, but just to tell the truth.
2 Q. I see. Well, could you -- since that is your approach,
3 Mr. Zlatkovic, could you turn to page 574 in this document.
4 MR. EMMERSON: And for Your Honours, this is page 8 of the English
5 translation -- I'm sorry, page 9 of the English translation. I do
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] 574, yes, thank you, I've found it.
8 MR. EMMERSON:
9 Q. Do you have an entry that reads 217 on that page?
10 A. 217, yes, I see it.
11 Q. Does that tell you that on the 11th of August there is a reported
12 attack by the KLA? Do you see that?
13 A. Yes, yes, near the village of Glodjane, Decani municipality, and
14 serious life-threatening injuries were sustained, et cetera, and
15 Djuro Vabros of the Novi Sad SAJ was injured. Yes, I do see that.
16 Q. So that says -- you are there recording the presence of SAJ,
17 anti-terrorist forces in and around the area of Gllogjan on the 11th of
19 A. Yes, they were deployed then. They weren't deployed when the
20 first attack came and when Otovic was killed, but otherwise they were
21 deployed because they are, indeed, anti-terrorist forces.
22 Q. And there they were in the area around Gllogjan; correct?
23 A. No. The shooting came from Glodjane. It says at 07 hours,
24 members -- on the 11th of August, 1998, at 0700 hours, members of the DTG
25 of ethnic Albanian DTG carried out a terrorist attack firing a mortar on
1 members of the Serbian MUP who were carrying out their regular duties and
2 assignments near Glodjane village, Decani municipality. In this terrorist
3 attack, a serious life-threatening injuries were sustained by
4 Mile Nikolic, member of the Novi Sad SAJ, while Djuro Vabros, member of
5 the Novi Sad SAJ was seriously injured, which means that a mine had been
6 launched from a mortar. You know that Decani Glodjane is not a long way
7 away from each other.
8 Q. I'm sorry, are you suggesting that this incident took place in
10 A. No, no, not in Decani. No, it wasn't in Decani. It was from the
11 Glodjane direction that the mine was launched. Now, whether they were 500
12 metres away from the road leading to Glodjane or whether they were on the
13 road itself, on the communication route, I can't say. I don't know.
14 Q. And the following entry, Mr. Zlatkovic, records a further incident
15 that day --
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson.
17 MR. EMMERSON: I'm sorry.
18 JUDGE ORIE: I'm mainly interested in where the targeted people
19 were. Could you please explore that with the witness.
20 MR. EMMERSON: Yes.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Because that's not entirely clear to me at this
23 MR. EMMERSON:
24 Q. Could you help us with that, please, Mr. Zlatkovic. The entry
25 you've just been looking at refers to members of the Serbian MUP who were
1 carrying out regular duties and assignments near Glodjane village. Do you
2 see that? Where were --
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Where were they, these SAJ officers, when the attack occurred on
5 the 11th of August?
6 A. It was a mixed unit, and they set up check-points along the road,
7 to ensure free passage of traffic along the road. There were points at
8 Prilep at the beginning of the village and check-points in Rastavica as
9 well and by the roadside in Drenovac and so on.
10 Q. Yes. You make it very clear in these entries when you're talking
11 about Prilep and Drenovac and Carrabreg where specifically were these SAJ
12 members you've recorded being on patrol near Gllogjan? When they were
13 attacked, where were they?
14 A. They were there, by the road --
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson --
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- I can't tell you exactly.
17 JUDGE ORIE: The witness answered that question. He said they
18 were -- after he said it was a mixed unit, that they were -- "they set up
19 check-points along the road." I understood that answer to be that they
20 were therefore along the road setting up check-points to ensure free
21 passage, and I understood the reference to Gllogjan as on the road near to
23 MR. EMMERSON: I see.
24 JUDGE ORIE: More in the direction of Decan or Djakovica. That's
25 how I understood the answer. Please proceed.
1 MR. EMMERSON: I see.
2 Q. Can I be absolutely clear that we've understood your testimony
3 correct. Are you saying that this incident occurred on the main road?
4 A. No, no. This is how it was: The main road -- well, as what
5 happened happened on the 9th of August, the units of Mr. Ramush Haradinaj
6 and the rest withdrew deeper towards Lake Radonjic, towards Lake Radonjic.
7 The Visnjarnik area or the cherry orchards or whatever and towards
8 Jablanica. Now, the police, at 100 or 200 metres in front of the mosque,
9 I remember that they set up a police check-point in front of the mosque in
10 Prilep and there was another check-point 2 or 300 metres away from the
11 road. Now, from up there they shot and probably the mine fell there, and
12 the truth of it was that people were wounded. Now, whether this was done
13 by this one or that one, I really don't know. But there were Ramush's
14 forces there, in that part.
15 Q. I see. And -- and if we could just look at page 573 for a moment
16 in your report, which for us is on page 9 in the English again. At 205 --
17 do you have the entry KU 205, where you describe an incident taking place
18 in Gramaqel? What does the reference to Gramaqel village mean there on
19 the 10th of August, this is KU --
20 A. Let me just take a minute to find it, please.
21 Q. KU 205, which you'll find at page 573 in your version.
22 A. I've found it.
23 Q. Yes. And that refers, does it not, to an incident that took place
24 in Gramaqel village?
25 A. Yes, yes.
1 Q. And can you help us with that, was that an incident also that took
2 place along the main road but somewhere near to Gramaqel or was that in
3 the village itself?
4 A. That was also the road leading towards Dubrava, Babaloc,
5 Gramocelj -- it was all in the same operation, that same action. There
6 was an action underway, and that's when it happened.
7 Q. Let me see if I've understood your evidence correctly, but there
8 are aspects of it that I'm finding a little difficult to follow. Is it
9 your evidence that there were forces that penetrated into Gramaqel this
10 operation? As far as Gramaqel --
11 A. Yes, that's right.
12 Q. As far as Dubrava, yes?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. As far as Gllogjan?
15 A. Up until the entrance to Glodjane and the terrorist group withdrew
16 to where I told you.
17 Q. And as far as the village of Bitesh?
18 A. Bites is to the right.
19 Q. And Dujak as well?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Yes. You see, Mr. Zlatkovic, these incidents that you've recorded
22 as having taken place between the 9th and the 12th of August, these all
23 occurred in the context of a major military offensive involving joint
24 operations between the VJ and the MUP to clear that area of the KLA,
25 didn't they?
1 A. I saw the police but I didn't see the army so I don't know whether
2 the army took part. Let me repeat again. All I did was to carry out on
3 on-site investigation, not only to see where the Serb forces had been
4 killed or civilians, but the Albanians, too. It was my task to go with
5 the investigative judge, if it was safe for an investigative judge to come
6 in from Pec, it was my task to carry out the on-site investigation and to
7 transform the bodies for a post mortem to be able to see what they had
8 died of, and then to hand over the bodies to their families, if the
9 families came forward; if not, then the procedure was instituted as is
10 customary with dead bodies. So it was my job to carry out an on-site
11 investigation. If there was no investigative judge present, then I had to
12 go on to the locality with an escort, of course, and do my job. Now,
13 whether the army took part or not, I don't know. Perhaps it did. Perhaps
14 they took part somewhere over there in the mountains, I don't know. What
15 I saw was the police forces.
16 Q. In the investigations you conducted into each of these incidents
17 between the 9th and the 12th of August, is it your evidence that you were
18 not aware that there was a major joint military and MUP operation to sweep
19 through that area and take control of Gllogjan at that time? You didn't
20 know that?
21 A. I knew that there was an operation underway, but I didn't see the
22 army. I saw just one tank, and I say that in my statement. When we
23 arrive for the first time in Glodjane and when we found, or rather,
24 Lake Radonjic by the canal when we found the dead bodies, then a military
25 tank --
1 Q. Mr. Zlatkovic, let --
2 A. -- went in front of the police and it cleared the area.
3 Q. I apologise for interrupting you, I apologise for interrupting
4 you, but that is a much later --
5 A. Yes, yes, that's all right.
6 Q. -- That is a much later part of your account, that deals with what
7 happened in September. I'm asking you about the 9th of August and the
8 period between the 9th and 12th and the question I'm trying to get you to
9 answer, if I may, please, since you investigated each of these incidents
10 did you not become aware in the course of your investigations that there
11 was a major offensive, a Serbian offensive taking place, and that these
12 people were casualties of that offensive?
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
14 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] Mr. President, the witness has
15 already testified that he did not remember that, and the same question is
16 asked again. I can't see how he could answer in a different way.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Well, Mr. Dutertre, this last comment which is not
19 Could you please tell us whether you ever became aware during your
20 investigations that it was a major offensive and that the army was
21 involved in it as well?
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I can't say anything on
23 that score. What I'm telling you is this: Perhaps later on when there
24 was the NATO aggression, perhaps then the army took part, but on this
25 occasion I didn't see the army except once and I said this in my
1 statement, I saw them previously, and I'm sure it says so here and I don't
2 mind standing by that because that is what I said, but that there was some
3 offensive underway, well, I don't know. Possibly, but I didn't see it. I
4 just did not see it. All I know is the police took part, it took part
5 with the weapons that a police force is issued with.
6 JUDGE ORIE: You emphasised and you made a clear distinction
7 between what you saw and what you perhaps learned. Now, when you made
8 these investigations, apart from what you saw, did you become aware, in
9 whatever way, at that moment or in these days that the army was involved
10 in the operations?
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, I was not aware of this. I
12 didn't learn of that.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Because I went last -- I apologise
15 for interrupting, but let me say I went last when everything was over.
16 When everything was over, I would come in last to carry out an on-site
17 investigation and I saw the police check-points.
18 MR. EMMERSON:
19 Q. Just so I understand you were investigating the circumstances in
20 which these people had died, weren't you?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Can you just look, please, behind tab 31 in the brown file. Now,
23 if you can look at this document with me, if you will, for a moment. It
24 is an order issued by Colonel Dragan Zivanovic of the 125th Motorised
25 Brigade of the VJ based in Peje dated the 8th of August, and can you see
1 that the objective is described at the top in the following words:
2 "Immediately begin preparations to provide support to MUP forces" -- do
3 you have that?
4 A. Yes, yes, yes, immediately.
5 Q. Just bear with me.
6 "Immediately begin preparations to provide support to MUP forces
7 fighting DTS in the general area of Glodjane village."
8 Do you see that?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. And if we could just look down here, please, at 2.6 and 2.7. Do
11 you see there there is a reference to: "BG," fighting group, "52 with
12 reinforcements shall support the attack of the main forces of the MUP 2nd
13 Detachment, Pristina CPJP company and SAJ on the axis of Radonjicka Suka
14 to Saptej to Rznic, and with part of its forces shall participate in
15 coordinated action on the axis of Donji Bites to Gramocelj to Saptej."
16 Do you see that?
17 A. I see that, but I never had access to that.
18 Q. Yes, thank you. I'm not asking you whether you did. Can you look
19 at 2.7, please.
20 "BG-549 shall support the attack of the MUP 9th Detachment and the
21 Prizren CPJP on the axis of Erec village-Erecka Suma-Babaloc-Rastavica."
22 Do you see that?
23 A. Yes, I see it.
24 Q. You told us a few minutes ago in the incident that I took you to
25 on the 9th of August in the area around Erecka Suka that you had gone the
1 same day on the 9th of August into that area; is that right?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. And did you investigate each of these incidents that you've
4 recorded on the 9th, the 10th, and the 11th of August in that area on the
5 same day at around the same time?
6 A. Certainly I did, yes.
7 Q. Thank you. I'd understood your testimony then that you never saw
8 any VJ forces at all in that area at that time; correct?
9 A. I still maintain that I never did. Perhaps they carried out that
10 attack earlier on and then left.
11 Q. I see. Before you got there on the 9th?
12 A. Yes, yes. Because when the fighting is over and the road is safe,
13 that's when I go, unless it's an exceptional case or something is urgent.
14 In this case there was fighting, and then I went there later on.
15 Q. Leaving the VJ aside, did you know that there was a coordinated
16 attack involving the MUP, the SAJ, and the PJP to sweep through those
17 villages and take control of them and that that's the context in which
18 these incidents occurred? Did you know that?
19 A. I didn't know that.
20 Q. You see because they've been made in your report, if you forgive
21 me for suggesting it to you, they've been made in your report to appear as
22 though these are unprovoked terrorist attacks on MUP going about their
23 regular patrolling duties, haven't they? That's how you've recorded them
24 in your report. Would you agree with that?
25 A. Yes, yes, yes. That's how I recorded it and that's certainly how
1 it was, because let me tell you this was not a divided territory. At that
2 time the police was still controlling that area and it had to go in to see
3 what was happening. I'm not blaming either of the sides for the incident.
4 One side thought the police shouldn't go in, the other side felt the
5 police should go in. It was up to me to carry out an on-site
6 investigation subsequently.
7 Q. But you stick to your evidence that these forces never entered
8 Gllogjan at that time?
9 A. I don't understand what forces are you referring to.
10 Q. The MUP, the SAJ, they never entered Gllogjan?
11 A. It's possible that they got as far as Mr. Ramush's house. It's
12 possible they were there, but they never got to Lake Radonjic. Because
13 right after that the same thing started up again. They might have got as
14 far as Ramush's house, but I don't know that.
15 Q. Yes. You see, I began my cross-examination of you, Mr. Zlatkovic,
16 by asking you about the first sentence in paragraph 28 in your witness
17 statement where you make a categorical assertion that the police never
18 returned to Gllogjan between March and September. Now, what is the
19 position? Do you know the answer to that question one way or the other?
20 A. I know the answer that the police was unable to reach
21 Lake Radonjic from the time Otovic was killed until the time they did get
22 there in September. That's all I know. I don't know anything else.
23 Q. Can I just play you a piece of videotape, please, briefly. You'll
24 have to watch the screen for a moment.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson, you are playing from --
1 MR. EMMERSON: I'm playing from the BBC video, Your Honour --
2 JUDGE ORIE: Just for the record.
3 MR. EMMERSON: It's tab 23 in the brown file, the transcript is
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Have you provided the transcript to the --
6 MR. EMMERSON: The transcript is in the brown file at tab 23,
7 which the interpreters have.
8 JUDGE ORIE: And then we are following the usual procedure, that
9 is, one of the interpreters reading and the other interpreter translating
10 on the basis of the transcript.
11 MR. EMMERSON: Thank you.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
13 [Videotape played]
14 "The Serbs know that they have the upper hand and they're
15 determined to press home the advantage. This time it was the village of
16 Glodjane in flames, shelled and machine-gunned into submission. On the
17 other side the KLA allowed us exclusive access to their new front line.
18 They're nervous but determined. Some of these men come from this village.
19 They know what's happened up ahead and that they now lie directly in the
20 path of the Serb offensive which has already removed the rebel fighters
21 from most of their strongholds in Kosovo. The waiting is tense, but
22 already it's clear that they won't have to wait long. The shells are now
23 falling on Rznic. Against artillery, there's little that the KLA has been
24 able to do but run. All this is happening while both sides consider peace
25 proposals and the international community struggles to find a way forward.
1 Despite the international diplomacy, the situation on the ground remains
2 unchanged. The Serbs are still pressing their offensive, the KLA still
3 defending their villages and communities. The Serbs, of course, don't see
4 it that way. They insist that the rebel fighters are the problem, and
5 without them so much misery and destruction could have been avoided. Here
6 it's the paramilitary police that are bearing down on the KLA. In other
7 places we saw heavily armed units of the Army of Yugoslavia. The Serbs
8 say they now regard this as a mopping-up operation. For the KLA it's
9 becoming a battle for survival. When there is fighting, there are, of
10 course, more refugees. Almost 200.000 people have been made homeless by
11 this conflict. The aid agencies have been hoping that they would return
12 to their villages. What's happened today makes that a very distant
13 prospect. Jeremy Cooke, BBC news, Rznic, Kosovo."
14 MR. EMMERSON: Thank you. End it there. Thank you very much.
15 Has the translation caught up?
16 JUDGE ORIE: No, no, no.
17 MR. EMMERSON:
18 Q. Mr. Zlatkovic, the Serbian offensive that swept through this area
19 between the 9th and 12th of August took control of Gllogjan and Irzniq and
20 all the area surrounding it, didn't it?
21 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] Objection, could we please know
22 what is meant by "the area surrounding it"?
23 MR. EMMERSON: Very well, I'll put the question more specifically.
24 Q. Mr. Zlatkovic, the Serbian offensive that swept through the area
25 to the east of the main Peje to Gjakove road between the 9th and the 12th
1 of August took control of the villages of Gllogjan and Irzniq, did it not?
2 A. I think -- well, this is a news report and I see both sides there.
3 And whenever there's fighting, civilians flee. I'm not a politician. I
4 was only a member of the police carrying out on-site investigations. I
5 was not interested in who was right here. The members of the KLA were
6 fighting to have their own government, their own --
7 Q. Forgive me --
8 A. -- their own authorities which they did not have the right to at
9 the time.
10 Q. Forgive me for interrupting you again. I'm not asking you to
11 express an opinion on the rights and wrongs. I'm asking you to confirm,
12 please, that you know that the Serbian offensive at that time took control
13 of Gllogjan and Irzniq.
14 A. It wasn't just the Serbian offensive. Both sides were shooting at
15 each other; that's how it was in my view --
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Zlatkovic, that is not the core of the question.
17 The core of the question is whether the Serb forces during those --
18 whether you call them skirmishes or battles or doesn't matter, whether
19 they finally gained control over Irzniq and Gllogjan. That's the
20 question -- or at least went as far as into the village of Irzniq and
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, judging by this
23 footage, most probably they got on to the foot-hills of those villages. I
24 can see that on this footage, and then they set up those check-points in
25 front of the mosque in Prilep or near the school in Rznic or in front of
1 the school, I'm not sure exactly where, and so on. But what I'm saying is
2 they never reached Lake Radonjic. They certainly got to the outskirts of
3 the village because the people withdrew. They saw that there was strong
4 forces, they withdrew towards Jablanica, wherever it was that they went,
5 and they took that area, those people, and set up check-points, but they
6 weren't left there in peace, they were attacked right away either from --
7 by snipers or from mortars. So there was always sporadic firing, and they
8 kept causing problems for us, for us who were supposed to go out on to the
9 field and carry out on-site investigations because we weren't safe.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that is all understood. Mr. Emmerson is just
11 testing your statement where you say that since the 24th of March that the
12 police never came back to Gllogjan, whereas it now -- I do understand that
13 your testimony is that in early August they never reached Lake Radonjic,
14 which of course is not exactly the same, but that's how I now understand
15 your testimony. Is that well understood?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, they couldn't exercise
17 control in Glodjane, function normally, mount patrols, communicate with
18 the citizens --
19 JUDGE ORIE: Again, I have to interrupt you. The question simply
20 is -- I'm not asking how long they stayed there, but the question is
21 whether they in this -- well, let's say around the 10th of August, whether
22 the forces went as far as Gllogjan entering the village. I do understand
23 that you say they could not function there normally, that's all
24 understood. But the question is whether they ever reached that village in
25 that period of time, yes or no. And I now, from your emphasis, on that
1 they did not reach Lake Radonjic, I do understand that you are not
2 testifying anymore that they never reached at that moment in time the
3 village of Gllogjan and the village of Irzniq. Is that correctly
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Then I have one additional question for you in this
7 context, and that is the following. Mr. Emmerson has put to you a
8 document which describes in some detail as how the MUP, that is police
9 forces, and the VJ would act together at this moment, at this moment in
10 time, that is, around the 10th of August, 1998. Mr. Emmerson also showed
11 you a BBC footage which shows -- well, substantial combat activity. Now,
12 I'd like to again put the question to you whether you never got any clue
13 at this moment in time when you were doing, during a couple of days, your
14 on-site investigations, whether you never got a clue from the presence of
15 the VJ and combined operations in that area.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I did not get any such clues or
17 indications that the VJ participated. It's possible they did. As this
18 document exists, they certainly did, but I did not see them myself. Well,
19 this document shows that they participated.
20 JUDGE ORIE: And the images you saw on this BBC footage, is that
21 what you would under normal circumstances be the image you would see if
22 there's a police operation going on, just police operation?
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I saw the KLA there, the
24 police on the footage, and the anti-terrorist unit, those in the grey
25 camouflage uniforms and bandannas on their heads, that was the
1 anti-terrorist unit. The BBC said it was a paramilitary unit. I don't
2 know how they could say that, but both those units participated, the
3 anti-terrorist unit and the police, which was then called the PJP.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
5 Mr. Emmerson, I'm looking at the clock.
6 MR. EMMERSON: Yes.
7 JUDGE ORIE: It's time for a break. Could you give us an
8 indication as far as time is concerned?
9 MR. EMMERSON: Yes. I mean, in real terms I've got two
10 significant areas to touch upon. One is the process of interrogation that
11 took place --
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
13 MR. EMMERSON: -- and the second is the canal itself. I would
14 have thought I'm likely to have another -- obviously entirely subject to
15 the Trial Chamber's direction another hour, hour and 15 minutes.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, which would mean that we could not conclude
17 today. We will consider that and if you would please already prepare for
18 speeding up.
19 MR. EMMERSON: Yes.
20 JUDGE ORIE: This is not any anticipation of what the Chamber will
21 decide --
22 MR. EMMERSON: Can I indicate that we are expecting to save some
23 time later in the week with a witness who is currently due to give
24 evidence via videolink and who may well, we anticipate, be able to be
25 reduced to an attestation of a 92 ter statement --
1 JUDGE ORIE: Is it 92 ter or --
2 MR. GUY-SMITH: 92 bis.
3 JUDGE ORIE: That was my information that you were considering
4 92 bis rather than 92 ter. That -- we'll keep that in mind and we'll also
5 look at how much time will be saved by that.
6 We'll have a break until ten minutes past 1.00.
7 --- Recess taken at 12.48 p.m.
8 --- On resuming at 1.17 p.m.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson, in view of the latest information the
10 Chamber received, we'll not insist on you speeding up. Of course the same
11 is true for other Defence counsel. This at the same time is not an
12 invitation to slow down unnecessarily. Please proceed.
13 MR. EMMERSON:
14 Q. Mr. Zlatkovic, I want to just conclude the questions I was asking
15 you, please, about the Serbian military offensive between 9th and 12th
16 August, 1998, by suggesting to you that in consequence of that the KLA was
17 driven out of the entire area around Gllogjan and did not even begin to
18 return until sometime in the area of the 20th of August?
19 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] I would like to know what counsel
20 means by the territory -- "the entire area around Gllogjan".
21 MR. EMMERSON:
22 Q. Let me confine the question to Gllogjan itself for a moment, then.
23 I want to suggest to you, Mr. Zlatkovic, that the KLA was driven out of
24 Gllogjan in this offensive and that it was not for several weeks that
25 reports began to reach Gjakove police station that they were beginning to
1 return and re-organise?
2 A. It's possible they were driven out of Glodjane, but they withdrew
3 only as far as the Perimi [phoen] farm in Rznic and the canal, and they
4 may have crossed the canal in the direction of Ratis. It's possible, but
5 I wasn't there to see for myself whether they had been driven out of
6 Glodjane or not, but it's a small difference, a few kilometres.
7 Q. You know who Zarko Bacetic is?
8 A. Bajcetic, Zarko Bajcetic, yes, I do know. I know. The chief of
9 the state security in Djakovica -- in fact, he was an advisor, he wasn't
10 really the chief. Sreten Camovic was the chief.
11 Q. Are you aware that he has testified in this court that there were
12 armed engagements between the Serbs and the KLA in the area to the east of
13 the road including in the area around the canal itself between July and
14 October 1998?
15 JUDGE ORIE: Which road are you referring to?
16 MR. EMMERSON:
17 Q. I'm sorry. The main road. The area around the east of the main
18 Peje to Gjakove road, including in the area around the canal where the
19 bodies were found. Did you know that he had given that testimony?
20 A. I don't know what Zarko Bajcetic said. I'm telling you what
21 happened. He could have said anything.
22 Q. Are you --
23 JUDGE ORIE: For our assistance, could you give us date and --
24 MR. EMMERSON: Yes, can I check that, Your Honour. It -- the last
25 part of the answer that I'm citing was the re-examination of Mr. Bajcetic
1 by Ms. Issa.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, okay. I'll try to --
3 MR. EMMERSON: But I will --
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, okay. I'll try to find it. Thank you.
5 MR. EMMERSON:
6 Q. Could you turn, please, to tab 34 in the bundle, in the brown
7 bundle. I think you were shown this document shortly before you came to
8 testify by Mr. Dutertre. Is that correct?
9 A. Yes, yes.
10 Q. And you can confirm that it is a document dated the 20th of August
11 headed: "Official note," and that the legend at the top records it as
12 being a note of the RDB based in Gjakove; correct?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Two things I want to ask you about, if I may. First of all, the
15 very first entry, which obviously is some two weeks or so before the
16 arrests of Bekim Kalamashi and Zenelj Alija that you refer to in your
17 witness statement, can we be clear, were you, in fact, aware some two
18 weeks before those arrest of allegations that there were remains in the
20 A. The state security most probably learned that through their
22 Q. The question I was asking you was whether you were aware of it,
23 Mr. Zlatkovic.
24 A. I only heard about it. There were rumours that those people were
25 missing, and through various conversations we received some information
1 that most probably they had been put somewhere. One story said that they
2 had been buried at a cemetery and another one said that they had been
3 thrown into Lake Radonjic, into the lake itself. Those were the things we
4 heard from the people we talked to. It was most probably the state
5 security that got this information through their collaborators, through
6 their people, and they wrote an official note about it.
7 Q. But just to be clear, this is referring specifically to the canal,
8 isn't it, this entry?
9 A. The state security got information that this was in the canal, but
10 the people we talked to, some said they had been buried in Volujak, others
11 said they had been buried somewhere near the cemetery in Jablanica. There
12 were various stories going around, but it was only when we found them that
13 we knew. The state security most probably had specific information they
14 got through their collaborators, so they got this information in that way.
15 Q. Well, I want to look now, if I may, at the state of the assessment
16 of the KLA in this area at that time. Could you turn to page 2 in the
17 B/C/S, also page 2 in the English, and can you please start with the sixth
18 paragraph down, can you find a paragraph that begins: "We possess
19 operational intelligence that a certain number of the most extreme members
20 of the DTG ..."
21 Do you see that paragraph?
22 A. Yes, yes, yes.
23 Q. " ... most extreme members of the DTG are returning to their DTG
24 centres, after the most recent operations to break them up and clear the
25 terrain. Thus, according to our most recent intelligence, terrorist
1 groups have returned to," and then there's a list of places which includes
2 Gllogjan and Prilep, "where they are attempting to re-organise,
3 establishing guards, et cetera."
4 And then it goes on: "The secessionists are using their return
5 for propaganda purposes, 'raising the morale' of the bandits with phrases
6 like: 'The KLA is regaining its lost positions ... Capturing the
7 temporarily occupied territories from the Serbian foe ...'"
8 Do you see that?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. And the areas they are describing is not just Gllogjan and Prilep
11 but Jablanica and Crmljane; is that right?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Moving on to the eastern side of Lake Radoniq?
14 A. Yes, yes. On the eastern side.
15 Q. What I want to suggest to you that the KLA was effectively routed
16 in that early August operation and that Serb forces had control of this
17 entire area up to and including Lake Radoniq from the main road right the
18 way across?
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson, I've got some problems as far as the
20 time is concerned because the document says that they have returned.
21 MR. EMMERSON: Yes.
22 JUDGE ORIE: And that's unclear in your question as to when this
23 may have happened. So would you be -- please be very precise --
24 MR. EMMERSON: Yes.
25 JUDGE ORIE: -- not only in relation to the 9th and to the 12th
1 but also in relation to the 20th of August.
2 MR. EMMERSON: I think in the second line, it says: "Are
3 returning," of that paragraph and then --
4 JUDGE ORIE: The document might not be --
5 MR. EMMERSON: Perfectly translated.
6 JUDGE ORIE: -- Very -- might not be without confusion, and
7 therefore we should not add to that but rather try to make matters more
9 MR. EMMERSON:
10 Q. Let me put the suggestion at its most narrow, Mr. Zlatkovic.
11 There was a period of time after the 12th of August when Serb forces
12 remained in control of Gllogjan and the area around the canal.
13 A. I don't know whether they had control or not. They had their
14 check-points there. Those are check-points near the school in Rznic,
15 another near another school - what was its name now? - near the Visnjarnik
16 or cherry orchards, so that's where they were always fired on from. There
17 was always information coming in that they had been wounded there. But
18 what you say about Crmljane, the area of Crmljane, Rakovina was always
19 under attack from Crmljane. There was a check-point in Rakovina, so
20 almost always they were under attack. Several policemen were killed in
22 Q. Very well.
23 A. When I went there to carry out an on-site investigation when a
24 policeman was killed, I was in a Lada car with a red cross and it was
25 fired on from the bushes, and fortunately I survived but I was going with
1 the humanitarians.
2 Q. Yes, Mr. Zlatkovic, just to be clear, you've answered the question
3 that I put to you by saying: "I don't know whether they had control or
4 not. They had their check-points there" --
5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. --
6 MR. EMMERSON: I'm sorry.
7 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] Yes, this question is always --
8 already been asked of the witness I don't know how many times the question
9 is going to be put to him, and he said what he knew about it.
10 MR. EMMERSON: Very well.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Dutertre, I don't know what the next question
12 would be, because Mr. Emmerson only referred to the earlier answer and has
13 not put either the same or another question after that.
14 Please proceed, Mr. Emmerson.
15 MR. EMMERSON:
16 Q. So I just want to be clear. You said in answer to my question
17 when I put to you that the Serb forces remained in control of Gllogjan and
18 the area around the canal: "I do not know whether they had control or
20 Now, just to be clear, is that the position, is that the state of
21 your knowledge, you don't know one way or the other, Mr. Zlatkovic?
22 Because if that is the position please tell us so clearly.
23 A. The Serb forces had positioned a check-point in Prilep, and Prilep
24 is 2 or 3 kilometres away from Lake Radonjic. The Serb forces also puts
25 up a check-point by the school in Rznici, and that is also about a
1 kilometre and a half away. That's what I know. I know nothing more than
3 Q. So --
4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson --
5 MR. EMMERSON: Yes --
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Which means that Lake Radonjic was
7 not touched. They did not arrive there until September.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson, it turned out to be the same question
9 and it's the same answer as well. Please proceed.
10 MR. EMMERSON: I'm happy with that.
11 Q. How long was the check-point in Irzniq there for after the 12th of
13 A. Right up until the operation that was carried out at the end of
14 August and beginning of September, and then, once again, this was
15 established. And when the terrorist groups returned, other policemen were
16 killed there in 1999 and 1998 --
17 Q. Very well --
18 A. -- in Prilep, too.
19 Q. We're not --
20 A. Which means that they held control of that area, but the groups
21 were there. I don't know how many of them there were --
22 Q. Yes, but --
23 A. -- But there must have been some there since people were killed.
24 Q. We're not concerned about 1999. You've told us that there was a
25 police check-point in Irzniq between the 12th of August and the time when
1 you arrived at the canal; is that correct?
2 A. [No interpretation]
3 THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness repeat his answer, please.
4 MR. EMMERSON:
5 Q. Just repeat your answer.
6 A. Yes, the check-point did exist in Prilep and Rznic, but it's one
7 and a half kilometres away, perhaps even two kilometres away.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Zlatkovic, you were asked to repeat your answer
9 not because there was anything wrong but just because the interpreters
10 couldn't hear it, so there's no need to be irritated.
11 MR. EMMERSON:
12 Q. Yes, and was the --
13 A. Very well. Thank you.
14 Q. Was the Serbian check-point in Irzniq manned with people with
15 heavy weapons? Was it a -- an armed check-point?
16 A. It was an armed check-point with light weapons, and of course they
17 had hand-grenades and perhaps even hand mortar, but certainly rifles,
18 machine-guns, yes.
19 Q. Thank you. Thank you. Can I then come to the arrests on the 3rd
20 of September in Kodralija of Bekim Kalamashi and Zenelj Alija. You say in
21 your witness statement, this is paragraphs 49 onwards, that you were
22 present throughout the interviewing process of those two men; is that
24 A. The interviews were conducting by people who knew the Albanian
25 language. I just controlled what were -- what they said and I entered
1 Zenelj Alija and Bekim Kalamashi's room. I would listen to what was being
2 discussed, and I would guide the people in the interview to ask the
3 questions, the proper questions. So I was present when both these people
4 were interviewed, but not throughout, just from time to time.
5 Q. I see. Did -- were you present when they were brought into the
6 police station?
7 A. Yes, I was.
8 Q. Bekim Kalamashi was in his underwear when he was brought into the
9 police station, wasn't he?
10 A. No.
11 Q. That's not true?
12 A. He certainly wasn't in his underwear. He was wearing a
14 Q. And was he brought in with other men?
15 A. Zenelj Alija and some other people.
16 Q. And were any of them stripped naked to their underwear when they
17 were brought in?
18 A. No, no. I didn't see them being stripped at all. How could we
19 interview them in underwear, without underwear? It's not civilised, it's
20 not humane. Where would you ever see anything like that take place?
21 Q. Well, Mr. Zlatkovic, I'm not going to comment on the evidence that
22 we've heard in that regard already, but I do want to suggest to you that
23 these men were beaten, beaten before they arrived at the police station
24 and beaten whilst they were there.
25 A. Bekim Kalamashi is a small guy. I don't believe that he could
1 have been beaten and he didn't have any injuries either, because I talked
2 to him first because he was a young boy, a young man. So I just wanted to
3 talk to him.
4 Q. Was it your decision to assign Rade Vlahovic to the interview
6 A. Rade Vlahovic was an inspector at that time, and he knew Albanian.
7 He knew it well because he lived in Donje Ratiste. So he spoke pure
8 Albanian and could interpret for us.
9 Q. Did these men not speak Serbian, the two people being interviewed?
10 A. Bekim Kalamashi didn't speak Serbian. Zenelj Alija knew a little
12 Q. And did you -- I'm looking at your witness statement at this
13 point. Did you make notes of these interviews as they were taking place?
14 A. Ranko Markovic, Rade Vlahovic, and Zivojin Stankovic did, whereas
15 I dealt with the matter on the basis of the notes that had been compiled
16 and on the basis of what I had heard.
17 Q. Could you just look at the last sentence of paragraph 51,
18 Mr. Zlatkovic, in your witness statement. Do you see that? And I ask you
19 the question again: Did you take notes during the interview process of
20 what was being said?
21 A. Perhaps there's just a mistake here in where it says I made notes.
22 I processed the subject matter, whereas it is the other men, Rade
23 Markovic, Ljubisa Novakovic, Zivojin Stankovic and the rest who made notes
24 and on the basis of those notes I dealt with the case and sent it on to
25 the prosecution. So that's it.
1 Q. So the answer is you did not make notes?
2 A. I dealt with the case, the crime report which I sent on to the
3 prosecutor on the basis of their statements.
4 Q. Mr. Zlatkovic, it's a reasonably straightforward question. If
5 your witness statement you have written the following words which you told
6 us this morning were true, namely you read the statement and would give
7 the same evidence on oath.
8 "I took notes of the responses that were translated to me by
9 them," that is by the police officers. My question is: Did you or did
10 you not take notes of the responses of the men who were being interviewed
11 as they were being translated to you, yes or no?
12 A. I did not say specifically for this case that I took notes, and I
13 state again that I dealt with the case with Rade Nikolic and another one
14 with Goran Mitic, but on the basis of the notes that were taken by others.
15 The notes exist in the case.
16 Q. I see. You've seen some witness statements that are signed by
17 Bekim Kalamashi and Zenelj Alija. Are those the notes that you're
18 referring to or were there other notes?
19 A. Those are the notes, they're statements, in fact.
20 Q. And so as each interview takes place, it's recorded in the form of
21 a statement, is it?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. I see. Can I ask you this, please: You've been shown two
24 statements signed by Bekim Kalamashi -- I'm sorry, it's two statements
25 attributed to Bekim Kalamashi, one signed and one unsigned --
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson, I'm looking at the clock. From what I
2 hear now I'm afraid that you would not finish in two minutes.
3 MR. EMMERSON: Your Honour may be right.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Perhaps we leave that until tomorrow.
5 MR. EMMERSON: Yes.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
7 Mr. Zlatkovic, we'll adjourn for the day.
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
9 JUDGE ORIE: We will continue tomorrow at 9.00 in --
10 Madam Registrar informed me, but it's the same courtroom. Yes. So we
11 would like to see you back tomorrow morning, 9.00, and we hope to conclude
12 your testimony tomorrow morning.
13 Madam Usher, could you --
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Oh, yes, I would like to instruct you that you should
16 not speak with anyone about the testimony you have given, nor about the
17 testimony still to be given. So don't speak with anyone about it. That's
18 my instruction.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I have nobody to speak to here in
20 The Hague.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Well, some people use telephones now and then,
22 Mr. Zlatkovic, so therefore --
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Don't worry, I won't, certainly not.
24 JUDGE ORIE: That's good to hear.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Heaven forbid.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Usher, would you please escort the witness out
2 of the courtroom.
3 [The witness stands down]
4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson, two small issues. First of all, you
5 put that question again to the witness where the witness said it might be
6 a translation problem.
7 MR. EMMERSON: Yes.
8 JUDGE ORIE: -- about taking notes. I observe, first of all, that
9 taking notes or producing a written statement, there's a lot of matters in
10 between. Sometimes you consistently take notes and make them a statement.
11 MR. EMMERSON: Yes.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Sometimes you write down a few things for yourself.
13 Of course, I'm not going -- do not know where you were heading for, but
14 notes is -- might easily lead to confusion, that's one.
15 Second, the witness said it might be a translation error. I take
16 it that you'll check that before we continue tomorrow.
17 MR. EMMERSON: In respect of that answer --
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, in respect of that --
19 MR. EMMERSON: -- I would certainly have that checked in relation
20 to the two sentences.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Then the witness testified that he saw special police
22 forces, KLA, but he didn't see any VJ persons on the BBC video. I hope
23 that you'll understand that this Chamber is not equipped well enough to
24 immediately see there in the distance we find the VJ --
25 MR. EMMERSON: No --
1 JUDGE ORIE: -- person. So therefore it's -- the video has been
2 played not once and has a certain importance for the case --
3 MR. EMMERSON: Yes.
4 JUDGE ORIE: -- to interpret the video properly --
5 MR. EMMERSON: Yes.
6 JUDGE ORIE: -- you're invited to carefully review the tape and to
7 draw our attention to the appearance of any VJ staff. And I am aware that
8 the Chamber has received evidence that earlier sometimes vehicles that
9 initially were perhaps green later on turned out to be blue, so therefore
10 if you don't see them, that's not absolute evidence that they are not
11 there --
12 MR. EMMERSON: No.
13 JUDGE ORIE: -- but if you can clearly see them, the Chamber would
14 like that you draw the attention of the Chamber to it.
15 MR. EMMERSON: There is some assistance, I think, to be derived
16 from the testimony of Colonel Crosland who viewed the video out of court
17 and made some comments about the people that he saw on the videotape.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Well, perhaps I should review it then.
19 MR. EMMERSON: And of course Your Honour will see there's evidence
20 on the videotape of shelling taking place on the village of Irzniq,
21 shelling being one of the functions of the VJ artillery rather than the
23 JUDGE ORIE: But not -- I cannot say that I've never seen any
24 shelling apart from exercised by VJ artillery so therefore. We'll then
25 certainly look at Colonel Crosland's explanation. Perhaps that's just a
1 suggestion. If you can clearly identify, perhaps it would not be a bad
2 idea to put that to the witness.
3 MR. EMMERSON: Can I indicate to Your Honour, on a completely
4 unrelated matter, that we will be filing in the next two hours a
5 response --
6 JUDGE ORIE: Iím aware that a, most likely, opposition to the
7 videolink will be filed.
8 MR. EMMERSON: And also a very brief response to the Prosecution's
9 objections concerning provisional release.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that's understood. We'll read that as soon as
12 Mr. Dutertre, any other procedural matter at this moment? I do
13 understand that most likely we'll run out of witnesses tomorrow halfway
14 the morning.
15 MR. DUTERTRE: [Interpretation] Absolutely. It is very unlikely
16 that the next witness be here. We're still waiting for written
17 confirmation. I could give you additional explanations if we were in
18 closed session, but I don't think he's going to come this week.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Then we'll adjourn until tomorrow morning, 9.00, same
21 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.48 p.m.,
22 to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 17th day of
23 July, 2007, at 9.00 a.m.