1 Wednesday, 29 August 2007
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.09 a.m.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning to everyone.
6 Mr. Registrar, would you please call the case.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. Good morning to
8 everyone in the courtroom. This is case number IT-04-84-T, the Prosecutor
9 versus Ramush Haradinaj et al.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
11 Mr. Emmerson.
12 MR. EMMERSON: Your Honour, at my request --
13 JUDGE ORIE: Perhaps, before we start, I'd like to first briefly
14 state what happened yesterday. At the end of our hearing, the electricity
15 supply was, although not completely, but partly interrupted which caused
16 most of the systems not to function anymore.
17 The last words that were recorded in our system was an answer of
18 the witness where he said: "Now, whether it coincides or whether it was
19 planned to be that way, the date coincides with the date of the meeting in
20 Oslo between," and there it stops.
21 What then happened is recorded by the court transcriber but has
22 not yet been uploaded in the system. The witness finished his answer. I
23 don't know whether this was the last question, but then I instructed the
24 witness, who understands some English, both about his duty not to discuss
25 with anyone his testimony and I adjourned. That will then soon appear now
1 in the system again. That's what happened yesterday.
2 Mr. Emmerson.
3 MR. EMMERSON: Yes, well --
4 JUDGE ORIE: You would like to raise --
5 MR. EMMERSON: -- the transcript I have, in fact, takes us to the
6 very end, including Your Honour's directions.
7 JUDGE ORIE: It could be that it is meanwhile there.
8 MR. EMMERSON: And I had risen to my feet yesterday as we were
9 about to adjourn, just to raise the question of timing, to which I now
10 return, in relation to this witness. I simply wanted to raise the issue
11 of how long the examination of this witness is likely to take and the
12 implications that that may have for the remainder of the week at this
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. As the Chamber expressed earlier, the Chamber
15 would like to finish with the two witnesses that are still scheduled for
16 this week.
17 Mr. Kearney, I don't know whether you could tell us how much time
18 you would need for the next witness.
19 MR. KEARNEY: Your Honour, as you know, the next witness
20 originally was a 92 bis witness. Our case in chief with that witness now
21 will be extremely short. We anticipate about 15 minutes.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Fifteen minutes.
23 MR. KEARNEY: And it will be our strong -- our strong preference
24 to finish him this week as well. We have -- this witness is already in
25 The Hague, and we have a witness starting -- that we hope to start at the
1 beginning of next week who has travelled some great distance. We believe
2 we cannot move him --
3 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. So, for the next witness, it would be
4 relatively short.
5 Could the Defence give an indication as to how much time it would
6 need for the next witness.
7 MR. EMMERSON: Also relatively short, I would have thought of
8 something in the region of 30 to 40 minutes.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Harvey, Mr. Guy-Smith.
10 MR. HARVEY: I think probably nothing from me.
11 MR. GUY-SMITH: I had indicated 15 to 20 minutes predicated on the
12 examination before mine, but it could be shorter than that, Your Honour.
13 JUDGE ORIE: How much time will the battle on the 92 ter statement
15 MR. EMMERSON: I can't answer that question at the moment, but it
16 certainly shouldn't take any court time.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. That's understood.
18 MR. GUY-SMITH: Hopefully, we will be able to expedite it once we
19 agree about the reasons that the witness has been called, because there's
20 a fair amount of information that's in the 92 ter statement. The dehors
21 of the stated reason for this witness's testimony.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Then that means that, for the next witness, we would
23 not need the whole of the day tomorrow. We also know that estimates
24 sometimes turn out to be real estimates but not always; so, therefore, in
25 view of what I heard, I would say one session at least, if not one and a
1 half, tomorrow should be reserved for the next witness. Of course, I have
2 read the 92 ter statement which was distributed already. I see a few
3 problems that could take some time.
4 MR. EMMERSON: Yes. I think Your Honour has already given some
5 indications in respect of that witness's 92 ter statement as to those
6 passages which should be removed and those passages which can't be adduced
7 without supporting material.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then this would mean, Mr. Emmerson, that if we
9 keep on the safe side that assuming that some time will be taken for
10 re-examination tomorrow, that if you would try to finish cross-examination
11 today, then we would --
12 MR. EMMERSON: Can I simply indicate, I've had an opportunity to
13 discuss this issue with my colleagues. I don't think that Mr. Guy-Smith
14 will have any questions or certainly many questions for this witness. I
15 understand that Mr. Harvey is likely to have some. My concern - and Your
16 Honour will have seen the breadth of the 92 ter statement - is that the
17 use of 92 ter with this witness has meant that the Prosecution's been in
18 the position to elicit his evidence in chief within a relatively short
19 time, but there are really quite a large number of issues that I need to
20 traverse with him in cross-examination.
21 And it would be -- again, obviously, I will always, as I always
22 do, abide by the Trial Chamber's rulings in respect of timing, but I had
23 indicated at the outset that this was one of the witnesses whose
24 cross-examination was likely to take some time. And, potentially, his
25 evidence has implications which cut across quite a large range of issues,
1 both generic and specific in relation to particular identified individuals
2 on the indictment. And I would want the opportunity, if possible, in this
3 particular instance to pursue those matters with him.
4 JUDGE ORIE: How much time do you assess you would need?
5 MR. EMMERSON: Well, having sliced off as much of the fat
6 overnight as I was able to over night, I was anticipating the first
7 session tomorrow being the concluding session.
8 JUDGE ORIE: If you would try to take one hour of tomorrow's first
9 session, and then --
10 MR. EMMERSON: Thank you very much. Thank you very much.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
12 Well, we have the witness not in yet.
13 Mr. Kearney.
14 MR. KEARNEY: Your Honour, regarding the 92 ter statement for this
15 witness, I just wanted to inform the Trial Chambers that the Court's
16 redactions have been inputted into those. The new redacted document is in
17 the process of being uploaded in e-court and should be ready this morning
18 for both the parties and Chambers.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you for that information.
20 Madam Usher, could you please escort the witness into the
21 courtroom. The curtains should be down when the witness enters the
23 MR. EMMERSON: Whilst that's being done, may I simply indicate, in
24 respect of Mr. Kearney's last comment, that it may be that further
25 redactions will be required, both in the light of evidence that was
1 elicited yesterday and in the light of evidence that was not, because the
2 indications that had been given yesterday morning incorporated in rulings
3 left the Prosecution to explore the foundation of certain passages which
4 Mr. Kearney chose not to explore in chief.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
6 MR. EMMERSON: So it may be in respect of those passages --
7 JUDGE ORIE: I take it you'll first discuss it briefly --
8 MR. EMMERSON: Of course.
9 JUDGE ORIE: -- with Mr. Kearney, and then see what remains --
10 MR. EMMERSON: I see what you are saying. The existing redacted
11 draft may not be the final one.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
13 Mr. Kearney, I take it you --
14 MR. KEARNEY: Yes. I'm happy to talk with counsel outside of
15 court today, Your Honour.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
17 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
18 JUDGE ORIE: It was my understanding that the witness was nearby,
19 but it turns out that he still has to climb a few stairs.
20 [The witness entered court]
21 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning, Witness 17.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning.
23 JUDGE ORIE: We have overcome the electricity-supply problems.
24 I'd like to remind you that you're still bound by the solemn declaration
25 you gave at the beginning of your testimony yesterday. Mr. Emmerson will
1 now continue his cross-examination.
2 Mr. Emmerson, please proceed.
3 MR. EMMERSON: Thank you.
4 WITNESS: WITNESS SST7/17 [Resumed]
5 [Witness answered through interpreter]
6 Cross-examination by Mr. Emmerson: [Continued]
7 Q. Witness 17, yesterday, Mr. Kearney asked you some questions about
8 the incident on the 4th of July when four FARK officers, who were en route
9 to collect weapons, became involved in a confrontation in Gllogjan. And
10 he asked you some questions about the effects of that incident on FARK
11 soldiers generally. You remember those questions from yesterday?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Now, in your 92 ter witness statement, you refer to a meeting that
14 took place the following day, at which that incident, amongst a number of
15 other issues, was discussed.
16 MR. KEARNEY: Your Honour, can I just ask my colleague to
17 reference a specific paragraph number when he's referring to the
18 statement, please.
19 MR. EMMERSON: 33.
20 Q. Now, I want to just remind you in respect of that meeting, in your
21 92 ter witness statement at paragraph 33, you indicate that at that
22 meeting Tahir Zemaj said that he wanted the incident that had occurred the
23 day before to be the first and the last of such incidents or he would be
24 unable to forget. (redacted)
1 Q. Is that correct, Witness 17?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Thank you. And you said that Mr. Haradinaj said at that meeting
4 that it would not be repeated, nothing like that would happen again; is
5 that correct?
6 A. Yes. He said that he was sorry about what happened and that would
7 not be repeated.
8 Q. Pause there. You can leave the statement to one side, Witness 17,
9 and simply refer to it if I ask you to look at a particular passage. If
10 you can, as best you can, answer the questions from your recollection. If
11 we need to turn to the documents, we will.
12 Now, we've seen various records that were made about that
13 incident. I just want to ask you, please, to confirm that between the
14 time of your arrival in June and the time of your departure, the retreat
15 of yourself and Mr. Zemaj and others in September, that was the only
16 incident that occurred where weapons were used and shots fired by KLA
17 soldiers against FARK soldiers. There was no other incident involving a
18 shooting by KLA soldiers against FARK soldiers during the period that you
19 were in Kosovo in 1998, was there?
20 A. That was not the only incident. There was also the incident of
21 the 10th of July in Prapaqan.
22 Q. Sorry, you've described the 10th of July incident when shots were
23 fired in the air. Leave that aside for a moment. There was never any
24 other incident in which shots were fired at FARK officers, was there?
25 A. If we leave aside the 10th of July incident, then okay.
1 Q. I want to be absolutely clear about this. When you say "okay,"
2 you agree with the suggestion that I'm making to you. There is no other
3 incident in which KLA soldiers or anybody with the KLA shot FARK soldiers
4 during that period of time, was there?
5 A. I said "okay"; that means yes.
6 Q. Thank you. Now, very specifically, I want to put two suggestions
7 to you. There was never, in 1998, any incident in which --
8 MR. EMMERSON: I'm sorry. I'll just wait for a moment.
9 [Trial Chamber confers]
10 MR. EMMERSON:
11 Q. Yes. I just want to be very specific with you. There was never
12 during 1998 any incident in which Ramush Haradinaj shot and killed a FARK
13 soldier in front of Tahir Zemaj's eyes, was there? That never happened?
14 A. The question is a bit unclear to me. You're saying there was not
15 an incident with Ramush Haradinaj that he never shot somebody in the
16 presence of Tahir Zemaj. I don't know. I was not present everywhere, so
17 I don't know.
18 Q. Did Tahir Zemaj ever suggest to you that Ramush Haradinaj had in
19 his presence shot and killed a FARK officer during 1998? Was that
20 suggestion ever made to you by Tahir Zemaj?
21 A. This question is very clear. Now I can respond very directly. He
22 never told me.
23 Q. Thank you. And you were never told of an incident when a group of
24 FARK officers were machine-gunned by KLA soldiers in front of another
25 group of FARK officers, killing a group of FARK soldiers?
1 A. I am not clear about this question. I don't understand.
2 Q. Nobody ever reported to you during 1998 an incident in which a
3 group of FARK soldiers, in the presence of other FARK soldiers, were
4 machine-gunned and killed by the KLA?
5 A. I had information that they were wounded, they were ill-treated,
6 and they were beaten, but not that they were killed.
7 Q. That is a reference to the 4th of July incident; is that correct?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Thank you. I'd like now, if I may, just to turn to some questions
10 about the Prapaqan barracks. Now, you say, in your 92 ter statement, that
11 you and the officers and soldiers with whom you had entered Kosovo moved
12 into the Prapaqan barracks on the 10th of July. This is paragraph 41. Is
13 that date correct, the 10th of July?
14 A. Yes, as far as I remember, it is correct.
15 Q. Could you please be provided with a copy of the blue
16 cross-examination file. And you're now going to be given a blue file
17 which contains a number of documents, some of which are documents that you
18 have produced and some of which are documents that have been provided by
19 other people. And I'd like you, please, to ask you, first of all, to turn
20 to tab 5, which, for the record, is Exhibit P188.
21 Now, first of all, can I ask you: Have you ever seen that
22 document before?
23 A. No.
24 Q. Now, do you agree that it indicates that the barracks at Prapaqan
25 had been opened as a KLA military facility on the 8th of July?
1 A. I never saw this document before. I was not aware of this
3 Q. But it is correct, isn't it, that when you moved into the Prapaqan
4 barracks, you were moving into a facility that had been set up and opened
5 by the existing KLA officers?
6 A. I said that I was not aware of such planning. I personally was
7 not aware of it.
8 Q. Could you turn to tab 6, please. That seems to be, just again,
9 for the record, tab 6 is Exhibit D39.
10 This document shows a list of KLA soldiers who were allocated to
11 the Prapaqan barracks, 64 of them in all, on the 8th of July. Can you see
13 A. Yes, yes.
14 Q. Now, it's right, isn't it, that when you moved into the Prapaqan
15 barracks, there was a group of existing KLA volunteers who joined the
16 soldiers that you had brought with you inside the Prapaqan barracks?
17 A. Yes. There were some soldiers.
18 Q. They were locals, they were Gjakovars; is that correct?
19 A. I couldn't know what area they came from.
20 Q. Obviously, we can see from the document that they're all recorded
21 as coming from Gjakove, do you see that, apart from the last two?
22 A. I can see the document, but the question was whether they were
23 Gjakovars, and I'm speaking about the time when I went to the barracks, or
24 the school barracks as they were called at that time. I can't respond to
25 you in any other way. I didn't know at the time what area they came from.
1 Q. That's a perfectly fair comment. Witness 17, I'm going to suggest
2 to you that in the first couple of days, after you started to move in,
3 there was a certain degree of friction between the existing KLA volunteers
4 who were there and the officers and soldiers that you brought with you.
5 Now, do you recall that?
6 A. No, just the incident of the 10th of July.
7 Q. Yes. Well, I'm going to suggest to you that that's what underlay
8 the incident of the 10th of July. You and the officers who you'd brought
9 with you, I suggest, took the view that the 64 volunteers who were
10 allocated to the barracks were not proper soldiers. Do you remember
11 forming that view?
12 A. I think this is a provoking question. I did not say that they
13 were not true or proper soldiers. The question was whether they were
14 Gjakovars, and I said I didn't know where they came from.
15 Q. Well --
16 JUDGE ORIE: Witness 17, I think you misunderstood Mr. Emmerson.
17 The question of whether you knew or whether you did not know at the time
18 whether these soldiers were from Gjakove is -- we left that issue. This
19 was the next question. Mr. Emmerson suggested to you that there was
20 tension and that you considered them, wherever they came from, not to be
21 proper soldiers. Did you develop that opinion at the time? That was the
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I did not have any opinion on them
24 until the 10th of July.
25 MR. EMMERSON:
1 Q. You see, I want to suggest that the confrontation that took place
2 on the 10th of July arose not over some trivial dispute about a salute but
3 over the fact that the KLA volunteers, who were barracked along with your
4 soldiers and officers at the Prapaqan barracks, were treated by your
5 colleagues as second-class soldiers, and that that is what Ramush
6 Haradinaj had come to remonstrate about.
7 A. I personally am not aware of that.
8 Q. Because you weren't present during the first part of the
9 conversation when he arrived, were you? You told us in your statement, I
10 think, elsewhere engaged in training at the time. Is that right?
11 A. That's right, yes.
12 Q. Did you ever discover that that was, in fact, the origin of the
13 dispute on the 10th, that in effect Mr. Haradinaj was saying, "I gave you
14 these barracks, I put my own volunteers in the barracks, and now they're
15 being ill-treated by the soldiers who've come in"?
16 A. I know that our presence at the Prapaqan barracks was something
17 that was agreed upon by Tahir Zemaj and Ramush. As about these small
18 arguments before the 10th of July, I'm not aware of those because I was
19 involved in the training of soldiers during the whole time. I was
20 preparing the artillery group, as I was an expert in that area.
21 Q. Thank you. You have also described two meetings that immediately
22 followed that, on the 10th and 11th of July, when the differences were
23 hammered out and resolved between Mr. Zemaj and Mr. Haradinaj in private
24 on the 10th and then formalised on the 11th. Is that right?
25 A. Yes. There were meetings and conversations.
1 Q. And they resulted in the formation of three brigades and the
2 distribution of the FARK officers across those three brigades, did they
4 A. The formation of the three brigades was before we entered Kosova.
5 The brigades had already been formed, but Tahir agreed with Ramush on the
6 location, whether it was okay for these brigades to go to the right place
7 at the right time, and then on their structure.
8 I know that Tahir had conversations with Ramush about this, but
9 I'm not sure about the way they discussed the organisation because I was
10 not present in those talks. I know that Ramush and Tahir came out of that
11 room where they had the talks, and they discussed among themselves.
12 Q. You described these brigades that were formed and distributed or
13 distributed -- sorry. Let me start the question again.
14 You described the brigades that were then located in Baran and
15 Prapaqan and so forth as FARK brigades, but in reality they were intended
16 to be and were mixed brigades, were they not, which consisted of some of
17 the soldiers you'd brought in and some of the volunteers who were already
18 within Kosovo under the banner of the KLA?
19 A. We had three brigades that had been formed in Papaj in northern
20 Albania, and they were 131, 133, and 134. The 134th Brigade was complete.
21 It had its military staff and soldier structure, while the 131st and 133rd
22 only had a superior officer structure. In the military sense, the
23 mobilisation was conducted in Kosovo according to the agreement. We never
24 took soldiers from the KLA staffs or from a territorial staff without the
25 permission of the territorial staff. I did this in my brigade especially.
1 Later, there was a discussion about numbers, whether they would be
2 called 131st or number 1 or 133rd. I think that Ramush and Tahir
3 discussed the numbers of the brigades, which was not important at all,
4 what number would be given to the brigades I mean.
5 Q. No, I entirely understand that's not important. But in terms of
6 the numbers of soldiers in the brigades, that may be a little more
7 important. Your notes indicate that you had 200-odd soldiers under your
8 command in the 3rd Brigade, is that right, or were there more than that?
9 A. Yes, in the beginning, yes. Later, all the territorial staffs
10 were subordinated to us in the area where I operated, and the number
11 became much larger.
12 Q. Yes. So 200 to start with. You -- can you give us some idea of
13 the number that were left at Prapaqan under the 1st Brigade?
14 A. I was not responsible for the -- I'm speaking about 131st --
15 134th, which was given the number the 1st Brigade. I don't know how many
16 soldiers were left behind in Prapaqan. Tahir Zemaj was responsible for
18 Q. I'm not asking --
19 A. This was formed in Tropoje already.
20 Q. I'm not asking for a specific number but an approximation. Were
21 there more than a hundred soldiers left at Prapaqan?
22 A. From Albania, we entered in Kosovo with over a hundred soldiers
23 from the 134th Brigade, and then mobilisation occurred in Kosovo and the
24 number became larger. I don't know exactly how many soldiers there were.
25 Q. I see. So all of the soldiers that you brought with you stayed
1 with Tahir Zemaj in Prapaqan, did they?
2 A. Yes. They were in his brigade.
3 Q. And then they were joined by what you call local mobilisation; in
4 other words, local KLA volunteers, is that right, who joined them under
5 Tahir Zemaj's command?
6 A. I said that, with our arrival in Kosovo, mobilisation occurred and
7 the soldiers were taken from the territorial local staffs in the villages,
8 and that's how they joined in.
9 Q. And the 200 people who were under your command at Baran then,
10 these were not FARK soldiers who had come in with you but people who were
11 either existing members of the Territorial Defence or existing KLA
12 volunteers. Is that right?
13 A. When we went to Baran on the 12th of July, and upon the formation
14 of the brigade, there was an agreement that the mobilisation would be done
15 by the territorial staffs of the villages, with the permission of the
16 commanders or the staffs who would send them to the brigade in order for
17 the numbers to increase. Of course, until we went there, there were KLA
18 staffs that were operating and also territorial, local staffs that then
19 were subordinated to the brigade. I'm speaking about Lugu i Baranit area.
20 Q. Yes, I understand. That's very helpful, and if I can just clarify
21 it with a yes or no question. It follows from what you've told us that
22 the soldiers under your command were not soldiers that you brought with
23 you into Kosovo. Is that correct?
24 A. Yes, it is correct.
25 Q. Thank you. Thank you. Now, could we look, please, behind tab 8
1 of the blue file, and I just want to get the picture clear as to the
2 process of amalgamation that was taking place --
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson.
4 MR. EMMERSON: I'm sorry.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Could you also seek some clarification. I don't know
6 whether I understood the witness well. In paragraph 47 of the 92 ter
7 statement, the witness is referring to the 1st Brigade as the former
8 134th; the 2nd Brigade as the former 133rd; and the 3rd Brigade, again,
9 the former 134th; whereas, in his testimony today, he's talking about 131,
10 133, and 134, whereas, I see that there's a difference.
11 MR. EMMERSON: Yes.
12 JUDGE ORIE: It's unclear to me. You might be better -- in a
13 better position to clarify that.
14 MR. EMMERSON: Well, yes, I can if that would assist.
15 Q. Witness 17, just to be clear, your 92 ter statement, at paragraph
16 47, describes these brigades in relation to the numbers, and it says --
17 I'll just read it to you, rather than ask you to look it up.
18 It says: "The 1st Brigade was based in Prapaqan, formerly the
19 134th ..." Now, just taking that. Was the 1st Brigade in Prapaqan, did
20 it consist of soldiers who had formerly been in the 134th Brigade?
21 A. The brigade did not change. We always called it the 134th
22 Brigade, so these were soldiers from 134th Brigade.
23 Q. Thank you. You then say: "The 2nd Brigade based in Irzniq was
24 the formerly the 133 Brigade." Now, let me be clear, were there any
25 soldiers as such in the 133 Brigade when you entered Kosovo?
1 A. I already told you that only the 134 Brigade was formed completely
2 with soldiers.
3 Q. So when you say the 2nd Brigade in Irzniq was formerly the 133
4 Brigade, there was no 133 Brigade, was there, not in reality?
5 A. This brigade was formed later on in Kosova when the mobilisation
6 of soldiers took place.
7 Q. We'll come to that in a moment, but you say in your statement that
8 the 2nd Brigade was made up of what was formerly the 133 Brigade --
9 JUDGE ORIE: The witness answered this.
10 MR. EMMERSON: Your Honour's happy?
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
12 MR. EMMERSON: Very well.
13 JUDGE ORIE: It may exist on paper, but it was formed, as he said,
15 MR. EMMERSON: Thank you.
16 Q. And then you say that the 3rd Brigade, based in the Baran Valley,
17 was formerly the 134th Brigade. That's what your statement says. Now, is
18 that what you meant to say?
19 A. No. It should be 131. I think it is a typo.
20 Q. Very well. But again - and the same answer presumably follows -
21 there were no soldiers until the 131 Brigade. It existed only in paper
22 when you entered Kosovo; is that correct?
23 A. There was a military staff that was ready to enter Kosova, and it
24 was already planned for the mobilisation to take place in Kosova, because
25 it was impossible to enter Kosova with three brigades at the same time
1 with more than 100 soldiers to cross the Albanian-Kosovar border without
2 being uncovered by the enemy. This was the basic idea, to form one
3 brigade fully, and the other two, to form them later on in Kosova, to fill
4 in the numbers with soldiers.
5 Q. Thank you. Now, if we could just look, please, at tab 8. This is
6 a document -- I'm sorry. For the record, tab 8 is Exhibit P192. This is
7 a document signed by Tahir Zemaj which is expressed as a request for the
8 appointment and job specification of military officers pursuant to the
9 10th of July agreement. Do you see that?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And it's addressed to the Dukagjini Plain Operative Staff. I just
12 want to understand this, first of all, the nature of the document, because
13 you I think produced one version of this document. At this point
14 Mr. Zemaj is making a request to Mr. Haradinaj; is that correct?
15 A. That's correct as for what is written on the paper and the
16 signature of this document --
17 Q. Thank you --
18 A. -- meaning the signature, not just what it writes.
19 Q. Yes. And of the 20 named officers, five of them were existing
20 officers of the Dukagjini KLA, were they not? And I'm referring to number
21 8, Shemsedin Cekaj; number 13, Driton Zeneli; number 18, Rrustem Tetaj;
22 number 19, Skender Rexhahmetaj; and number 20, Gani Gjukaj, so 8, 13, 18,
23 19, and 20. Five of those officers were KLA officers in the Dukagjini
24 area, were they not?
25 A. I didn't take note of all the numbers. You said 8, 9, 19, and
1 20? Maybe I missed just one number. Maybe you said 14.
2 Q. Let me go through them with you then individually. Number 8,
3 Shemsedin Cekaj, he was not somebody who came with you. He was an
4 existing KLA commander, wasn't he?
5 A. Yes. We found him in Kosova; that's correct.
6 Q. The same is true of number 13, Driton Zeneli?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Number 18, Rrustem Tetaj?
9 A. Yes, this was the fifth.
10 Q. Yes. Number 19, Skender Rexhahmetaj?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. And number 20, Gani Gjukaj?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Now could you look to tab 9, please, which is Exhibit P193. This
15 document sets out another request and proposal from Mr. Zemaj to the
16 Dukagjini Plain Operative Staff for the way in which officers were to be
17 distributed, do you agree?
18 A. From what I can see from the document, I agree with you, but I'm
19 not sure about the signature because this signature is not Tahir Zemaj's
20 signature. And this goes for the first document as well.
21 Q. Can I ask you this, please: You say in your witness statement -
22 and I'm looking at paragraph 53 at the document - you say: "The 2nd or
23 133 Brigade was located in Bardhaniq village, Decan municipality. This
24 brigade was not properly staffed and, therefore, never properly came into
25 existence. The commander of the brigade, Kemal Shaqiri, later left to
1 take up duty in the Drenica HQ."
2 Now, I just want to be clear about this, Witness 17, because on
3 this document, the commander of the 2nd Brigade is listed as Shemsedin
4 Cekaj, and Kemal Shaqiri is listed as the Chief of Staff of the 1st
5 Brigade. Can you help us about that, please? Was the commander of the
6 2nd Brigade Shemsedin Cekaj?
7 A. In the beginning, as for Kemal Shaqiri, he was planned to be the
8 commander of the 133 Brigade upon our arrival in Kosova.
9 Q. My question is: When the three brigades were set up after the
10 10th of July agreement, is it correct that Shemsedin Cekaj, who's
11 testified in this court about his position in this regard, is it correct
12 that he was, in fact, appointed to be the commander of the 2nd Brigade?
13 A. To my recollection, when Kemal Shaqiri left for Drenica for the
14 needs of the army there, and after Tahir Zemaj authorised his leaving, the
15 brigade was led by Musa Gjakova. Shemsedin Cekaj was part of that
16 structure, but personally I have no knowledge that he was commander of
17 that brigade. Musa Gjakova was a person who was leading the brigade at
18 that time. This is what happened.
19 Q. I see. And where this document refers to Kemal Shaqiri as being
20 the Chief of Staff of the 1st Brigade, what is your response to that?
21 A. He didn't show results in the duty of commander of the 2nd
22 Brigade. He stayed for some time in the 134 Brigade, Kemal Shaqiri, as a
23 Chief of Staff of this brigade, but for a very brief period because he
24 left for Drenice.
25 Q. I see. If we look now, please, behind tab 10, this is annex 10 to
1 your witness statement.
2 A. May I just --
3 Q. I'm sorry. Did you wish to say something?
4 A. I just wanted to explain something about the names that you
5 mentioned, the 20 officers and those five who were already in Kosova
6 before we entered it. I just wanted to point out that, on the 2nd of
7 July, there was a meeting held. All these senior officers attended this
8 meeting which was held in Isniq, and the remaining officers joined the
9 brigades with the exception of Rrustem Tetaj. I think it would be of use
10 to know this fact because this is what actually happened.
11 Q. Thank you. Now, if we look behind tab 10 in the bundle, this is
12 annex 10 to your statement. We see a document signed by Ramush Haradinaj
13 ordering the formation of the 3rd Brigade; is that right?
14 A. Pursuant to this document, it is right.
15 Q. Thank you. And if we could look behind tab 11 for a moment,
16 Witness 17. I'm not going to take you to these documents individually,
17 but these are each of them authorisations and orders signed by Ramush
18 Haradinaj for the establishment of each of the three brigades. I suggest.
19 Can you please look through them and confirm that.
20 And, for the record, this is Exhibit P199, P194, P200, P198,
21 P201 - sorry - and P197.
22 Do you see those documents, Witness 17?
23 A. I can see the first document under tab 11, dated 12th of July.
24 Q. I'm not going to ask you to go through them individually, Witness
25 17, but they are each of them authorisations and orders similar to the one
1 that you have produced for the formation of the three brigades, do you
3 A. These are instructions or authorisations which indicate the
4 formation of the three brigades which were already formed, as I said.
5 Only the name of the brigade -- brigades changes. The numbers changes --
6 change, but there are no changes in the military structure and in the
7 structure of senior officers.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson.
9 MR. EMMERSON: Yes.
10 JUDGE ORIE: You earlier referred to annex 10 to the 92 ter
12 MR. EMMERSON: Yes.
13 JUDGE ORIE: I do understand that, provisionally, P numbers have
14 been assigned to those documents. That would be----
15 MR. EMMERSON: It would be P890.
16 JUDGE ORIE: -- P890. For the record, it's easier.
17 MR. EMMERSON:
18 Q. Now, I want you to help, if you can, us understand that then, from
19 that point onwards, from the 12th of July onwards, when these
20 authorisations were signed and the brigades began to distribute themselves
21 and set up, what was your understanding of the command relationship
22 between Tahir Zemaj and Ramush Haradinaj?
23 A. The relationship between Tahir Zemaj and Ramush Haradinaj had a
24 tendency to become closer.
25 Q. Yes. I'm not asking you about their personal relationship,
1 although that answer's helpful. I'm asking about their command
2 relationship. You see, on the face of these documents, we have Tahir
3 Zemaj making a request and then a response from Ramush Haradinaj in the
4 form of an authorisation.
5 And I just want to understand whether, going forwards from the
6 12th of July, it was accepted that Tahir Zemaj was subordinate to Ramush
8 A. I said earlier that I looked at these document, but the first
9 document and the second one, namely, the request by Tahir Zemaj, the
10 signature does not correspond to his. I'm sure that this is not his
11 signature. I know for a fact that there were discussions amongst them.
12 There were tendencies to join forces. This I know.
13 Q. Forget the individual documents. Concentrate on annex 10, the
14 document you've produced, which is an order for the formation of the
15 brigade over which you were the commander, which is signed by
16 Mr. Haradinaj.
17 What I want to understand from you, not on the documents
18 themselves, but from your understanding of the command relationship at the
19 time, is simply this: Who was in command of whom? Was Ramush Haradinaj
20 subordinate to Tahir Zemaj in your view; Tahir Zemaj subordinate to Ramush
21 Haradinaj; or were they operating, so to speak, on a parallel? What was
22 your understanding of their command relationship?
23 MR. KEARNEY: Your Honour, I'm going to ask counsel on this one
24 question to be more specific as to time. It's phrased from the 12th of
25 July --
1 MR. EMMERSON: On the 12th of July then.
2 MR. KEARNEY: Thank you.
3 MR. EMMERSON:
4 Q. Can you help us at all, please, Witness 17? What was in command
5 of who, or did you not know?
6 A. The commander of operative units was Tahir Zemaj, commander of the
7 three brigades that entered Kosova; while the commander of the Dukagjini
8 Plain and of the units of the KLA, after we entered Kosova, we realised
9 him to be Ramush Haradinaj. Up to the 21st of August, this is how it
11 Q. Yes, I'm --
12 A. There were no subordinates, or nobody was commander of somebody
14 Q. I see. So you say, up until the 21st of August when Tahir Zemaj
15 became overall commander, he was on an equal and independent standing, in
16 your view, to Ramush Haradinaj; is that the position?
17 A. I said that he commanded with the operative units of the three
18 brigades that entered Kosova, while Ramush continued to perform his duty
19 as commander of the Dukagjini Plain in the function that we found him.
20 And the meetings show that the aim was to reach an agreement between the
21 two sides, an agreement that we entered in Oslo. We tried in all possible
22 ways to implement the Oslo agreement.
23 Q. Very well. In your 92 ter statement, at paragraph 59, there is a
24 sentence which reads: "All local staff in my area of responsibility were
25 automatically supposed to be called FARK soldiers."
1 "All local staff in my area of responsibility were automatically
2 supposed to be called FARK soldiers."
3 Now, I want to ask you: Is that what you meant to say, that the
4 people who were under your command in Baran were expected to refer to
5 themselves as FARK soldiers rather than KLA soldiers?
6 MR. KEARNEY: Your Honour, I'm going to ask my colleague to, when
7 he presents this question to the witness, to read the last clause of that
8 sentence. I believe it is important for the -- for the understanding of
9 this witness.
10 MR. EMMERSON: No, I'm sorry. I'm not going to do that, with
11 respect, because I'm not asking about any individual or any loyalties.
12 I'm simply asking about whether it's correct that officers under this
13 witness's command were expected to refer to themselves as FARK soldiers.
14 JUDGE ORIE: The question can be put in re-examination if you
15 would like to create a better context, Mr. Kearney. You're allowed to do
16 so of course.
17 MR. EMMERSON:
18 Q. Now, could you answer the question, Witness 17. Is it your
19 evidence that the officers and soldiers under your - let's just take the
20 soldiers - that the soldiers under your command were expected to refer to
21 themselves as FARK soldiers?
22 A. Not that they should refer to themselves as such. We had already
23 formed our brigades in Tropoje in northern Albania. This is how we
24 entered Kosova. We were subordinated to a command, the Ministry of
25 Defence of the Republic of Kosova. We had our designated tasks and
1 duties, and we acted pursuant to these orders. The units that we found in
2 Kosova, as well as the commanders we found there, we did our best to
3 cooperate with them and to reach an agreement on future activities.
4 When I arrived at Baran on 12th of July, the mobilisation of
5 soldiers was agreed upon, the area of responsibility of the brigade was
6 designated, and my area of responsibility included Raushiq, Loxh, Baran i
7 Eperm, Baran i Ulet, Kotradic, Vranoc, and up to Kepuz. All these
8 villages were all under my command.
9 Q. Can I interrupt you. I was not asking about the villages under
10 your command. I think you've answered the question which I was asking
11 which is: You did not expect FARK soldiers, or soldiers under your
12 command, to refer to themselves as FARK soldiers. You would expect them
13 to refer to KLA soldiers; is that correct?
14 A. I really don't understand your question now. It's really mixed
16 Q. Well, very well. Let me put it to you clearly. Your witness
17 statement says that soldiers under your command were automatically
18 supposed to be called FARK soldiers. I have asked you whether that was
19 intended to suggest that they were supposed to refer to themselves, that
20 is, to present themselves to other people, as members of the FARK, or
21 whether you would expect them to refer to themselves as members of the
23 I'm trying to understand whether you're suggesting that there was
24 a separate designation of FARK soldiers. Now do you understand the
1 A. A separate designation was the designation of my area of
2 responsibility. All those villages that fell in my area of responsibility
3 were under the command of my brigade. So no soldier was allowed to
4 declare himself a member of this or that unit, especially not to the
5 villagers, because soldiers should report to their respective commanders
6 and not to civilians or ordinary villagers. In my opinion, there is no
7 need for a soldier to report to a civilian and tell him to which
8 organisation he belongs.
9 Q. Very well. I'm going to look now, please, behind tab 1, which is
10 your notes of the various events that occurred over this period; and, in
11 particular, I want to look at the passage of your notes - this is tab 1,
12 Witness 17 - the passage of your notes that deals with the meetings that
13 you had on the 13th of July.
14 If you could find that for us in the manuscript part of your
16 MR. EMMERSON: For those following in English, it is page 14 of
17 the English translation. Tab 1 is annex 1 to the witness's 92 ter
18 statement with proposed Exhibit Number P886.
19 Q. Now, I'm told that - if you just bear with me for a moment - if
20 you look as the numbers that are stamped on this document, you will
21 find -- which is stamped in the top right-hand corner in the Albanian, you
22 will find the passage that I'm asking you to look at on, at U008-5677 at
23 line 13 or thereabouts.
24 Now, have you found the page, Witness 17?
25 MR. EMMERSON: Perhaps the usher might help, 5677, on the
1 left-hand side of the page.
2 Q. Now, first of all, Witness --
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson, before we continue there, you were
4 referring to the English page 14?
5 MR. EMMERSON: Yes.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But may I draw your attention, and also
7 Mr. Kearney's attention, to something I noticed; that is, the witness
8 yesterday, when he testified about the ten names of people that would be
9 wanted or missing, he said: "I jotted that down the day after I heard
10 about it," or when he exactly received that is unclear. I noted that on
11 page 13 - and it has some effect also on page 14 - that above the military
12 police, in the original, you find a new date, that is, the 13th of July,
13 1998; whereas, as it appears now, it looks as only on page 14 we're moving
14 to the 13th of July; whereas, in fact, in the original, it does already
15 halfway page 13.
16 Mr. Kearney, it seems to be a translation or a transcript error.
17 I don't know whether you noticed it. My attention was drawn to it because
18 on the basis of the document itself, I had some difficulties to understand
19 that it was jotted down not on the 12th but not 13th; whereas, it appears,
20 at least in English, already to be written down on the 12th. But
21 comparison with the original made clear to me that actually it is
22 something that is under the heading of the 13th of July.
23 MR. KEARNEY: And I believe that was what the witness testified to
24 yesterday, Your Honour.
25 JUDGE ORIE: That's, of course, what he testified to, but which I
1 had some difficulties in reconciling with what I found in the document
2 until I consulted the original. I don't know whether page 13 could be
3 replaced by a better copy, including the date above the line where it
4 reads "military police."
5 MR. KEARNEY: Perhaps, at the break, I can check with our
6 interpreters, Your Honour.
7 JUDGE ORIE: There's not a lot of interpretation to be done. It's
8 just looking at 130798.
9 MR. EMMERSON: Yes.
10 Q. Now, you've found the passage that I've asked you to look at, have
11 you, Witness 17? Have you found the passage that I've asked you to look
12 at on page 5677?
13 A. I have here on the screen a page with a different date. If we are
14 talking about the list of --
15 Q. No, we're not --
16 A. -- people sought, that's another page.
17 Q. Don't --
18 JUDGE ORIE: Forget about that, Witness 17. I was just making a
19 comment on something you told us yesterday. It's not related to the
20 question Mr. Emmerson will ask you, from what I understand.
21 MR. EMMERSON: No.
22 Q. I'm asking you about page 5677. Now, first of all, Witness 17,
23 can you please confirm that, immediately after your arrival in Baran, you
24 travelled around the villages trying to recruit people to join the 3rd
25 Brigade. Is that correct?
1 A. I went immediately to the villages, and I informed the commands of
2 the villages in the region.
3 Q. And I want to ask you about the meeting that you held with the
4 inhabitants of Buqan at 6.00 in the evening, that is, 1800 hours, on the
5 13th of July because you gave them a briefing; is that correct?
6 A. Yes, yes.
7 Q. And from the notes that we have, it appears that you told them
8 about the formation of the 3rd Brigade and you told them of the
9 mobilisation of soldiers aged 18 to 35 in operational units and in
10 Territorial Defence units from 18 to 65. Is that what you told them when
11 you arrived in Buqan?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. And then it appears from your notes that you said this to them:
14 "The question whether there is a KLA or a government army has no sense
15 because the leadership has agreed upon that KLA is the core or the
16 foundation of a Kosovo modern army; therefore, we are the KLA and the KLA
17 are us. Consequently, all the dilemmas, whether the actions are
18 coordinated or not, should be discarded."
19 Is that the message that you were giving out to the village
20 defence staffs?
21 A. Yes. That was my message because I was sure and clear pursuant to
22 the Oslo agreement there -- that there were no dilemmas about the further
23 structure and organisation. Everything was clear to me. That's why I
24 said those words to the regional staffs wherever I went, and this was also
25 our approach in the terrain, on the ground.
1 Q. Now, the --
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson, may I also draw your attention to page
3 7611 yesterday, where the witness testified about from whatever routes the
4 forces would come, they would call it by the name best known to the
6 MR. EMMERSON: I understand.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Names are not, perhaps not always, reflecting, at
8 least, that's suggested in the answer of the witness yesterday, that this
9 was very convenient to approach the matter in this way.
10 MR. EMMERSON: Yes.
11 JUDGE ORIE: And, at the same time, he's saying an armed force of
12 which the bulk came from this --
13 MR. EMMERSON: Of course, that isn't in his testimony. The
14 testimony is that the soldiers under his command were all locally
15 recruited people who were formerly village defence staff.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Of a force, the bulk of which -- now he's talking
17 about the overall, of which would come from the KLA.
18 MR. EMMERSON: Yes.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes --
20 MR. EMMERSON: I'm sorry. I interrupted too quickly.
21 JUDGE ORIE: I didn't suggest that the bulk came from the FARK.
22 MR. EMMERSON: I'm sorry, I interrupted you.
23 JUDGE ORIE: I previously consulted with my colleagues, and I'm
24 wondering whether it's going into further detail here --
25 MR. EMMERSON: Yes --
1 JUDGE ORIE: -- would assist with us.
2 MR. EMMERSON: I've finished with that topic.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
4 MR. EMMERSON:
5 Q. The last topic I want to take you to before taking a break would
6 be to ask you help us at page 5731 --
7 MR. EMMERSON: Help the witness to page 5731 in the same document;
8 and for those following in English, it's page 81 in the English
10 Q. Now, Witness 17, is this a list of the commanders of the 3rd
12 A. A list of the commanders of 131st Brigade, later called the 3rd
13 Brigade, yes.
14 Q. Thank you. I just want to ask you about a couple of people first
15 of all on that list. The first five names on that list appear on the
16 order establishing the 3rd Brigade that we have looked at. Can I ask you
17 about Musa Dragaj very briefly. He seems to have been given the title the
18 commander of the 3rd Battalion of the 3rd Brigade. Is that right, is that
19 his title?
20 A. Later, because the change in senior officers was done according to
21 the needs on the ground, and that's why the name of a person appears
22 sometimes in one brigade and sometimes in another brigade. This was in
23 the beginning. Rrustem Berisha was the commander of the 131st Brigade.
24 But because of the developments after we entered Kosova, he had to remain
25 in Junik, and I acted as commander of that brigade further on.
1 Q. I understand that. And Musa Dragaj was one of your immediate
2 subordinates; is that right?
3 A. He was planned to be in the beginning, but he never came to my
4 brigade in Baran.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson, I'm not perfectly certain that the
6 witness did understand your previous question where in his answer he was
7 referring only to 3rd Brigade -- people in brigades; whereas, you asked
8 about battalion, 3rd Battalion --
9 MR. EMMERSON: I did because of the documents we've seen, but I
10 think the witness's last answer seems to supersede that and for the
11 purposes of the questioning I'm putting to him.
12 Q. I just want to be clear, because I want to be absolutely certain
13 of what you're saying, Witness 17. Is it your testimony - because you
14 appreciate you're not the only witness to give evidence about who was at
15 Baran - is it your testimony that Musa Dragaj was not serving at the
16 school barracks in Baran under your command? Is that your evidence?
17 A. Only for -- sorry, sorry. I confused Musa Dragaj with Musa
18 Gjakova. There has been a change. Musa Dragaj was in Baran, yes, that's
20 Q. Thank you. We'll come back --
21 A. I apologise.
22 Q. We'll come back to him. Just a couple further questions, if I
23 may, still within the time.
24 JUDGE ORIE: If you finish within two, three minutes, otherwise
25 we'll have a break.
1 MR. EMMERSON: Yes, I can.
2 Q. Sadri Selca, he was appointed by you as head of intelligence and
3 counter-intelligence; is that correct?
4 A. I did not call it intelligence or counter-intelligence. We called
5 it a person responsible for security in the brigade. Because after I
6 arrived in Baran, I organised the sectors: The information sector, the
7 logistics sector, the observation and cartography sector, and the security
8 sector. In the beginning, the military police was formed on the 12th of
9 July in Vranoc.
10 Q. Thank you very much. I'll come back to the military police after
11 the break. Finally this on this page before we break. I want to ask you
12 about a man who is not on the list but who you refer to in your statement,
13 at paragraph 77, as one of your officers, a man called Cufe Krasniqi. Can
14 I ask you, please, what his command level was under your command?
15 A. He was commander of a platoon.
16 Q. Yes.
17 MR. EMMERSON: Would that be a convenient moment?
18 JUDGE ORIE: It is a convenient moment. We'll have a break until
20 --- Recess taken at 10.35 a.m.
21 --- On resuming at 11.04 a.m.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson, before you continue, I was informed
23 that there's a request from the Brahimaj Defence to have an opportunity to
24 inspect the original of the notes of this Witness 17.
25 Mr. Harvey, is that correct?
1 MR. HARVEY: That's correct, Your Honour, yes.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Let's first try to find out what the witness thinks
3 about it.
4 Witness 17, Defence counsel would like to have access to the
5 original of your notes. Are you willing to make these notes available
6 for, I take it, for inspection?
7 MR. HARVEY: That's correct, Your Honour.
8 JUDGE ORIE: So not to be taken away forever. I don't know
9 whether you would like to have an expert look at it or start just by
11 MR. HARVEY: Just start by myself, Your Honour, and we'll see
12 where it goes from there.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Do you have any idea of how much time you'd think
14 you'd need?
15 MR. HARVEY: Only a matter of ten minutes or so, I think.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Witness 17, would you mind to give the original of
17 your notes during the next break - I would then suggest, Mr. Harvey - to
18 Mr. Harvey so that he can have a look at the original?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't mind, but not for him to
20 check it for a long time, one day, two days. I would like it for me -- to
21 be returned to me immediately.
22 MR. HARVEY: It won't --
23 JUDGE ORIE: It will be returned and Mr. Harvey, it's one of his
24 professional duties not to change, not to -- well, just look at it,
25 inspect it. And if he would need it, well, let's say, for expert opinion,
1 then he would return it to you, then ask for such -- for an opportunity to
2 have an expert look at it as well - I don't know whether this will happen
3 or not - and then he might address the Chamber and ask the Chamber to
4 invite you to make it available for expert -- for expertise as well. But
5 then let's not anticipate on that. The only thing, at this moment,
6 Mr. Harvey's asking is to get it for ten minutes and it then to be
7 returned to you.
8 But whatever will happen, the Chamber would already like to
9 instruct you to keep your notes; that is, not to lose them, burn them,
10 sell them, whatever, so that you keep the original version of the notes
11 which have been copied, but only the copied version available at this
12 moment to us. So then you're invited to give the original, at the end of
13 this session, for inspection to Mr. Harvey. Thank you for your
15 MR. HARVEY: Thank you, Your Honour.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson, please proceed.
17 MR. EMMERSON: Yes.
18 Q. Witness 17, looking back, please, then at that list of commanders
19 of the 3rd Brigade, I want to ask you now about Din Krasniqi. Now, you
20 say, in your statement, Din Krasniqi was the Baran Valley commander. Can
21 you just, please, explain to us within this list of the command of the 3rd
22 Brigade what his formal role was.
23 A. Krasniqi was some kind of coordinate after the brigade came to
24 Baran, after the 12th of July.
25 Q. You've included him on this page where you list the brigade
1 commanders. We can see that he's a paediatrician. What is the
2 significance of him being one of the people listed amongst the brigade
4 A. He was not. There was an office, a health office in the brigade,
5 and he checked the soldiers. That's why he is in this list.
6 Q. Was he a medical officer of the brigade then?
7 A. He checked the soldiers.
8 Q. I see. I think you accept, don't you, that he was formally under
9 your command? That's to be found in your witness statement at paragraph
11 A. Upon the arrival of the brigade and my arrival in Baran,
12 automatically, he had to become my subordinate; but, in fact, we worked in
13 a parallel fashion, as far as he was concerned.
14 Q. I'll come to that in a moment, if I may. Now, you say various
15 things in your witness statement about his role, and I just want to
16 explore some of them with you. You say that, when you first arrived, he
17 introduced himself as Baran Valley commander and told you that he had been
18 appointed to that position by Ramush Haradinaj, paragraph 55. I just want
19 to be clear about this.
20 First of all, do you have any personal knowledge about the manner
21 in which Din Krasniqi came to be appointed or chosen as the Baran Valley
23 A. No.
24 Q. We've heard evidence from Cufe Krasniqi that the villages of the
25 Baran Valley organised themselves and that it was he, Cufe, who had
1 nominated Din Krasniqi for selection as the Baran Valley commander.
2 That's transcript 5471, lines 2 to 5.
3 Can I be clear about this, as far as you are aware, was the Baran
4 Valley command already organised?
5 A. That the villagers were organised already before we went there,
6 this is something that was clear to us; but the fact that Cufe appointed
7 Din as commander, I was not aware of that.
8 Q. Put shortly, just so that the Trial Chamber understands, you have
9 no real knowledge of how the Baran Valley had organised its command before
10 you arrived; is that correct?
11 A. I already said that I am not aware that Cufe appointed Din
12 Krasniqi as commander of the villages of Lugu i Baranit, but I was aware
13 that a part of the villages were organised already.
14 Q. Now, at paragraph 59 of your statement, you suggest that Din
15 Krasniqi was having regular meetings with Ramush Haradinaj during the time
16 that you were in Baran from the 12th of July onwards. I just want to ask
17 you, please: What is the basis for your suggestion that they were having
18 regular meetings?
19 A. The fact is that he had meetings with the village commanders once
20 a week, although it was not necessary, because I was there and I had
21 daily meetings, briefings at 7.00 every evening and he then, of course,
22 reported further on.
23 Q. Just pause for a moment. You didn't know at the time, did you,
24 that there were any meetings between Ramush Haradinaj and the village
25 commanders going on?
1 A. In Lugu i Baranit, I know that Din met him.
2 Q. Yes. Well --
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson, your reference to 5471 [sic] seems not
4 to be very solid; at least, I find something totally different there.
5 MR. EMMERSON: Then I'll check my reference.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please do.
7 MR. EMMERSON:
8 Q. Just so that we're clear, in paragraph 59 of your witness
9 statement, you are shown the minutes of a meeting attended by Ramush
10 Haradinaj with Baran Valley staff commanders on the 29th of July, and you
11 say, and I quote: "I did not know that Ramush Haradinaj was having such
12 meetings with KLA village commanders."
13 That's what your witness statement says. Now, I just want clear,
14 at the time from the 12th of July onwards, why is it that you say that
15 meetings were taking place between Ramush Haradinaj and Din Krasniqi. On
16 what basis do you say that?
17 A. On the basis of what I already said, that every week he called the
18 village commanders and had meetings with them, but he never reported to me
19 on what was discussed at these meetings with them, and I believe that he
20 continued his further contacts with Ramush.
21 Q. Well, I'm not concerned about general belief. I'm pressing you
22 for specifics here, Witness 17, about meetings between Ramush Haradinaj
23 and Din Krasniqi. First of all, did Din Krasniqi himself tell you that
24 he'd had meetings with Ramush Haradinaj? Is that what you're saying?
25 A. Din Krasniqi said that he had been appointed by Ramush. He told
1 me that on the 12th of July when I arrived in Vranoc, when we had the
2 meeting with the commanders of the villages and with Krasniqi. And,
3 according to the way he behaved, he never was willing to leave that post.
4 He continued to be in that post even further; although, he knew
5 that, after the 12th of July, it was the responsibility of the brigade,
6 and everything had to be done in the framework of the brigade.
7 Q. I just want to be clear, please. I understand what you're saying
8 about the position before your arrival. I want to know whether you have
9 any basis for suggesting, after the time that you arrived, that there were
10 meetings, regular meetings, going on between Din Krasniqi and Ramush
12 Now, if the position is that you don't know that there were
13 meetings going on, then please tell us; if the position is that you do
14 know, then please tell us how you know.
15 MR. KEARNEY: Your Honour, I have to object at this stage. This
16 question has been asked and answered --
17 MR. EMMERSON: Not --
18 MR. KEARNEY: -- at this stage. He said that, based on the way
19 that Din Krasniqi behaved in his unwillingness to leave his former
20 position, that's the conclusion he drew. It is my belief that is
21 testimony --
22 MR. EMMERSON: If that's the extent in the evidence, then, in our
23 submission, it remains an unsupported assertion. I'm giving the witness
24 the opportunity to tell us what the basis for his assertion is.
25 JUDGE ORIE: I'll allow the question to be put, and I invite the
1 witness to answer the question.
2 Perhaps you put it again to him, Mr. Emmerson, because he might be
4 Meanwhile, I resolve the matter of "5471" should be "5741."
5 MR. EMMERSON: Yes.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
7 MR. EMMERSON:
8 Q. Witness 17, the question I am asking you is: Do you know for a
9 fact that there were meetings taking place between the two of them, that
10 is, Ramush Haradinaj and Din Krasniqi, after the 12th of July when you
11 became commander; and if so, please tell us how you know?
12 A. I did not attend these meetings because geographically it was
13 part of the territory where I could not move about at all times and see
14 who is meeting whom. He was responsible for health issues in the brigade,
15 and I know that he had meetings with the village commanders and that
16 he reported further to Ramush. I know this, because some village
17 commanders who did not go to those meetings told me about these
19 Q. So the commanders of the villages told you that Din Krasniqi
20 regularly visited them; is that correct?
21 A. After the meeting with them.
22 Q. And are you saying that one or more of the village commanders told
23 you that Din Krasniqi had had meetings regularly with Ramush Haradinaj?
24 A. Din Krasniqi with Ramush.
25 Q. Are you saying somebody told --
1 JUDGE ORIE: Let's try to get more direct. You explained to us
2 that you were not present when Din Krasniqi met with Ramush Haradinaj. It
3 was in the area you had no access to. How did you know that these regular
4 meetings took place? Who told you? What did you observe?
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As I said, from the meetings that
6 Din Krasniqi held with the village commanders, and my information came
7 from certain of those persons who told me that Din further reports to
9 MR. EMMERSON:
10 Q. Can you tell us, please, who told you that?
11 A. I don't have a name. I don't know exactly the name.
12 Q. I see. And are you able to tell us whether the information was
13 reliable or not, if you don't know who it was who told you?
14 A. With the further development of the events, I can say that this
15 information was reliable.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson, I'm also intrigued by it.
17 You said you don't have a name. Do you remember what position?
18 Was this a village commander of a certain village? Do you remember which
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. I said that I don't have
21 knowledge about the names; but as things developed later on, it turned out
22 that the contacts between Din and Ramush were regular.
23 JUDGE ORIE: It's still a bit mysterious to me. Could you confirm
24 that your source of knowledge was one of the village commanders?
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
1 JUDGE ORIE: One or more? Did you hear it from one or from more
2 village commanders?
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Now I cannot recall. Years have
4 passed, nine years, and I'm not able to recall.
5 JUDGE ORIE: And did they tell you that Din Krasniqi reported to
6 Haradinaj, which not necessarily includes that they met? Could you tell
7 us in more detail what this person told you?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I cannot talk in more details. From
9 what I recall, I was informed by that individual that Din reported further
10 about his contacts with the village commanders, and it implies the
11 situation in the zone and the activities of the army.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Emmerson.
13 MR. EMMERSON:
14 Q. I think you accept, don't you, that you have no idea, if such
15 contacts did take place, what may or may not have been said?
16 A. I don't know anything about the subject discussed during these
18 Q. Yes, thank you.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson, you were referring to contacts. Were
20 you referring to contacts between Ramush Haradinaj and Din Krasniqi?
21 Because the last time the word "contact" was used, it was the contact
22 between the village commanders and Din Krasniqi.
23 MR. EMMERSON: Well, yes, let me make it absolutely clear.
24 Q. You have no idea, if there was any contact between Mr. Haradinaj
25 and Mr. Krasniqi, you have no idea what passed between them, do you?
1 MR. KEARNEY: Well, Your Honour, that's a -- that question has two
2 parts in it. One misstates this witness's earlier testimony --
3 MR. EMMERSON: Well, I'm sorry.
4 JUDGE ORIE: I --
5 MR. EMMERSON: Let me break the question down again.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please do so.
7 MR. EMMERSON:
8 Q. Assuming that there were contacts between Ramush Haradinaj and Din
9 Krasniqi, do you accept, Witness 17, that you do not know what, if
10 anything, was discussed between them?
11 A. There were contacts; but, as I said, I don't know the subject
12 matter of those contacts. I don't know what they discussed between
13 themselves. I think my answer is clear.
14 Q. Thank you. Now, presumably, as brigade commander, you had the
15 authority to issue instructions to Din Krasniqi; is that correct?
16 A. Depending on how he understood those instructions and how obedient
17 he was.
18 Q. I'm not asking at the moment about whether he was always obedient,
19 but you had the authority to issue instructions to him under the command
20 structure that was in place; is that correct?
21 A. As I already said, it depends on the way he understood those
22 instructions. It depends how -- on how the other side interpreted those
23 instructions; and in this concrete case, Din Krasniqi.
24 Q. You say in your witness statement, at paragraph, 59 that you were
25 informed by two of your officers that a kind of anarchy existed within the
1 command of Din Krasniqi, whereby orders were not being carried out and the
2 chain of command was not respected. I want to ask you, please: What do
3 you mean by "kind of anarchy"?
4 A. What I meant is that certain soldiers, who were under his command
5 before the arrival of the brigade at Baran, continued their activities and
6 continued to present -- to present obstacles in the further creation of
7 the structure, military structure, in Baran.
8 Q. I want to put a passage to you from a statement that you made in
9 November 2004.
10 MR. EMMERSON: It's paragraph 95 for Mr. Kearney's assistance.
11 Q. I'm just going to read it to you, because I don't want to take
12 time over it. You say this: "The KLA were disorganised groups which
13 lacked structure and discipline; by that, I mean they had little or no
14 respect for the chain of command. And the KLA had too many officers and
15 not enough soldiers."
16 Those are your words in your 2004 witness statement. I just want
17 to ask you: Was that the picture you encountered in the area you were
18 commander for?
19 A. Yes, this is true. It is true that I stated that. This is how
20 certain individuals behaved. There was lack of structure and command --
21 chain of command. This is what I observed, at least, when I arrived in
22 Baran. Within the structure, commanding structure, there were talks about
23 the number 35 but not for units, well-organised military units in the
24 vertical sense. This is what I meant when I said not well-organised or
1 Q. And just picking it up from the last remark that you made, what
2 you encountered - have I got this correctly - what you encountered was
3 horizontal in its operation rather than vertical as a commander structure?
4 A. It was still in the phase of being organised, but what I
5 encountered was not a well-organised structure.
6 Q. Thank you. And one of your first tasks on arrival at Baran was to
7 set up a military police unit there; is that right?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. And I think you told us just before the break that you did that on
10 the 12th of July, the very day of your arrival; is that correct?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Now, I wonder if you could help us, please, by looking at -- back
13 at your notebook for the entry on the 13th of July, where you list the
14 military police officers, and this is page 13 of the English translation.
15 Do you have that list?
16 A. Not on the screen.
17 Q. Just give us one moment, please.
18 JUDGE ORIE: I think it is one of the previous pages, I think two
19 pages -- something like two pages back.
20 MR. EMMERSON: I think it's page U008-5675 in the original
21 notebook and page 13 of the English translation.
22 Q. I just want to make sure I've understood how this military police
23 came to be set up. Do you have that list there?
24 MR. EMMERSON: I think the witness has found it.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I do.
1 MR. EMMERSON:
2 Q. Thank you. We can see that, at the very bottom of the list, a man
3 called Hasan Gashi from Lower Baran was elected at the meeting. Was that
4 election -- did that election take place in your presence?
5 A. Yes, and in the presence of Din Krasniqi and certain other village
7 Q. And, if we just look a little lower down, it describes where he
8 had been educated, and then it says: "Person in charge attached to the
9 brigade command."
10 Can I understand, please, does that indicate that Hasan Gashi, the
11 commander, would be attached to your brigade command; is that right?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Thank you. Now, let me just understand the geography, please, for
14 a moment. The brigade HQ where you based yourselves and your soldiers was
15 in what was called the new school in Baran; is that right?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. And the military police that was first established on the 13th of
18 July, were they established nearby in what was called the old school or
19 the red school, a former elementary school; is that right?
20 A. The place was not designated. It was created within the
21 frameworks of the brigade. I established it.
22 Q. You're saying physically they had no designated space?
23 A. Not in the beginning. These were soldiers proposed by the local
24 village commanders. This is the idea of the 12th of July, for the local
25 village commanders to propose soldiers that would become part of the
1 military police unit of the brigade.
2 Q. Now, Cufe Krasniqi has testified to this Tribunal that the
3 military police were established in the old school or the red school. Can
4 I ask you: Did there come a time when the military police of your brigade
5 was located in the old school, the red school, the elementary school?
6 A. They were part of the brigade, which means they were located in
7 the courtyard of the school.
8 Q. Which school?
9 A. The Baran school.
10 Q. So they were located within the courtyard of the building where
11 you, yourself, were based; is that your testimony?
12 A. Yes, this is what I meant.
13 Q. Thank you. Now, Cufe Krasniqi has testified that after you formed
14 the 3rd Brigade that the military police at the Baran barracks included a
15 number of people whose names I want to put to you.
16 The first was Mete Krasniqi. Was he a member of the military
17 police at the Baran barracks?
18 A. According to my list, no.
19 Q. Did he become a member of the military police barracks after the
20 13th of July?
21 A. He came and entered the barracks, but he was never on my list of
22 military police unit, the list of the brigade.
23 Q. But did he have an office, Witness 17? We've heard evidence from
24 a number of people that he had an office at Baran.
25 A. To my knowledge, perhaps he had, but he was not part of the
1 brigade structure. It is possible that a parallel structure existed.
2 Q. I see. And Iber and Avni Krasniqi; now, Cufe Krasniqi has told us
3 that they were also members of the military police based on your command
4 at the Baran school. Is that right?
5 A. I can only say that Ibra was on the list as a person who could
6 become part of the military police unit based on the proposal of the
7 village commanders. I accepted this proposal and I've made an entry on
8 the 13th of July, but this list was not the final one. It needed to be
9 approved by me.
10 Q. And Avni Krasniqi at all, can you help us with him?
11 A. He was not planned to be on that list. Iber Krasniqi, Avni
12 Krasniqi, Zeqe Krasniqi, I know that they were such in the past. They
13 performed the duties of military police members; but after my arrival,
14 they were no longer part of the brigade.
15 Q. Can you think of any reason why Sadri Selca would record that Iber
16 and Avni Krasniqi were members of the military police under your command
17 at Baran? Can you think of any reason why he would think they were?
18 A. I'm not clear about the question.
19 Q. Would there be any reason why your head of security, Sadri Selca,
20 would believe that Iber and Avni Krasniqi were police officers under your
21 direct command?
22 MR. KEARNEY: Your Honour, that calls for speculation on behalf of
23 this witness.
24 JUDGE ORIE: If the question would be whether the witness has any
25 explanation for this difference of recollection, then it doesn't call for
1 speculation anymore.
2 And I think, as a matter of fact, Mr. Emmerson, that the reason
3 why was meant to ask the witness about whether he has an explanation for
4 this difference.
5 MR. EMMERSON: Yes.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So others say that Iber and Avni Krasniqi were
7 police officers. You say they were not. Do you have any explanation for
8 people so close to the events having a difference of recollection on the
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] They were military police officers
11 up to my arrival in Baran. But the formation of the military police
12 within the framework of the brigade, what I can say is that they were not
13 part of this military police of the brigade, because, as I explained, I
14 received the list of proposals of village commanders for members of this
16 No one from these persons that were mentioned here were on that
17 list of proposals for potential members of the military police unit. This
18 is why I'm saying that I am absolutely sure that they were not members of
19 the police, military police unit of the brigade.
20 MR. EMMERSON:
21 Q. So just help me understand this then, please, did they continue to
22 perform the activities as though they were police officers out of the
23 barracks that you were the commander of, even though you didn't have them
24 as part of your command; is that what you're telling us?
25 A. It is possible that they continued to perform the activities of
1 the military police unit members but without authorisation outside my
3 Q. I see. But if Mete Krasniqi had an office there, why did you
4 tolerate that if he wasn't part of your command?
5 A. Perhaps he had a private office but not within the frameworks of
6 that brigade.
7 Q. I see. Did you have people who had private offices within your
9 A. Not in my barracks. As far as I know, there weren't any.
10 Q. I see. Now, I want just to move to a related topic. Mr. Kearney
11 asked you some questions about annex 14 to your 92 ter witness statement,
12 which is tab 14 in this bundle which has proposed Exhibit Number P893.
13 And this was a document dated the 21st of June, signed by Ramush
14 Haradinaj, setting out police -- military police regulations, and you were
15 asked to comment on item 3: "The PU has the task of investigating and
16 uncovering" --
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson, I think the witness --
18 MR. EMMERSON: I'm sorry.
19 JUDGE ORIE: -- upon a specific question, said it was not signed,
20 but the name of Ramush Haradinaj appeared on the bottom.
21 MR. EMMERSON: Your Honour is quite right.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please proceed.
23 MR. EMMERSON:
24 Q. You should be looking in the blue file. It's probably easier if
25 you follow it in the blue file, Witness 17, at tab 14. Now, Mr. Kearney
1 asked you about point 3 that the police unit "has the task of
2 investigating and uncovering, with persuasive facts, all those persons who
3 collaborate in any way with the enemy. "
4 First of all, could I just ask you to look at point 11 for a
5 moment: "Police officers who abuse their uniform or the KLA emblem will
6 be stripped of all their functions and will be subjected to the
7 appropriate sanctions."
8 I want to ask you two things. First of all, was it your policy at
9 Baran to investigate and uncover, with persuasive facts, all those who
10 collaborate in any way with the enemy? Was that your policy?
11 A. The policy of the military police of the brigade was to protect
12 the order in the area of the responsibility of the brigade, and through
13 their commander to report on every kind of incident or on something that
14 would prevent the work and organisation of the brigade. We didn't treat
15 this problem that deeply, the problem mentioned here on item 11.
16 Q. But you did, did you not, under Sadri Selca, arrest and detain
17 suspected collaborators for interview with your authority?
18 A. No. We did not arrest anyone. Somebody else arrested them, and I
19 wanted to know what the reason was for bringing that person to the
20 facilities. That's why I authorised Cufe Krasniqi to see the person and
21 talk to the person.
22 Q. We'll talk about specific cases later on, Witness 17. In your 92
23 ter statement, at paragraph 83, you say this: "Sadri Selca had his own
24 office in the FARK barracks where he conducted interviews of witnesses and
25 suspects. If we brought in a person for an interview, we took notes and
1 released them. This was true even of suspected collaborators."
2 Was it true of suspected collaborators, that you took them in,
3 interviewed them, took notes, and released them?
4 A. I said that the structure was formed in the brigade, structure of
5 individual responsibilities, and we also had a security sector. It was
6 Sadri Selca's task, and I was convinced that he would do everything he was
7 asked properly, with high authority and professionalism. He invited
8 persons, witnesses spoke to them, and he did what he had to do.
9 Q. Did he, under your authority, bring in and question suspected
11 A. As commander of the brigade, as a person responsible for the whole
12 area, I assigned duties to each sector, and it was impossible for me to
13 directly see what was going on in each sector, who they invited to talk
14 to, and what they did. They were my subordinates, and they had to do
15 their duties with full responsibility. I could not speak in more detail
16 with Sadri, especially in the beginning.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson --
18 MR. EMMERSON: Yes.
19 JUDGE ORIE: -- may I ask one question.
20 Witness 17, you describe who had what duties, et cetera. It all
21 happened under your command. Is it your testimony that you never have
22 heard of any person brought in, interviewed, and then free to go after
23 that who was suspected of collaboration? You had no information
24 whatsoever about the type of interviews that were conducted, the subjects,
25 whether in any detail? But you never heard, "We interviewed today Mr. X,
1 Y, or Z because we suspected him of collaborating in this and this way."
2 You never heard about that?
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Not in the beginning. Later, I
4 heard that they were speaking about the arrest of a young woman. That's
5 when I intervened, and I asked to be informed, who had stopped her, and
6 why had she been stopped.
7 MR. EMMERSON: I'm sorry --
8 JUDGE ORIE: That's one case.
9 MR. EMMERSON: That's presumably the Sanije Balaj case.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I take it you're referring to a young woman by
11 the name of Sanije Balaj. Is that the only time you ever learned about
12 such interviews? I mean, was this police mainly interviewing thefts, et
13 cetera, and it's from the evidence we heard that collaboration might have
14 been an issue at that time which might have caught some attention. And
15 you say, just apart from this one case, "I never heard about ..."
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There were interviews. But as far
17 as collaborators or people who collaborated with the enemy, these things I
18 did not know about in the beginning because I was involved in military
19 actions at that time. I was involved with the offensive, but the
20 responsible person had this duty that he had to perform.
21 JUDGE ORIE: And they never reported to you,"We interviewed five
22 people this week, three for theft, two for collaboration"? You never
23 discussed the impact interviews may have had on military operations?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Later, we did, because Sadri kept in
25 contact with me. And the later cases were more flagrant, and he came and
1 told me about the Sanije Balaj case and the attempted murder of Tahir
3 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Emmerson.
4 MR. EMMERSON:
5 Q. Cufe Krasniqi has testified that it was your policy to detain
6 suspected collaborators for interview now -- at Baran. That's the
7 question I want to put to you: Was it your policy to detain suspected
8 collaborators and interview them and release them?
9 A. What Cufe Krasniqi said here I cannot comment on.
10 Q. You can. You can tell us if it was your policy or not.
11 A. I had a military police unit, and I delegated the responsibility
12 to the commander of this community to conduct his duties.
13 Q. Very well. Could you turn to tab 17, please, where you will find
14 some notes made by Sadri Selca and produced by you as part of your
15 evidence. This is --
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson, is there any issue about using notes of
17 Sadri Selca?
18 MR. EMMERSON: Not -- these are notes produced by this witness
19 from his contemporary records.
20 JUDGE ORIE: If there's no issue, I'm interested --
21 MR. EMMERSON: If there's an issue later on regarding to any
22 matter of the kind that might --
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I'd like to hear now any objections against the
24 using of notes. I don't know whether -- not primarily Prosecution, but
25 perhaps other Defence counsel.
1 MR. EMMERSON: I'll make it absolutely clear. I'm not tendering
2 these notes as evidence of the truth of its contents. I'm tendering them
3 to the test the witness's evidence.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
5 MR. EMMERSON: This is proposed Exhibit number P896, annex 18 to
6 your witness statement.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Excuse me.
8 Mr. Guy-Smith.
9 MR. GUY-SMITH: To be clear, Annex 18 is --
10 JUDGE ORIE: Annex 18. I mean, I am not asking this question --
11 MR. GUY-SMITH: I understand why you're asking the question. It
12 was my understanding that if we came to this point that these notes would
13 be proffered for the very reason that Mr. Emmerson suggested; and with
14 that in mind, I have no difficulty.
15 JUDGE ORIE: That's what he's doing. But, at the same time, we
16 have not labelled evidence as to the content to the truth, just to
17 destabilise this. I mean, evidence is evidence, and, of course, the
18 Chamber will use it --
19 MR. GUY-SMITH: Sure.
20 JUDGE ORIE: -- in a responsible way. And the Chamber will also
21 carefully listen to any objections raised during it, but evidence as such
22 is not labelled. Yes.
23 MR. EMMERSON: Thank you.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
25 MR. EMMERSON:
1 Q. If you could turn, please, if you look at the pages that are in,
2 what we call, landscape format, you will find the numbers in the top
3 right-hand corner stamped, and I wonder if you could start please looking
4 at U008-5586 to an entry against the name of Jashar Daut Berisha. And
5 this is page 6 of the English translation: "Jashar Daut Berisha from the
6 village of Kepuz where he lives, born," and it is given, "a pensioner, was
7 summoned for an interview on the 2nd September, 1998, regarding a
8 conversation conducted with Emin Berisha from Pristina who works in the
9 Serbian state security," and then Mr. Selca had recorded some information
10 from that conversation. Do you see that entry?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Thank you. Item number 10: "Rasim Jashar Berisha from the
13 village of Kepuz, summoned for an interview in connection with the
14 spreading of disinformation." Do you see that?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. If you could just look now at items 15, 17 --
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson.
18 MR. EMMERSON: I'm sorry.
19 Q. If you could just look now at items 15, 17, and 19, each of those
20 refer to individuals who'd been brought to Baran by the military police
21 for various matters. Do you see that?
22 Not, as it happens, collaboration, but individuals who had been
23 brought in. Do you see that?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. And item 19, to a name that appears there - I'm not going to read
1 it out on the public record at the moment - an individual from the village
2 of Turjake was taken for an interview regarding his collaboration with the
3 Serbian police and several other cases. Do you see that?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. This is a list of people that Sadri Selca is recording as having
6 been brought into your barracks for questioning, isn't it?
7 A. Yes. Of course, he must have brought in these people, because he
8 has kept these notes after the talks or conversations with them, as it
9 appears from what I see.
10 Q. Paragraph 81 of your 92 ter statement, if we could just have a
11 look at that for a moment, where you deal with that item number 19, you
12 say: "I do not know where he got the information or where the abduction
13 actually occurred."
14 Can I ask you: Why were you referring to someone who'd been
15 brought in for questioning by your own security officer as an abduction?
16 A. I don't remember this passage. I'm not clear about this
17 abduction, in what context it appears.
18 Q. In your 92 ter statement, you're commenting at paragraph 81 on
19 that very entry I've just taken you to, and you said: "I do not know
20 where he got this information or where the abduction actually occurred."
21 I'm simply asking you why you referred to the taking in of an
22 individual by officers under your command for questioning for
23 collaboration as an abduction.
24 A. I would like to know, paragraph 81, is it connected to any other
25 previous paragraph? Maybe there is another paragraph that is logically
1 connected to it, so that I can understand it.
2 Q. You've got your statement in front of you, Witness 17.
3 A. Yes, I do.
4 Q. What you say in paragraph 81 is this: (redacted)
9 JUDGE ORIE: You're reading, Mr. Emmerson.
10 MR. EMMERSON:
11 Q. "I do not know where he got the information or where the abduction
12 actually occurred."
13 And the question I'm asking you, looking at that entry in context
14 as you've accepted, and given that this was an individual brought in by
15 your officers for questioning by your security people, why you're
16 suggesting that it was an abduction.
17 A. I said that I don't know where he got the that information from,
18 while the word "abduction" should be substituted with the stopping of a
19 person. Somebody had been stopped and then brought in to have the
20 interview. That is my explanation. I didn't give any other explanation.
21 Q. And so to return to the first questions I asked you in this line
22 of questioning, officers under your control, under your authority, were
23 authorised to bring people in for questioning for suspected collaboration,
24 and they were then released. Is that right?
25 A. According to Sadri Selca's notes, which I did not see at the time
1 because I did not have time, as I said, I was involved in operations and I
2 was not able to go to his office and check all his notes about the things
3 that he did. These notes I took with me after my left Kosova, so I was
4 not aware directly at the time about these notes. These notes are -- bear
5 the date September 1998, and that was the time of a major Serb offensive
6 and we had to face up to that offensive.
7 Q. I fully understand that the Serb offensives in August and
8 September were a massive distraction for all of you, and we'll come back
9 to that when we deal with the reports you made to Mr. Haradinaj. Can you
10 turn to paragraph 63 in your 92 ter statement, please, Witness 17.
11 Paragraph 63, do you have it?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. You there refer and exhibit a signed order signed by Mr.
14 Haradinaj, dated the 25th of -- I'm sorry, the 24th of June, which lists
15 seven specific directives. Item 1 orders a mobilisation, and you make the
16 point that item 6 threatens imprisonment as one of a number of penalties
17 if an order is not implemented. And we have that order at tab 19 of the
18 blue bundle. Could you just turn it up and remind yourself of it, please.
19 Tab 19, do you have it? Have you found your place to tab 19, Witness 17?
20 A. Yes, yes.
21 Q. Could you just look, please, with me at the reference number at
22 the top right-hand corner: "Ev. Op 24/06/98." Do you see that?
23 Could you answer, please?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. If we actually look at what item 6 says, first of all, this is a
1 general mobilisation order, would you agree?
2 A. There is nothing to agree, because I did not formulate this
3 document. This was worded and written and signed, as you can see here, by
4 Ramush Haradinaj.
5 Q. But you saw it at the time, didn't you, Witness 17? You saw it
6 whilst you were at Baran. You had it available to you in your office,
7 didn't you?
8 A. Yes. Some orders during the formation of the general command,
9 after the 21st of August, the documents were collected and put together.
10 At that time I was Chief of Staff, and that's how I came upon these
11 documents and they form part of my archives. I cannot explain the
12 documents -- document as such, though, because it has not been written by
14 Q. Thank you. And then if we just look at what item 6 actually says,
15 it says: "In cases where this order is opposed or not implemented,
16 immediate measures of isolation, removal of weapons, and imprisonment will
17 be taken, and these will be reported to the Operational Staff of the Plain
18 of Dukagjin and the Central Staff of the KLA respectively."
19 Do you see that?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. I just want to ask you, Witness 17: You, personally, as commander
22 at Baran, you issued mobilisation orders threatening to arrest people if
23 they didn't comply quite frequently, didn't you?
24 A. I didn't issue any orders. I gave tasks. I assigned tasks.
25 Q. If you look to tab 20, please. These documents I'm going to take
1 you to now are documents you produced to the Prosecution when you were
2 interviewed in 2004. Tab 20 was your document as produced. It is Defence
3 document identification 1D56-0025, and it's an unofficial translation.
4 Witness 17, this is an order, dated the 4th of August, mobilising
5 soldiers who had been or referring to soldiers who had been mobilised in
6 the 3rd Brigade, directing them to go to their units and threatening
7 arresting measures according to law which will be implemented after 8.00
8 p.m. if an individual fails to comply.
9 Is that the sort of order you issued, Witness 17, just so we're
11 MR. KEARNEY: Your Honour, I'm going to object to the form of that
12 question. "Is that the sort of order you issued," I think that's vague
13 and unspecific at this time.
14 MR. EMMERSON: Very well. The witness produced this document
15 himself, electronically.
16 Q. Can I ask you: Did you issue orders requiring people to attend
17 the barracks and threaten them with arrest according to the law if they
18 failed to do so?
19 A. If you look at this order, there is the name of a person here who
20 is not me. The 4th of August coincides with the enemy's offensive in Lugu
21 i Baranit, in two villages of Lugu i Baranit; and, at that time, some kind
22 of disorganisation happened, some soldiers left their units. And that's
23 the purpose of this document, that these soldiers were invited to go back,
24 to return, and that's how I can explain this document or this order.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Witness 17, you're not asked to explain the order.
1 You're asked whether such an order was issued by you, this one or similar
2 one; that is, those who do not obey will be arrested in accordance with
3 the law.
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] According to the explanation I gave
5 of this document, there is a possibility that I might have issued such an
6 order after the soldiers left during the offensive. There is a
8 JUDGE ORIE: Aren't you telling us that there were good reasons to
9 give such orders at that point in time?
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The reason was because the units
11 became disorganised and --
12 JUDGE ORIE: I'm not asking you to repeat the reasons, but I'm
13 asking you whether, although with a lot of words, you actually say at that
14 point in time there was a good reason you just gave to give such--
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There were reasons.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Now, if there were good reasons to give such an
17 order, you say there's a possibility --
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
19 JUDGE ORIE: -- which if I have a good reason to do something, I
20 usually remember whether I did do or whether I didn't do something.
21 So were these orders given at the time with your knowledge, under
22 your authority? You're not here to stand trial, let's be very clear. We
23 just would like to know what happened at that point in time.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I said, after the disorganisation
25 that happened after the operations, I might have issued such orders to
1 have the soldiers return back to the units and to complete the units.
2 MR. EMMERSON: Thank you.
3 Q. Can I ask you to turn behind tab 21 now, where there's an order
4 dated the 15th of August, which you also produced to the Prosecution,
5 calling up villagers from Buqan and Vranoc and bearing your name. Do you
6 see that?
7 MR. EMMERSON: Tab 21 is Defence --
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can see it.
9 MR. EMMERSON: Tab 21 Defence document identification 1D56-0021.
10 Q. Yes, I'm sorry. You were about to say you can see it. Bear in
11 mind you produced this document to the Prosecution, Witness 17. Can you
12 help us, please, is that an order that you issued calling up persons from
13 Buqan and Vranoc on the 15th of August, 1998?
14 A. Yes. This is a document calling for mobilisation of individuals
15 from these villages.
16 Q. And at the very end, again, you say: "For any kind of
17 unresponding, military police must get active and arrest according to
18 law," don't you?
19 A. In these documents, I cannot -- yes, it is there.
20 Q. Thank you.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson, just, at tab 21, you said --
22 MR. EMMERSON: It's 1 --
23 JUDGE ORIE: It bears the name issued by --
24 MR. EMMERSON: I do apologise. My mistake.
25 JUDGE ORIE: That must be a mistake then.
1 Then for tab 20 and 21, they have not yet been assigned any
3 MR. EMMERSON: Yes. There's going to be one more. May I do that
4 one first and then assign the numbers?
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, then assign three D numbers.
6 MR. EMMERSON:
7 Q. Tab 22 now, if you would, please, another document produced by
8 you. This is dated the 31st of July, 1998, and it is identification it
9 1D56-0035. And this one is one which bears your name, Witness 17, and was
10 produced by you. And if we look at it on two sides, it is a blank form,
11 so no names filled in on it, for the requisitioning of a vehicle and for
12 the mobilisation of an individual on the other side. Do you see that?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Yes. And just so that we're clear, if we look at the rubric that
15 appears on both of those orders, it says: "According to fighting
16 circumstances in Lugu i Baranit, by intention to face successfully
17 fighting operations relying on the order Ev.Op June 24, 1998 ..."
18 And then at the bottom, it says: "The above-mentioned local HQ,"
19 I'm looking at the second one now, "is obliged to finish this order. In
20 case it isn't implemented, we will act according to point 6 of the
21 above-mentioned order."
22 Do you see that?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. The reference there to point 6 of order Ev.Op June 24 is a
25 reference back to the general mobilisation order, bearing the name of
1 Mr. Haradinaj, signed on the 24th of June, which is annex 15 and tab 19 in
2 this bundle, isn't it?
3 It's a reference back, Witness 17, to point 6, the one you draw
4 attention to in your witness statement and to the very same general
5 mobilisation order. And what I'm suggesting to you --
6 MR. KEARNEY: Well, counsel, I'm going to ask -- there's two or
7 three questions pending now. The witness is still trying to catch up by
8 looking at the documents himself.
9 MR. EMMERSON: Very well.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Perhaps we should give some time.
11 Witness 17, in the blank document just to be filled in, in which
12 your name appears at the bottom as a commander, reference is made to the
13 24th of June order with the name of Ramush Haradinaj on the bottom, signed
14 by him, in which it is said that those who are opposing or not
15 implementing the order, measures will immediately be taken and those
16 measures include imprisonment.
17 MR. EMMERSON:
18 Q. Witness 17, you can see the reference number. The suggestion I'm
19 making to you is that the draft documents you produced were citing the
20 authority of this general mobilisation order - that's the point I'm making
21 to you - as the authority for the mobilisations that you yourself were
22 ordering. It's plainly the case, is it not?
23 A. Yes, according to the document.
24 Q. Yes. Now, you told us you only saw that document, the 24th of
25 June document, after the 21st of August when there was a handover of
1 command. It's obviously not right, is it? You must have had that
2 document in front of you when putting a date on the blank, mustn't you?
3 A. Whether I had this document earlier than that date, this I cannot
4 say. I'm not sure. It is possible that, according to the coordination
5 between my brigade and Tahir Zemaj, because we did have coordination with
6 the Dukagjini Plain staff, it is possible that we had it. But, as I said,
7 I don't remember having it before me at that time.
8 Q. By incorporating point 6 of the general mobilisation order,
9 Witness 17, you're threatening imprisonment, but you've told us that the
10 Baran barracks had no detention facility. Can I ask you how you would
11 have effected imprisonment, if you had been called upon to do so in the
12 absence of a detention facility, or were these really essentially empty
14 A. I wouldn't call it a threat, rather information, because those
15 persons who were called for mobilisation should respond to this call. And
16 this is informing them what can happen with them in case they fail to
17 report for mobilisation.
18 Q. But my question, Witness 17 - and it's the last one I'll ask
19 before inviting the Trial Chamber for a short break - my question was:
20 Given that you had no detention facility, you obviously never really
21 intended to imprison anybody; is that right?
22 A. I already explained the reasons why this order was issued.
23 Q. Very well. I won't pursue that any further.
24 MR. EMMERSON: Would that be a convenient moment?
25 JUDGE ORIE: It is a convenient moment. I would have, however,
1 one rather technical questions perhaps to be -- to think about over the
2 break. Paragraph 81 of the witness statement where he uses -- of the 92
3 ter statement, is in line with the guidance given by the Chamber, and on
4 the basis of the objections raised, especially by Mr. Guy-Smith, was
5 redacted. Now, the question arises whether it's -- at the same time, the
6 witness gave his attestation on the basis of the statement without
8 This raises the issue to what extent one could put to a witness
9 language which he attested to be the language he used, and at the same
10 time which is excluded from evidence.
11 MR. EMMERSON: May I have a discussion with Mr. Guy-Smith over the
12 adjournment. It was, as Your Honour rightly points out, an objection
13 raised by him.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
15 MR. EMMERSON: May I have a discussion if --
16 JUDGE ORIE: When we gave the guidance, I did not hear anything of
17 the kind, like: "No. 81 should stay in, so therefore..."
18 MR. EMMERSON: Your Honour is quite right, but may I invite
19 Mr. Guy-Smith over the adjournment to consider whether he would like to
20 withdraw his objection. I had indicated there are certain passages on the
21 92 ter which may have to be redacted that currently are not.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I am aware of that. At the same time, it's not
23 only Mr. Guy-Smith who is involved, it's Mr. Kearney who is involved here,
24 because the guidance was to elicit the evidence if need be orally and to
25 have it redacted.
1 Now, this specific portion was not elicited by Mr. Kearney, so I'd
2 like to -- all parties involved to sit together and to see how we
3 procedurally should resolve this matter. I'm not going to ask your
4 attention to it at this moment.
5 Another question I would have is: We now, I think for the first
6 time in this case, we find documents under tab 20, 21, 22, which are not
7 annexes to the 92 ter statement, which seem to be have been produced
9 I mean, if you give me half an hour, Mr. Emmerson, I would produce
10 similar documents perhaps with some typing errors, so that raises --
11 MR. EMMERSON: I can -- there's no difficulty with that at all.
12 The witness handed the Prosecution's investigator, Barney Kelly, a floppy
13 disk which contained these documents from the computer system, as he said,
14 held by his forces; in other words, he provided these documents in that
15 form, as computer-generated documents.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. That also gives further opportunities that if
17 there's any doubt about authenticity, then, of course, the floppy disk
18 could help us out. Technology used at that time is not the technology
19 used at this time, but I wondered what-- actually how authentic these
20 documents were.
21 MR. EMMERSON: I'll give Your Honour the reference to the passages
22 in the 2004 witness statement, which is in the bundle at tab 34, after the
23 short adjournment, if I may.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And since only the 92 ter statement was
25 suggested as would be tendered, I at least - although, I had the 2004
1 statement available - I refrained from reading it because I wanted to
2 focus on what would be in evidence.
3 [Trial Chamber confers]
4 JUDGE ORIE: Then the last thing I would like to ask you, Witness
5 17, before we take a break is whether you would be willing at this moment
6 to hand out, perhaps with the assistance of Madam Usher, to hand out the
7 original of your notes to Mr. Harvey.
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I am sorry, but I cannot find them
9 in my bag. I went through them last night, so I guess I forgot them in my
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Do you have any suggestion on how we could get
12 it from your room or would you be willing to perhaps give it to someone
13 from the Victims and Witnesses Section this afternoon, who would then give
14 it to Mr. Harvey, who would then return it, well, let's say within the
15 hour to the officer of the Victims and Witnesses Section?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I found them. They are in the other
17 file --
18 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's Correction: Folder.
19 MR. HARVEY: Thank you, Your Honours.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Well, so there are no additional tasks for the
21 Victims and Witnesses Section.
22 Mr. Harvey, I take it that after the break you'll report
23 whether -- first of all, they will be returned to the witness, but you'll
24 report whether there would be any follow-up needed.
25 MR. HARVEY: Yes, of course.
1 JUDGE ORIE: We have a break until five minutes to 1.00.
2 --- Recess taken at 12.36 p.m.
3 --- On resuming at 1.00 p.m.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Witness 17, before we'll continue, I have to deliver
5 a decision which has got nothing to do with you. But since it takes a few
6 measures to have you out and in the courtroom, just remain seated where
7 you are.
8 I will deliver a short order concerning the filing status of the
9 Prosecution's motion for videolink testimony of Witness 30, a motion which
10 was filed on the 15th of August, 2007. The motion was properly filed ex
11 parte. We have since sought the advice of the Victims and Witnesses
12 Section. Today the Chamber has been advised that while the country of
13 residence of Witness 30 is confidential information which may,
14 nonetheless, be shared among the parties, no more specific information
15 about the witness's current location may be disclosed.
16 In light of this, the Chamber orders the Prosecution to re-file
17 its motion confidentially and inter partes. The Prosecution must take
18 particular care to redact any information as to location which is more
19 specific than the country of residence; for example, the header of annex B
20 will need to be redacted. The accused are, of course, entitled to see the
21 re-filed motion, and they have one week - Defence has one week - from the
22 date of re-filing to make a response.
23 This concludes the Chamber's order.
24 Then, Mr. Emmerson, you are invited, first of all, just for the
25 purposes of the record to indicate, I think, it was tab 19, what
1 provisional number has been assigned to that decision, if it was not yet
2 in evidence, but let me just check. Tab 19.
3 MR. EMMERSON: That is proposed Exhibit Number P894.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And then for tab 20 --
5 MR. EMMERSON: That is --
6 JUDGE ORIE: -- 21, and 22, we have no numbers assigned to it.
7 MR. EMMERSON: No.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar, for number 20, order, it says signed
9 by a person, but that should be with the name of the person on it because
10 I do not see any signature. Tab 20 would be ...?
11 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we'll mark this for identification
12 as D156.
13 JUDGE ORIE: The date of the document is 4th of August, 1998. 21,
14 order for soldiers from Buqan and Vranoc with the name of the person
15 mentioned here on it, dated 15th of August, 1998.
16 MR. EMMERSON: 22 should be admitted under seal.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but I'm -- well, yes, I do understand, but I was
18 just at 21 only. Yes.
19 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, tab 21 will be marked for
20 identification as D157.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Now, Mr. Emmerson, repeatedly, you said Buqan and
22 Vranoc. For 21, I can't find any reference to -- oh, there are the two.
23 Let me just --
24 MR. EMMERSON: Buqan is on the first page -- the first list, and
25 Vranoc on the second.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I see that. So, as a matter of fact, the
2 document is two orders for soldiers, or is it one order? I think it's
4 MR. EMMERSON: It's as it appears. It appears to be one order of
5 the same day, with two sets of soldiers.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Well, at least it covers both these locations.
7 And then 22 marked for identification, but should be under seal,
8 mobilisation order for a vehicle, that also is a document with two
9 elements in it: I think one specific about vehicles; the other one about
10 persons rather than vehicles.
11 THE REGISTRAR: As D158, under seal, Your Honours.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
13 Please proceed, Mr. Emmerson.
14 MR. EMMERSON:
15 Q. Witness 17, could you please go back to your notebook behind tab 1
16 and find, again, the list of military police officers who you say were
17 appointed under your command on the 12th of July.
18 MR. EMMERSON: It should be U008-5675; and for those following in
19 the English translation, page 13.
20 Q. I want to ask you some questions at this stage about the list of
21 wanted persons that appears immediately beneath the list of names of
22 police officers that you accepted to be directly under your command.
23 Now, you tell -- you told us yesterday that, although you don't
24 remember who gave you this list, it was given to you at a meeting on the
25 12th. Was that the same meeting as the meeting at which the military
1 police officers were appointed?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. And were you given the list orally or in writing?
4 A. I don't remember. I don't know.
5 Q. If you didn't write it down until the next day, Witness 17, would
6 you have been able to remember the names of all of those people whose
7 names you tell us you'd never heard before?
8 A. I didn't know these names at all.
9 Q. Let me ask you this, please: What did you understand to be the
10 purpose of giving to you, the new commander, this list of names?
11 A. I wasn't thinking about these reasons at the time.
12 Q. Well, when the list was given to you, what was said to you about
13 it? You've written "wanted" at the top. Somebody must have told you,
14 must they not, that these were people who were being sought; is that
16 A. Apart from the notes that I took from that meeting, there were
17 other persons who were taking notes as well. So there is a possibility
18 that a piece of paper containing these names was given to me, and that
19 later on I transcribed these names in my notebook and destroyed that piece
20 of paper. This is a possibility.
21 Q. Yes, I understand that. The question I'm asking you, though, is:
22 Somebody's come to you just after you've appointed the military police, at
23 the same meeting, and given you a list of people who are being looked for.
24 These were people, were they not, who your new military police were
25 looking for?
1 A. The military police was not appointed immediately. It was the
2 village commanders who filed their proposals first. This I mentioned
3 earlier as well, and it had to undergo certain procedure. This list of
4 proposals had to be approved by me, and the approval did not take place on
5 the same date.
6 Q. You've told us that, of the list that you wrote on the 13th, so
7 the next day, you've told us that at the meeting the day before Hasan
8 Gashi was elected as chief of police, and he was to be attached to your
10 Now, let's be clear, Witness 17, the list of persons that you
11 wrote down, they're a list of persons that the police officers under your
12 command were looking for, aren't they?
13 A. Yes, but Hasan Gashi was elected as person -- the most appropriate
14 person for commander of the military police unit but not the other
15 persons, because the decision for the other persons was not reached yet.
16 It was still in the phase of proposals.
17 Q. And why did you, as the commander, choose to write this list in
18 your notebook of people who were being looked for my your new military
19 police commander?
20 MR. KEARNEY: Your Honour, I believe that misstates his testimony.
21 I believe his testimony was that he received this list from others that
22 were -- this list had already been composed before he arrived at this
24 MR. EMMERSON: I think if you look at page 75, lines 17 to 19, the
25 witness confirms that this was a list of people that the police officers
1 were looking for.
2 JUDGE ORIE: That does not identify which police officers, but
3 let's ask. The question is: Why did you write down these names?
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Because I made notes about these
5 things. I wanted to be in the flow of every event that was going on in my
6 area of responsibility, and that's why I made note of the names of these
7 persons. These persons were sought; but, at the time, I did not think of
8 who was looking for them and why. This is the explanation I can give you.
9 MR. EMMERSON:
10 Q. You see, you told us earlier on that you weren't aware that your
11 police officers were much interested in collaborators, and here we have a
12 list that you wrote down of people who were being looked for by the
13 officers you were appointing under your command and, for example, at item
14 8, two women collaborators.
15 You knew, did you not, Witness 17, that these men with you just
16 appointed, that they were looking for this list of alleged collaborators?
17 A. According to the notes that I have, none of the names is
18 accompanied with the word "collaborator," or there is no reason why they
19 are being sought. I just have made an entry there saying "persons
20 sought," and then the names of these persons follow, nothing else.
21 Q. Did you ask why your authority was to be used to search for
23 MR. KEARNEY: Well, that misstates his testimony, Your Honour.
24 MR. EMMERSON: Let me put the question again.
25 Q. Did you ask why they were being sought?
1 A. No.
2 Q. Why not?
3 A. I didn't ask, and I wouldn't know why I didn't ask.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Witness 17, the Chamber discussed briefly over the
5 break the way in which you're answering questions. The Chamber gets the
6 impression that you're rather evasive in your answers. The Chamber,
7 therefore, would like to remind you that you have given a solemn
8 declaration that you will not only speak the truth, but the whole truth
9 and nothing but the truth. Whatever you remember you should tell.
10 MR. EMMERSON:
11 Q. Look at item 8, Witness 17. You just told us a moment ago you
12 didn't know why people were being searched for. You wrote, in your own
13 notebook, in your own hand, "two women collaborators, Turjake."
14 You knew that the men that you had taken under your command under
15 the authority of Hasan Gashi, the person attached to your brigade command,
16 was at the very least looking for two women collaborators, didn't you?
17 MR. KEARNEY: Your Honour, again, counsel is suggesting that on
18 this date he had taken this list of men under his command, and it's very
19 clear from this witness's own testimony that these were proposed military
20 policemen given to him by village commanders.
21 MR. EMMERSON: It's also --
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But, well, whether these were his own police
23 officers or other police officers, these were persons which were to be
24 sought by police officers.
25 MR. EMMERSON: Yes --
1 JUDGE ORIE: And --
2 MR. EMMERSON: With respect, the witness has testified very
3 clearly that Hasan Gashi, as his notes reflect, was attached to the
4 brigade command and was the commander of the group of police officers --
5 JUDGE ORIE: That's clear. But the quote you just gave,
6 Mr. Emmerson, that was a reference to earlier on. Let me check that
8 MR. EMMERSON: Your Honour will see it on the line immediately
9 preceding the wanted list on the notebook.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I see that. I'd just like to return to the
11 answer the witness gave earlier. Let me just check that. You referred us
12 to page -- to a certain line. I looked it up at that moment, but I'm just
13 trying to find it. After the objection from Mr. Kearney, page 75, line --
15 You confirmed, earlier, that this was a list of persons that the
16 police officers under your command were looking for. That was asked to
17 you by Mr. Emmerson, and you said: "Yes," and then you gave an
18 explanation about the election of Hasan Gashi. That's what the transcript
19 tells us as what you said.
20 Yes. I see that you're nodding in a way as if you would not agree
21 with what I just said.
22 MR. EMMERSON: Well --
23 JUDGE ORIE: Let's give Witness 17 an opportunity to ...
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] By your leave, I want to be more
25 clear, although I repeated the same thing yesterday and today. On the
1 12th of July in Baran, the proposal for the formation of the military
2 police was made. Hasan Gashi was elected at that meeting, and the list
3 was offered to me.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Let me stop you there. Well, you now come to the
5 list. That's the last words. I'm interested in the list, not in the
6 appointment of police officers and how this actually went on. So you said
7 "and the list," could you tell us what this list was about.
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I made note of this list that was
9 offered to me by someone. I don't know who gave that list to me, but
10 there is a note of it in my notebook.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But you would only write down, especially if
12 you do it the next day, any information that is relevant for you, isn't
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I was not in a position to carry out
15 one activity and write at the same time. I took notes and then I
16 transcribed those notes in my official notebook on the next day or
17 whenever I had time to make these notes, and I did make note of the most
18 important events.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. This was not an event, but this is an activity?
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I really don't see the difference
21 between an event and activity. I don't know what kind of activity this
22 could be.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Well, looking for persons, as a matter of fact.
24 Mr. Emmerson, please proceed.
25 MR. EMMERSON:
1 Q. Just to be clear, Witness 17, who did you think was going to go
2 find them?
3 A. I was not thinking about this at the time. I wasn't pre-occupied
4 with this. My pre-occupation was to create the brigade, to find
5 locations, suitable location, and to form further structures.
6 Q. But you did know, didn't you, that at least two of the people on
7 that list were being looked for on the grounds that they were alleged to
8 be collaborators, the two women mentioned at item 8?
9 A. I made a note of the information the way it was served to me,
10 given to me, by a person.
11 Q. Did you think there was anything improper about this list that had
12 been given to you? Did you think, for example, it was evidence of a plan
13 to commit crimes?
14 A. No, I didn't.
15 Q. So can we take it then that you never took this list to Ramush
16 Haradinaj, and said, "Look, these men under my command are looking for
18 A. No, I didn't, that's true. I didn't take it to him.
19 Q. Well, before we look at some of the people on --
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. If you want to go into details, otherwise, I
21 would suggest to move on. Unless you want to go into details, I would
22 have a specific question as far as number 10 is concerned.
23 MR. EMMERSON: Well, I'm going to come back to a number of them,
24 in fact, in due course.
25 Q. Now, before we look at the people who were actually on your list,
1 I wonder if you could just turn to the list of soldiers that's in your
3 MR. EMMERSON: And for those of us following in English, it's page
4 54 of the English translation.
5 Q. And I'm looking at a soldier numbered 144 in the list of soldiers
6 under your command, Witness 17. Do you have him? Do you have number 144?
7 There's a list of soldiers in your notebook, and they're all given a
8 separate number, and I want you to look, please, at 144. It's at
9 U008-5712, and it has a line put through it and the word "deserter"
10 written. Do you see it? Have you found it?
11 MR. EMMERSON: Would you like to just assist the witness, please.
12 Thank you very much indeed. It's 5712.
13 Q. Do you see that? It's on the screen in front of you, Witness 17.
15 A. Yes, I can see it on the screen.
16 Q. Now, I just want to be clear with you, when you wrote down the
17 names of soldiers in your book, it's clear at the very beginning of the
18 list that you put the name of the -- the first name of the soldier, then
19 you put his father's name in the middle, and then the family name. Is
20 that right?
21 A. I can explain. This list was made during mobilisation and the
22 coming of soldiers to the brigade, and I don't -- did not compile this
24 Q. I don't need a lengthy explanation. If you look at the very
25 beginning of the list of names, you'll find - it's our page 19 - that the
1 first line for each entry is the person's first name with the father's
2 name in the middle and then the surname.
3 And so what 144 is telling us, Witness 17, is that this is a
4 soldier whose name is Mejdin Gashi and whose father's name is Kemal Gashi.
5 Do you see that?
6 A. I wanted to explain that this list that you're saying I wrote
7 down, this was not compiled by me. These are not my notes. These are
8 notes of the person who was responsible for the mobilisation of soldiers
9 in the brigade. These are not my notes.
10 Q. Whoever wrote the notes, they're a list of the soldiers in your
11 brigade; is that correct?
12 A. Yes. I just took issue with what you said that I wrote this list.
13 This was a list that was compiled by the person who was in charge of
14 mobilisation and writing down the details of the persons who were
16 Q. Witness 17, the Trial Chamber has heard evidence from this
17 soldier, and he has given evidence that, on the 27th of July or
18 thereabouts, he was approached by Musa Dragaj and told to report to Mete
19 Krasniqi's office at Baran, where his father was being detained for
20 suspected collaboration. Musa Dragaj was one of your inner circle of
21 officers from the FARK brigade, wasn't he?
22 A. Yes. Musa Dragaj was in the brigade, but I'm not aware of this
23 case, of what he told to someone. I'm not aware.
24 Q. But, of course, if the testimony we've heard is right it would
25 mean that one of your FARK officers is cooperating directly with Mete
1 Krasniqi in the investigation of a suspected collaborator. And what I
2 want to explore with you, and the question I'm going to put to you is
3 this: Were your FARK officers cooperating directly with Mete Krasniqi?
4 MR. KEARNEY: Your Honour, this witness has already said he's not
5 aware of this incident, so this question is asking him to speculate at
6 this stage.
7 MR. EMMERSON: No, it's not at all. It's a question of whether or
8 not the FARK officers under the man's immediate control were cooperating
9 with Mete Krasniqi, given this witness's --
10 JUDGE ORIE: The objection is denied, also in view of my previous
11 comment I made.
12 Please proceed.
13 MR. EMMERSON:
14 Q. Were your senior FARK inner circle cooperating with Mete Krasniqi?
15 Because you've told us a little while ago that, although he may have had
16 an office on your premises, he wasn't part of your structure.
17 A. That's true, that he was not part of my structure. I don't know
18 of any legitimate way that my subordinates contacted him or cooperated
19 with him; however, I could not stop them from having personal contacts
20 with him.
21 Q. This isn't a personal contact. This is directing one of your
22 soldiers under your command to report to his office, where his father was
23 allegedly being detained for suspected collaboration. Now, I want to ask
24 you - and bearing in mind the oath that you've taken - were your senior
25 FARK officers cooperating with Mete Krasniqi?
1 JUDGE ORIE: If I may add to that, whether legitimate or not.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I am not aware of any cooperation,
3 legitimate cooperation, with my authorisation or at my request or at my
4 permission. Maybe without my authorisation they might have, but not with
5 my organisation.
6 MR. EMMERSON:
7 Q. Did you come to learn that Mete Krasniqi was beating people
8 adjacent to your barracks on the 27th or 28th of July, something you found
10 A. I heard about Mete Krasniqi after Sanije Balaj's arrest.
11 Q. He still had an office, didn't he, at the time of Sanije Balaj's
12 arrest at the end of the first week or two of August, isn't that right, he
13 still had an office there then?
14 A. As I said earlier, he might have had a private one but not in the
15 framework of the brigade. There was not any such office in the framework
16 of the brigade.
17 Q. Let's move to somebody else then for a moment. You mention in
18 your witness statement, paragraphs 71 to 73, a man called Zenun. And you
19 say that you received information that he had been taken by Mete Krasniqi
20 to Gllogjan. You say you intervened to have him released and, that he was
21 taken again by Zeqe Krasniqi to Gllogjan. You remember the case you've
22 mentioned on a few occasions, Witness 17?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Now, you say that the information came to you first from somebody
25 within your security service, is that right? Have I got that correct?
1 You say: "I received information from someone within the brigade security
2 service." Is that right?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Was that Sadri Selca?
5 A. I could not tell you. It could have been him or maybe a
6 subordinate of him.
7 Q. Now, I just want to see if you can help us a little bit more about
8 this man Zenun. You mentioned a little later in your statement that you
9 heard that he was a Roma. Can I ask you: Were you aware that he was a
10 former police officer who had worked with Sadri Selca in the past, a man
11 called Zenun Gashi?
12 A. No. That he was a police officer, I did not know that. I didn't
13 even know his surname. I knew only his first name, Zenun.
14 Q. Zenun Gashi is one of the people on the list of people wanted that
15 you have written in your notebook, isn't he? Well, don't take time
16 because we can all see that he is. I just want to see if you can help us
17 with this, please.
18 Can you turn to tab 32 in the blue bundle. This is a witness
19 statement that has been admitted by agreement and with no challenge from
20 either side and it's a statement of a man called Vesel Dizdari, who,
21 according to Cufe Krasniqi, was parted of the military police stationed
22 under your command at Baran and under the authority of Mete Krasniqi.
23 If you could just turn, please, to tab 32 in your blue file.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Have you found it, Witness 17?
25 MR. EMMERSON:
1 Q. Do you have it?
2 A. In English.
3 Q. There's also been Albanian translation, and if you could turn to
4 paragraphs 18 to 20, please. This man has made a witness statement and,
5 indeed, come to The Hague, describing an occasion when he was going from
6 Kosuriq to Baran and a cast-off at the school in Baran, and there was a
7 commander, Mete Krasniqi, together with two soldiers, who told him to go
8 to the house of Zenun Gashi and bring him to the school in Baran.
9 And he says he got into the car with these soldiers and went to
10 the house of Zenun Gashi. He said he had been asked to join the military
11 police a week before this incident by Mete Krasniqi, who was the military
12 police commander, and that he went to Zenun Gashi's house and brought him
13 to the school in Baran and left him there.
14 Now, that is a man, as we see, who is on the list you have written
15 in your diary as a person who is wanted and being sought. It is a man who
16 is named as a victim on this indictment, and it's a man who on the
17 evidence unchallenged by either side was taken not to Gllogjan but to the
18 school in Baran where you were commander, Witness 17.
19 Did you know about that case either?
20 A. I know about the time when this person was sent to Gllogjan. As
21 about these things that are said here, somebody appointed to take him and
22 that was an order by Mete Krasniqi, I'm not aware of that. It's difficult
23 for me to speak about things that I don't know.
24 Q. See, I suggest to you he wasn't taken to Gllogjan at all; he was
25 taken to your barracks, Witness 17.
1 A. If according to the statement of this witness the order was given
2 by Mete Krasniqi, you have to be clear about this, that Mete Krasniqi was
3 not part of the structure of the brigade in Baran and he was not sent to
4 my brigade.
5 Q. Yes, I see. Now, if we go back then to your 92 ter witness
6 statement at paragraph 72, you say that the information that you received
7 about this man came from Din Krasniqi. Is that correct?
8 A. Yes, but later. I became aware of it, and I received that
9 information from Din.
10 Q. Did you regard Din Krasniqi as a reliable source of information,
11 Witness 17?
12 A. I can't tell you now whether he was reliable or not, but he was a
13 person who knew about things. He had information.
14 Q. And he told you that somebody had been killed, and you say you
15 responded with outrage and said that nothing like that should ever happen
16 again. Is that correct?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. You also knew, you tell us, that Mete Krasniqi was involved in
19 that incident, correct?
20 A. There were no details. I was told that he was sent by Mete
21 Krasniqi; but as to how he was summoned or how he was eliminated, I don't
22 know. He just gestured with a hand, as if a cut-throat action was --
23 Q. Did you take any steps to investigate this incident or to
24 discipline Mete or Din Krasniqi for it?
25 A. Mete Krasniqi was not part of my structure. Din Krasniqi was a
1 parallel commander in Lugu i Baranit after my arrival. He kept his
2 authority or competencies that he had before the 12th of July, so I could
3 not take any measures against people who were not directly under my
4 command in the brigade. Din had a double role.
5 Q. Mete continued to have an office located at Baran, and Din was
6 under your formal command; is that correct?
7 A. Din was under my command; but, as I said earlier, he did not obey
8 my orders but worked in a parallel fashion.
9 Q. You see, I suggest that much of the evidence you've given about
10 parallel structures is an attempt by you to deflect criticism for you in
11 having failed to control the officers who were operating under your
12 command at Baran, Witness 17.
13 A. I don't know what criticism I'm trying to deflect. I don't
14 understand what you mean. I testified here, and I'm saying, again, the
15 way things were happening at the time, there were parallel structures and
16 it was difficult for me to have somebody obey me, somebody who didn't want
17 to be part of the structure of the command. One of those persons who did
18 not want to obey was Din.
19 MR. EMMERSON: Would that be a convenient moment?
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. It's quarter to 2.00, Witness 17, that means
21 that we'll adjourn for the day. We'd like to see you back tomorrow
22 morning, 9.00, in another courtroom, Courtroom I. I give you the same
23 instruction as I did yesterday; that is, that you should not speak with
24 anyone about your testimony, whether given or still to be given.
25 Mr. Harvey.
1 MR. HARVEY: Your Honour, I've had an opportunity to peruse the
2 notes. Obviously, they're in a language or languages I don't speak.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
4 MR. HARVEY: But it has been most helpful. I do need to look
5 further at them, but I think the easiest thing -- the easiest way of
6 dealing with that would be is if it would be possible to have them
7 photocopied and made available to all parties in their entirety.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Is that more than we find under tab 1?
9 MR. HARVEY: Yes.
10 JUDGE ORIE: I wasn't aware that this wasn't a complete copy.
11 MR. HARVEY: And there are also -- there's highlighting in some of
12 this that doesn't come out in the highlighting that we have, so it is
13 important for us to --
14 JUDGE ORIE: Would that mean that you need colour copies, because
15 sometimes it's --
16 MR. HARVEY: I think we can manage without colour copies at this
17 stage, as long as the originals are preserved.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Then I would suggest that the copies would not be
19 made by the parties, but I'll consult with the registry whether copies can
20 be made, because at this moment the witness, of course, should have no
21 contact with the Prosecution --
22 MR. HARVEY: Of course.
23 JUDGE ORIE: -- neither direct with the Defence.
24 MR. HARVEY: And may I say also, Your Honour, it is going to be
25 important for us to be able to look at these between now and tomorrow, and
1 it may be that I will need some translation assistance from colleagues
2 between now and tomorrow before I cross-examine.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I do understand.
4 Witness 17, would you be willing to give, again, your personal
5 notes to the registrar at this moment, now in order to have them fully
6 photocopied, because Mr. Harvey established that our copies are not the
7 complete copies.
8 Unless, Mr. Kearney, somewhere else there are already complete
9 copies, or these are the copies you have?
10 MR. KEARNEY: I was -- we have given what we have to the Defence.
11 I had believed it was a complete copy. Perhaps I can take a quick look,
12 and Mr. Harvey can show me what has not having been received to date --
13 JUDGE ORIE: Not at this moment. I take it you will be in contact
14 with the representative of the registry.
15 Witness 17, would you be willing to give the set, again, now not
16 to Mr. Harvey, but for purposes of photocopying, to the registry? They'll
17 be returned to you again after that. Yes?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. I can give them to the
19 registry, but on the condition that they be returned to me today.
20 JUDGE ORIE: I take it, Mr. Harvey, photocopying would do for the
21 time being. That means that they can be returned to you today. At the
22 same time, my order to you still is that you should keep them, so that if
23 there would be any need later on, to inspect the originals again that they
24 are then.
25 Madam Usher, could you please receive the originals from the --
1 oh, it's still in your hands, Mr. Harvey.
2 Yes, thank you. It will be returned to you today, Witness 17,
3 after photocopying has been completed.
4 MR. HARVEY: For the avoidance of doubt, Your Honour, could the
5 witness be ordered to bring them back with him when he comes to court
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
8 MR. HARVEY: And for the further avoidance of doubt, perhaps could
9 the witness should be asked whether he has any other notes with him either
10 in his bag or in his hotel room, wherever he's staying, that are --
11 JUDGE ORIE: Contemporaneous.
12 MR. HARVEY: Contemporaneous, yes.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Witness 17, the question is you've given these notes,
14 they will be copied. Are there any other notes that you've made at that
15 time that is in, well, let's say 1998? Do you have any other notebooks
16 covering the period, Mr. Harvey, the whole of 1998?
17 MR. HARVEY: Yes, Your Honour.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Do you have any other personal notes written down at
19 the time?
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I have handed over everything; and
21 to my knowledge, everything has been photocopied. I don't know why that
22 has not been done with the things that you mentioned.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. We do not know. We'll find out. Then I take
24 it that disclosure should answer your question about any other notes.
25 MR. HARVEY: Thank you, Your Honour, yes.
1 JUDGE ORIE: And you'll be in contact with the registry.
2 We adjourn until tomorrow morning, 9.00, Courtroom I.
3 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.52 p.m.,
4 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 30th day of
5 August, 2007, at 9.00 a.m.