1 Monday, 29 October 2007
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 2.25 p.m.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Good afternoon to everyone.
6 Mr. Registrar, would you please call the case.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Good afternoon, Your Honour. Good afternoon 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 This morning a meeting was held between the parties in my presence
12 in which I gave some guidance as far as the objections were concerned in
13 relation to the Rule 92 ter witness statement of the witness to come.
14 We -- I then was not quite certain on some elements where I said that for
15 80 per cent the Chamber had made up its mind. We have now further
16 considered the matter, and it does not change anything in the guidance I
17 gave this morning to the Chamber [sic].
18 Then I'd like to turn into private session for a moment.
19 [Private session]
11 Pages 9825-9842 redacted. Private session.
1 [Open session]
2 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're back in open session.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
4 The Chamber first gives the reasons for Witness 69 to testify with
5 protective measures.
6 Threats were made against this witness by phone. Further, the
7 testimony of the witness may antagonise persons who reside in Kosovo. The
8 witness -- not a witness but the family of the witness live and work in
9 that territory and have property there. And there exists an unstable
10 security situation in the territory which is particularly unfavourable to
11 witnesses who appear before the Tribunal. So therefore, both under the
12 first standard, that is, threats, and under the second standard, that is,
13 the unstable security situation and a testimony that may antagonise
14 persons - the testimony given by someone who has his family still living
15 there - under both these standards, protective measures are justified.
16 The witness will -- the protective measures granted are pseudonym, face
17 distortion, and voice distortion.
18 Mr. Re, please proceed.
19 MR. RE: The summary can be displayed in Sanction, if Sanction is
20 displayable at the moment. There's nothing in it which will reveal the
21 witness's identity.
22 Examination by Mr. Re:
23 Q. What follows is the summary of the Rule 92 ter statement of
24 Witness 69.
25 In 1998, the witness worked for the SUP. The Djakovica area of
1 responsibility covered 122 villages in Djakovica and Decane municipality
2 (the Dukagjini area). After the killing of police officer Otovic on the
3 24th of March, 1998 near Gramocelj, the conflict became more severe.
4 Around April 1998, KLA groups began to emerge in most villages of the
5 Dukagjini area. Intelligence and civilians provided information of KLA
6 headquarters in Glodjane and Jablanica. KLA groups began crossing the
7 Albanian border to collect weapons and equipment - going from Jablanica to
8 Glodjane to Erec, Smonica, Ponosevac, Morina, into Albania. From early
9 spring 1998, the KLA increased its ambushes and attacks on MUP, VJ, and
10 civilian targets and started kidnapping police and civilians, including
11 Serbs, Kosovo Albanians, and Roma civilians and establishing check-points
12 and roadblocks. The KLA became more radical, ambushing cars, buses, and
13 people and opening fire against everything related to Serbia - police,
14 military, and civilians. Serb residents complained of KLA crimes ranging
15 from damage to crops, to rapes, murders and intimidation of people into
16 leaving their homes. The KLA periodically blocked the Djakovica-Decane
17 road, and from 23rd of May, 1998, held it for ten days. It became
18 extremely risky for the police to travel on it and police officers Popadic
19 and Jovanovic were kidnapped there. The area along Lake Radonjic,
20 including Jablanica, Zabelj, Bardonic, and Glodjane, had been a "no-go"
21 area for the police for a couple years and they could only enter if they
22 launched an operation. From mid-1998 to September 1998, it would have
23 been almost impossible to access the area around the lake undetected by
24 the KLA. In late August/beginning of September 1998, there was an
25 operation to unblock the Djakovica-Rakovina-Klina-Pristina road. Around
1 10 KLA members were arrested in Kodralija and questioned at the Djakovica
2 SUP. KLA members informed the police of the bodies at Lake Radonjic. On
3 8th of September, 1998, police and DB officials took KLA member
4 Bekim Kalamashi to the Lake Radonjic canal, where he led them to the
5 bodies. The crime scene was then secured 24 hours a day until 19th of
6 September, 1998. Judge Gojkovic's investigation team started work on 11th
7 of September, 1998. Exhuming the bodies and the autopsies lasted until
8 19th of September, 1998. The witness attended the crime scene on the
9 third or fourth day after the bodies were discovered. The investigation
10 team marked the bodies with numbers, took photographs, and placed them in
11 labeled plastic bags. The police transported remains daily by convoy to
12 the garage of Hotel Pastrik in Djakovica. The remains were constantly
13 secured. The witness attended the autopsies in the basement garage, which
14 was constantly guarded by the police. Identified remains were handed over
15 to relatives and the unidentified remains to the public sanitation company
16 Cabrat. 34 bodies were handed over. On 19th September 1998, 20 body-bags
17 and 1 body-bag with the remains of five individuals were handed over to
18 the Cabrat company for burial at Piskote cemetery. Five more unidentified
19 bodies subsequently recovered were handed over at a later stage. In all,
20 39 bodies were found at the Canal, Ekonomija farm, and Dasinovac road.
21 That completes the summary of the Rule 92 ter statement of the
23 Witness 69, do you have a copy of your statement there in -- which
24 you signed in Serbian?
25 A. Yes. Yes.
1 Q. [Microphone not activated]
2 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
3 MR. RE:
4 Q. The Trial Chamber has seen -- I will -- has a copy of it, and I
5 wish to ask you two questions about that document. And the date of
6 interview is the 22nd of May, 2007.
7 My question is: Does it bear your signature and is it true?
8 A. You're asking me about the statement I provided on the 20th of
9 June, 2007?
10 Q. That's the one, signed on the 20th of June, 2007.
11 A. That is correct.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Re, for full position, the cover page of the
13 witness statement says that the interview took place on the 21st and the
14 22nd of May. I take it that that -- and then we could ignore the cover
15 page Rule 92 ter witness statement where it says "26th of June"
17 MR. RE: Yes.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So it's the 20th of June. Thank you. Please
20 MR. RE:
21 Q. The second question is: Would you give the evidence which is
22 contained in that statement if you were asked those questions in court?
23 Would you give the same evidence as is contained in that statement?
24 A. Of course I would. Those are official data of the police
25 administration in Djakovica, not mine. It is, as is stated here and
1 within some written documents of the police station in Djakovica.
2 MR. RE: The statement is 65 ter Exhibit number 1720. On that
3 basis, may it be received into evidence with the redactions which were
4 ordered in the meeting this morning.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Has that already been uploaded in e-court,
6 Mr. Re, or do we still have to wait until we have the final version?
7 MR. RE: The redacted version has not yet been uploaded into
9 JUDGE ORIE: So then the Chamber will decide, but if the uploaded
10 version will be the same as this morning, taking into consideration the
11 guidance the Chamber gave in every respect, then the Chamber will decide
12 in favour of admission.
13 Please proceed.
14 MR. RE:
15 Q. Please turn to paragraph 8 of the statement, Witness 69.
16 In the statement, you referred to a group called the people who
17 want to liberate the villagers who had a base in Jablanica in Djakovica.
18 You say: "The members of this organisation were previously known to the
19 police as criminals who had committed many crimes in those areas. In the
20 beginning the crime they were known to have committed were mainly thefts,
21 serious thefts, fights, and rapes."
22 I want to ask you: What was your understanding of the aim of that
23 group? And in answering the question, I want you to tell the Trial
24 Chamber what the sources were that led you to have an understanding of the
25 aim of the group.
1 A. This would be my answer: Much like any other law enforcement
2 agency in the world, we also operate based on our operational connections
3 or links. And I mean the police administration of Djakovica when I say
4 that. We follow operational procedure which encompasses the following:
5 The services in that -- operating in that domain have associates and
6 informants. In terms of operational procedure, such informants and
7 associates have to be registered, provided with a pseudonym and a number,
8 which serves to protect their identity.
9 The information contained herein is the information of the service
10 gained through or by citizens, police officials, operatives, exchanges of
11 information with the State Security Service and the military security
12 service. (redacted)
15 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
16 JUDGE ORIE: We turn into private session.
17 [Private session]
6 [Open session]
7 THE REGISTRAR: We're back in open session.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Thank you.
9 Yes. I -- I do understand that.
10 Mr. Re, please proceed.
11 MR. RE:
12 Q. You said a moment ago: "there was an exchange of information
13 among the services." Which services are you referring to? And please
14 continue with what you were saying.
15 A. Yes. I had in mind the State Security Service, since they were
16 very much interested in those issues as well. I also had in mind the
17 military security service and the public security service, which focused
18 mainly on other -- or different issues. However, due to the complexity of
19 the situation, they also assigned us the tasks from that particular
21 Q. All right. What was your -- what I want to find out is what the
22 aim of the group was and how you found out what the aim of this particular
23 group was.
24 A. Information that arrived at the police administration as regards
25 the exchange of information with the military security service and the
1 State Security Service and in terms of information provided to my
2 superiors who were in charge, all pointed to the fact that there was
3 something of national interest taking place in the area and that the
4 purpose of establishing such a group was to operate in a way so as to
5 create disorder in the area. As I said, that was State Security Service
6 information that we received. Their end goal was to see Kosovo secede
7 from the Republic of Serbia and to secure a situation within which Kosovo
8 would become independent. That was the information we received from the
9 other two services, since they focused their activities on that.
10 All that information was further corroborated by operational
11 information on certain meetings in certain villages whereby the things I
12 described were discussed. It all pointed at that.
13 Q. Okay. Witness, you then say in paragraph 10: "Around 1995 and
14 1996, I obtained information from the intelligence of public security and
15 state security that the core of this group consisted of some ten members."
16 What was your information about who the leader of the group was
17 and where did you obtain that information from?
18 A. As I've said already, the services received such operational
19 information from their associates or informants. The informants and
20 associates were not only Serbs or Montenegrins or Muslims but also
21 Albanians and Catholic Albanians. If I remember correctly, during a
22 meeting the State Security Service stated that they had informants and
23 associates who were KLA members.
24 The thing referred to here, that is, the name of Lahi Brahimaj,
25 this is what the operational information was telling us, that he was the
1 head of the group, at least at the beginning.
2 Q. Witness --
3 A. And I'm merely conveying --
4 Q. Could I ask you, please, to look at me a little bit when we're
5 talking so if I need you to pause, I can just put my hand up and down like
7 A. Certainly.
8 Q. You've answered the question I -- I asked a moment ago.
9 Now, I want you to take you to paragraph 11 of your statement,
10 where you say in the last line, relating to 1998: "The first time I heard
11 of this group which became known as the KLA was a few months before, June
12 1998, the SUP Djakovica called them by a different name, which was the
13 sabotage terrorist group."
14 What was your information leading up to May 1998 of what the KLA
15 was doing to people within the villages?
16 MR. GUY-SMITH: Well, since prior to that time it was defined in
17 the area by a different name, I don't think it's appropriate to ask a
18 question including the name of the KLA because there may be different
19 members of the same or dissimilar groups.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Guy-Smith, on the assumption that the 92 ter
21 statement will be in evidence, the witness in 11 explains that the SUP
22 Djakovica called them by -- yes, no, I see we have two -- we have now a
23 third name.
24 Yes, Mr. Re, perhaps it would be good to know for sure that the
25 group called sabotage terrorist group by the SUP Gjakova and the group
1 which became known as the KLA is the same group as the witness was talking
2 about earlier. I think that's the issue.
3 MR. RE:
4 Q. Was the sabotage terrorist group the KLA?
5 A. This would be my answer: The official terminology used by the
6 Serbian MUP in the beginning was the terrorist sabotage group. After a
7 while, after we kept coming across emblems and insignia in our operational
8 information, we started using the term "KLA." And therefore that is the
9 same thing.
10 Q. All right.
11 JUDGE HOEPFEL: May I ask you: What do you mean when you say "we
12 were starting to use this term." Who is "we"? Or are there other groups
13 in -- we don't need to go into detail, but maybe we go into private
14 session for a moment.
15 MR. RE: It's -- I think it's generic information available to
16 members of the MUP.
17 JUDGE HOEPFEL: I asked -- actually, I asked the witness and --
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And you asked to go into private session.
19 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Yes. If maybe that would be --
20 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. We'll go into private session.
21 [Private session] [Confidentiality lifted by later order of the Chamber]
22 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're in private session.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. When you say "we were starting to use this
24 term," Mr. -- Judge Hoepfel would like to know who you refer to.
25 Who's "we"?
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The official terminology, before the
2 KLA term was used, was the official terminology by the Serbian SUP and the
3 SUP in Djakovica. We used to call them the "sabotage terrorist group"
4 After that we reverted to "the KLA." And when I say "we", I mean the MUP
5 of Serbia and the SUP in Djakovica. I hope I managed to clear that up.
6 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Thank you very much.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Then we can return into open session.
8 MR. RE: Does that answer need to be in private session? Or could
9 it be made public?
10 JUDGE ORIE: Well, "we" in relation to -- of course, it would
11 identify him as anyone who would be in the SUP or any MUP.
12 [Trial Chamber confers]
13 JUDGE ORIE: It could be public, Mr. Re.
14 Mr. Registrar, that portion of the evidence can be made public.
15 Please proceed.
16 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
17 JUDGE ORIE: And, of course, we'll return into open session.
18 [Open session]
19 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're back in open session.
20 MR. RE:
21 Q. Did you have any information -- oh, I apologise.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
23 Please proceed, Mr. Re.
24 MR. RE:
25 Q. Did you have any information, Witness 69, about curfews?
1 A. There was operational information in circulation within the
2 service stating that once the situation became more complicated that
3 villagers and citizens did not move about after 8.00 p.m. This was
4 corroborated by several reports to the police administration in Djakovica
5 on the events in the field.
6 Some people using roads in that area were stopped, and as far as I
7 recall, some interliners, some buses were stopped and passengers searched.
8 Q. I was just asking you about curfews, and in paragraph 12 you
9 say: "The KLA imposed curfews after 8.00 p.m."
10 What was your information about the imposition of curfews, as
11 opposed to people not going out after 8.00 p.m.?
12 A. The official document was not in the possession of the police
13 administration but on the basis of the movements of the citizens and the
14 operative information official records, it was clear that everything went
15 as I just explained. People were afraid to move about after 8.00 p.m., as
16 I've already indicated to you.
17 Q. What I'm trying to clarify is: Your statement says the KLA
18 imposed curfews. There's a difference between the imposition of the
19 curfew and people being afraid to travel after 8.00 p.m.
20 A. Well, I -- I've already indicated that as far as I recall, there
21 was no official written document in the possession of the police
22 administration, but on the basis of the official reports, comments about
23 the developments, about what was going on, I tried to explain it the way I
24 just did.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Harvey.
1 MR. HARVEY: Your Honours, I note that the witness appears to be
2 reading from a document. Since the -- his 92 ter statement has gone
3 through a number of changes, it would be helpful to know whether he does
4 need this document and, if so, which one he's using.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. (redacted) I can't see that from here.
6 Are you using any document at this moment? And what is that -- oh, yes.
7 Witness 69. Yes.
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Apart there the statement that I
9 gave, I don't have any other documents. My briefcase with the information
10 and the documents, it's in -- in my luggage. I didn't bring it here.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Whenever you would need, Witness 69, to consult the
12 document, would you first ask permission and put it in such a way that you
13 do not read from it. Yes?
14 Please proceed.
15 MR. RE:
16 Q. I want to take you to paragraph 17 of your statement in which you
17 refer to the election of Ramush Haradinaj as the commander or KLA
18 commander of the Dukagjini Zone and in which you say that: "The SUP was
19 informed through our intelligence and informants that conflicts were
20 already arising between the KLA and the other so-called liberation army
21 called the FARK."
22 When did you first become aware of the existence of
23 Ramush Haradinaj? And please concentrate just first on when.
24 A. I think that the operational information and the official
25 information about Mr. Ramush Haradinaj dated from 1998, as early as 1998.
1 Q. And what was the operational information and official information
2 that you had about him before then?
3 A. Well, that was in the purview of another service, not the public
4 security. In the course of the exchange of information with that service,
5 as I've already explained when I talked about the time when I heard about
6 the KLA and the elections that had been organised and the appointment of
7 Ramush Haradinaj, that was all in 1998. On the basis of the documents in
8 the possession of the police administration in Djakovica -- or rather, the
9 Decani municipal office for the interior, part of the Djakovica police
10 administration contained information that he is prone to political
11 activity and that on the basis of the criminal record, in the Djakovica
12 SUP it could be ascertained that a member of his family - his father,
13 rather - had been convicted for political reasons. So that was all there
14 was, apart from what the Djakovica police had. So this is the
16 Q. Let's turn to paragraph 19, in which you refer to: "Intelligence,
17 informants, and minutes of KLA meetings", that you became aware of the
18 names of KLA presidents and commanders, and that the commanders of the
19 local KLA branches were suggested by Ramush Haradinaj.
20 What was your information about how the local branches had to
22 A. Well, everything that I said in paragraph 19, this is the
23 intelligence gathered by the State Security Service, so the intelligence
24 gathered by the military security service, and the intelligence gathered
25 by the public security service.
1 As far as I can recall, there were some written documents that
2 were found by the service in the field in the course of their activities,
3 daily activities, so written documents about the organisation of the
4 election -- elections in that area for the KLA organs, as indicated here.
5 Q. Was there a KLA programme?
6 A. I think so. I think so. And I think that the State Security
7 Service did send this document to us. I think that the answer is "yes."
8 Q. What was your information about how the KLA branches were
9 financing themselves?
10 A. The service had intelligence that they were financed by voluntary
11 contributions, that they were financed from the contributions levied on
12 the salaries or some amounts that were paid on a voluntary basis,
13 something along those lines.
14 Q. You just mentioned "voluntary." Did you have any information
15 about involuntary payments to the KLA?
16 A. Well, if we consider paying taxes not to the legal state but into
17 some other funds as being involuntary contributions, then the service did
18 have this information.
19 Q. What if people refused to pay the KLA? Did you have any
20 information on that?
21 A. Information about the refusal to pay indicated that those fellow
22 citizens were subjected to mistreatment, that they were -- well, I don't
23 know what term to use, but quite simply they were pushed to the margins.
24 They were not visited by anyone. They couldn't socialise with anyone.
25 They couldn't go and visit anyone. So it was a form of a boycott.
1 Q. All right. Did it go further than a boycott according to the
2 information you received?
3 A. Well, at one point the service learned that -- that was on the
4 basis of some reports, in the logbook of the Djakovica police
5 administration there were reports that some citizens were abducted, not
6 only Serbs but Serbs, Albanians, Roma, also Roman Catholic Albanians.
7 This information came from the duty service. This is where a citizen
8 would come and report an incident. And the service then was under an
9 obligation to act upon those reports.
10 Q. I'm asking you only at the moment about the consequences of
11 refusing to pay the KLA. Is that what your last answer was referring to?
12 A. On the basis of the official information, I can say that they were
13 marginalised, boycotted, and there were some reports that some of them had
14 been beaten up. Now, as to what else might have happened, my superiors
15 should know that as well as any services that dealt with this particular
17 Q. Let's go to paragraph 22, where it says: "At the same time" --
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Re, just for the record, you're referring to the
19 old paragraphs. And, of course, it will be -- or -- starting "at the same
20 time." I mean, the old paragraph numbering of the -- yes. Because if we
21 ever would come to a point where we admit the new statement, would we then
22 have the same numbers or would it be a tiny little puzzle for whatever
23 Chamber might ...?
24 MR. RE: The witness didn't sign the chronological revision.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
1 MR. RE: So I've basically abandoned --
2 JUDGE ORIE: The idea of introducing -- so we can forget about any
3 tables of.
4 MR. RE: Don't forget the table, the table with the ten annexes.
5 Keep that, but --
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, the table with the annexes, be I -- but the
7 table -- the paragraph changes table. Yes.
8 MR. RE: Forget that. Yes.
9 Q. All right. Paragraph 22 of your statement, Witness 69, where it
10 says: "At the same time, the KLA increased the ambushes and attacks on
11 MUP, VJ, and civilian targets. They also started the kidnappings of
12 civilians and were establishing check-points and roadblocks."
13 How did you see that occurring?
14 A. This is my answer: This occurred on the basis of the chronology
15 of the events in the field, which was a reflection -- or rather, this is
16 what was reported to the duty service in the Djakovica police
18 Let me clarify this. In our system of work, there is a duty
19 service at the police administration and every citizen can come to that
20 duty service and report about any incidents, anything that happened to him
21 or to his family or anything that he or she may have observed. And on the
22 basis of what the police officers in the duty service received, the
23 official notices, this is what I base my explanation on.
24 Q. Okay. Did you personally notice any increase in KLA activity in
1 A. On the basis of the crimes that were reported to the service, yes.
2 Q. Crimes of what nature? And how did you know that they were
4 A. Well, again, I have to go back to my explanation. These were the
5 reports made by the citizens to the duty service, the crimes that were
6 committed and that were reported by the citizens themselves, so they came
7 in person and said such-and-such thing happened in such-and-such place,
8 and so on. We saw or we observed or we have grounds for suspicion that
9 somebody was done by a KLA member. The reports that were filed by the
10 citizens did not concern only Serbs; they concerned Albanians, Roma, all
11 of the ethnic groups that were present in that area.
12 Q. Crimes of what nature?
13 A. Well, damage to the crops, fights, weapons being discharged, all
14 the way up to the murder of Mr. Otovic.
15 Q. Apart from Mr. Otovic's murder, as you described it, what about --
16 were there other murders or killings ascribed to the KLA in that period?
17 A. Well, there were quite a few cases. I can't really enumerate them
18 all off the top of the head -- off the top of my head, but there is
19 paperwork concerning all that. A citizen would report that their house
20 was fired on on such-and-such a day, that such-and-such a thing was done,
21 or that a vehicle was shot at or intercepted. As I indicate, there is
22 paperwork in the Djakovica police administration concerning all that.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson.
24 MR. EMMERSON: I'm obviously in the Trial Chamber's hands in
25 relation to the -- the usefulness of a line of questioning based on
1 generalities of allegations which are, according to Mr. Re's question,
2 ascribed to the KLA during a particular period with there being --
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Perhaps before we continue this, we are at a
4 time where we would have a break anyhow. So --
5 Witness 69, we'll have a break of approximately half an hour, but
6 we allow you already to leave the courtroom, where some procedural issue
7 has been raised. But we have to pull the curtains down.
8 Mr. Emmerson.
9 MR. EMMERSON: I think I've taken --
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
11 MR. EMMERSON: -- the point as far as it is to be taken.
12 JUDGE ORIE: You've taken -- yes. Before we continue, we'll wait
13 just for a second.
14 [The witness stands down]
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Re, this evidence could be considered to some
16 extent cumulative to the extent that this Chamber has heard quite a lot of
17 evidence on what was reported and was linked to the KLA sometimes with,
18 often without greater details. It seems that we have a bit of a -- the
19 same again.
20 What do you intend to do for the remaining time?
21 MR. RE: Paragraph 24, the last line of paragraph 30, and
22 paragraph 63, and the annexes. Those are the bits which the Trial Chamber
23 ordered redacted.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Where the Chamber gave guidance as to -- to
25 redactions. Of course, it was also to some extent because the sourcing
1 was rather unspecific and the allegations were of a rather general nature.
2 So therefore, if you want to elicit that evidence, which, as it is put on
3 paper now is -- well, what we have heard several times before, then, of
4 course, the Chamber would expect you to come with more details about
5 sources, et cetera. Until now you've asked about it, but the answers of
6 the witness were mainly that this is what the services learnt at the time
7 from those who reported this, which is, of course, rather general again.
8 So therefore, to replace one generality by another would not
9 assist greatly. At the same time, I can imagine that if we are talking
10 about, for example, by "control" in the last line of paragraph 30, there
11 it's mainly the witness who should tell us what he understood by that.
12 How much time do you think you would still need for in chief?
13 MR. RE: I think 20 minutes is probably safe.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Twenty minutes is safe.
15 MR. RE: I think.
16 [Trial Chamber confers]
17 JUDGE ORIE: Since you said 20 minutes was safe, we'll strictly
18 limit you, then, to 20 minutes after the break.
19 We'll resume at a quarter past 4.00.
20 --- Recess taken at 3.52 p.m.
21 [The witness takes the stand]
22 --- On resuming at 4.21 p.m.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Re. I looked at the clock before I asked you to
25 MR. RE:
1 Q. The reason why Judge Orie was looking at the clock, Witness, is
2 because I have 20 minutes to finish with you, so we have to get through
3 these annexes and a few more issues in 20 minutes, so I'd very much ask
4 you to try and keep your answers as brief as possible and as responsive as
5 possible. Okay? Thank you.
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. I want to take you to paragraph 24 of your statement in which you
8 say that: "From around early 1998, I had learned from the intelligence
9 and state and public security that the KLA had begun to kidnap people."
10 Did you have any information about detention, KLA detention
11 centres? And if so, what was it? As briefly as possible, please.
12 A. As indicated in my statement, we had intelligence data received
13 from the citizens -- or rather, from people who were apprehended crossing
14 the border illegally or in police raids.
15 Q. I'm not -- I'm asking you specifically about detention centres.
16 Did you have any information about the KLA having or not having detention
17 centres? And if so, where were they and what was your information?
18 A. Yes, the service did have operational information that in the
19 village of Jablanica there was a detention unit for the people or citizens
20 who had been abducted.
21 As far as I can recall, there is paperwork concerning all that.
22 Q. Which period are you talking about?
23 A. From mid-1998 until maybe mid-1999, the time period up to the
25 Q. All right. And what about any other places apart from Jablanica?
1 A. Jablanica, the village of Glodjane were mentioned for the most
2 part, and I also think that there were some reports about the village of
4 Q. Let's go to paragraph 30 of your statement, in which you refer to
5 the area around Lake Radonjic as being very difficult to reach by car, as
6 there were only dust roads existing. And then you describe the roads into
7 the Lake Radonjic area.
8 What I want to ask you about is KLA control of area -- of areas
9 covered by the Djakovica SUP's area of responsibility. In the period of
10 March through to September 1998, what portion of the area of
11 responsibility of the SUP Djakovica was controlled by the KLA?
12 A. In that time period, on the basis of the information available to
13 the service, the service could not go to Gornji Ratis, Donji Ratis,
14 Glodjane, Jablanica. It was getting more and more difficult to reach
15 Prilep, the area around Prilep. So that part of the territory down there.
16 As far as I know, even the sector chiefs did not go there to do
17 their daily work. When I say "sector chiefs," I'm talking about uniformed
19 Q. Can you give us a rough percentage? Like, 10 per cent? 20 per
20 cent? 30 per cent? Or whatever.
21 A. When the situation got more complicated and when all this started,
22 I think that it was impossible to control. It was a large part of the
23 territory, a large percentage of the territory was inaccessible. This was
24 the job of the uniformed police. They were supposed to control that area.
25 And on the basis of the exchange of information, large areas were
1 inaccessible to the police to carry out their basic daily work.
2 Q. Let's go to paragraph 63 of your statement. In the preceding
3 paragraph, 62, you refer to police documentation being destroyed during
4 the NATO bombing in 1999 and the SUP Djakovica building being completely
5 destroyed. And then you referred to photo records and fingerprints of the
6 KLA terrorists arrested in September 1998 possibly being destroyed as
8 Do you remember seeing information on Idriz Balaj, also known as
9 Toger? Firstly, yes or no. If the answer is "yes," I'll ask you another
11 A. Could you please repeat the question. I didn't hear it.
12 Q. Have a look at paragraph 62 of your statement, please.
13 Did you hear me?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. All right. Can you please have a look at paragraph 62. It's in
16 front of you there.
17 A. Yes. Yes, I've had a look at it.
18 Q. All right. My question is: In paragraph 62, you say that you
19 think or possibly some records relating to KLA terrorists arrested in
20 September 1998 were destroyed in a NATO bombing.
21 My question was: Did you have any information about -- or did you
22 remember seeing any information about Idriz Balaj, also known as Toger?
23 A. There was some operational information. These records were
24 destroyed in the NATO air campaign. And this third part about the
25 fingerprints, I'm not sure that his fingerprints were there. And as far
1 as other members are concerned, the sum of whom had been apprehended in
2 police raids, I'm sure that their fingerprints were there.
3 Q. Okay. Please concentrate on --
4 JUDGE ORIE: Witness 69.
5 MR. RE:
6 Q. -- the questions I'm asking you.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Witness 69, Mr. Re asks you whether among that
8 material, that information, documentation that was destroyed by the NATO
9 bombing, whether you have any recollection or whether there was any
10 material in it which related to Idriz Balaj, also known by the name of
11 Toger. That's the question.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, no.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Re.
14 MR. RE: Okay.
15 Q. I want to show you some documents.
16 Can the witness please be shown -- be given a bundle of documents
17 here, which are the annexes referred to in his statement.
18 Do you have the -- there's a bundle of documents there. The first
19 one I want to take you to --
20 JUDGE ORIE: Now, before we -- we have bundles with different
21 numberings. Mr. Re, for us to follow, should we focus on the list of ten?
22 Annex index?
23 Yes? Okay.
24 MR. RE:
25 Q. The first one I take you to is annex 1, which is a map of the area
1 of responsibility of the Djakovica SUP, which is 65 ter number 1722 and it
2 is referred to in your statement as annex B.
3 JUDGE ORIE: It needs a number, Mr. Re?
4 MR. RE: I'm sorry.
5 JUDGE ORIE: It needs a number?
6 MR. RE: Yes, please.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
8 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be marked for
9 identification as P1175.
10 MR. RE:
11 Q. The question is simply: Is that a map -- is that a map of the
12 area of responsibility of the Djakovica SUP; yes or no?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. In 1998.
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Thank you. The next one is number -- annex 2, which is 65 ter
17 Exhibit number 1723, which is a list of villages within the area of
18 responsibility of the Djakovica SUP. And it is referred to in the
19 statement as MSBK 3.
20 Can the witness please have a look at that and confirm that is in
21 fact a list of villages so described.
22 A. Yes.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar, that would be number?
24 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be marked for
25 identification as P1176.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
2 MR. RE:
3 Q. The next one I refer you to is a Djakovica SUP report number
4 307/98 on Rade Popadic's kidnapping. That's annexed as number 3, 65 ter
5 number 1725, which is referred to in your statement as MSBK 1.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar, that would be number?
7 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that would be number P1177.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
9 MR. RE:
10 Q. Is that the document as described in your statement?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. The next one I take you to is described as annex 4, which is MS --
13 sorry, 65 ter number 1726, described in your statement as MSBK 5, which is
14 a report number Ki1 or 17/2005, relating to the handover of exhumed
15 remains by UN representatives. Is that the document in question?
16 A. Yes.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar, may I take it that that receives
18 number 1178? Thank you.
19 Please proceed, Mr. Re.
20 MR. RE:
21 Q. The next one, annex 5, 65 ter number 1727, described as a map
22 showing the no-go area for the police between mid-1998 and September 1998,
23 which is described in your statement as annex A. Is that in fact the map
24 you marked as the no-go area, which is annexed to your statement?
25 A. Yes.
1 JUDGE ORIE: I would prefer to wait until it appears on my screen
2 so that I know what we are talking about, but already, Mr. Registrar, may
3 I take it that that would be marked for identification as 1179?
4 Thank you, Mr. Registrar, for the confirmation.
5 MR. RE:
6 Q. The 65 ter number on that last one --
7 JUDGE ORIE: Maps usually take a bit more time.
8 MR. RE: It actually has his signature on it, so I'd ask that it
9 not be displayed publicly, please.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, not to be displayed in public. And marked for
11 identification under seal.
12 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
13 JUDGE ORIE: I'm informed that everything is only displayed in the
14 courtroom. But still my screen is empty for the last one; that's 1179.
15 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Re, could you please repeat the 65 ter number for
17 the map marked with the no-go area so -- because it seems that --
18 MR. RE: 1727.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Witness 69, is that the map with the no-go area
20 marked on it?
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
23 Please proceed, Mr. Re.
24 MR. RE:
25 Q. The next one is annex 7, which is 65 ter number 1728, described as
1 Djakovica SUP criminal investigation -- "Criminal report on the crime
2 scene investigation of Lake Radonjic," which is described in the witness's
3 statement as "annexed document."
4 Please look at that document and confirm that that is as
6 Oh, did I miss annex 6 just then? I apologise.
7 Can I -- I take you back, Witness, to the previous document, which
8 is annex 6, 65 ter number 1729, described as "SUP report on the arrival at
9 the location in Lake Radonjic," and it's described in your statement as
10 annex 1.
11 Is that the document in question?
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Registrar, may I take it that that would
13 receive number P1180 for marked for identification?
14 Yes. Thank you for the confirmation.
15 Please proceed, Mr. Re.
16 MR. RE:
17 Q. Okay. Next one, number 7, I referred you to --
18 JUDGE ORIE: I'd like to see it, but perhaps I'm -- yes, that is
19 the -- the original is on the screen. Please proceed.
20 MR. RE:
21 Q. All right. The next one was annex number 7, 65 ter number 1728,
22 described as "Annex to document" in your statement. The description is
23 "Djakovica SUP criminal report on the crime scene investigation." Is
24 that the document in question?
25 A. Yes.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar, would that receive P1181, marked for
3 Thank you for the confirmation.
4 Please proceed, Mr. Re.
5 MR. RE:
6 Q. The next one is annex 8, 65 ter number 1730, described in your
7 statement as "Annex 2, KLA journal excerpt for beginning of May 1998." Is
8 that the document in question?
9 A. Yes.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar, would that receive P1182, marked for
12 Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
13 Please proceed, Mr. Re.
14 MR. RE:
15 Q. The next one is described as annex 9, 65 ter 1731, described in
16 your statement as "Annex 3," described as "SUP Djakovica official note
17 from citizen, (redacted) Is that the document in question?
18 A. Yes.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar, would that receive number P1183,
20 marked for identification?
21 Thank you for confirming that.
22 Mr. Re.
23 MR. RE:
24 Q. The last document is annex 10, 65 ter 1732, which is described in
25 your statement as annex 4 and it is case file compilation of documents
1 dealing with formation of the KLA in Metohija.
2 Can you please look at that document and confirm that is the
3 document in question.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Guy-Smith.
5 MR. GUY-SMITH: Yes. If I might, just for purposes of -- of
6 clarity, with regard to annex number 10, if I could ask for the ERN
7 numbers for -- just for that particular annex for the moment, I'd
8 appreciate it.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
10 MR. RE: U009-8765 to U009-8852. That's B/C/S. English is
11 U016-8343 to U016-8425.
12 MR. GUY-SMITH: Thank you.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Now, I'll first -- yes, I wanted to check on the
14 transcript whether this speed could be followed. And I'd like to express
15 my admiration that the transcriber was able to follow this.
16 That is now on the screen. Could you put the question or repeat
17 the question to the witness, Mr. Re.
18 MR. RE:
19 Q. Is that the document in question annexed to your statement? I
20 think it's in the other volume of documents which are to your left.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Usher, could you please assist the witness.
22 Meanwhile, Mr. Registrar, would that receive P1184, marked for
24 Mr. Registrar, you're nodding. Thank you for your confirmation.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
1 MR. RE:
2 Q. Thank you. And there is one last question I want to ask you, and
3 that relates to KLA communiques.
4 Firstly, I want you to answer "yes" or "no." Did you see any KLA
5 communiques in 1998? Just "yes" or "no."
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Did they -- how did they relate to things which you had witnessed
8 or read about yourself?
9 A. Could you please repeat your question. I didn't understand it.
10 Q. How did the KLA communiques that you read in 1998 relate to things
11 that you had seen or read about or heard about yourself in your area?
12 A. I truly cannot understand. I'm sorry.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Witness 69, what Mr. Re would like to know from you
14 is whether what you read in the communiques, whether that was in line with
15 or not in line with your own findings or what was reported from other
16 sources to you. So was it congruent or was it different what you read
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It was in keeping with what we found
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, by your own means you mean?
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. By police work, if that's what
22 you mean. By our operative work.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
24 Any further questions, Mr. Re?
25 Witness 69, you'll now be cross-examined by Defence counsel.
1 Mr. Emmerson will be the first one to cross-examine you, and he's counsel,
2 as I said before, for Mr. Haradinaj.
3 Mr. Emmerson, you may proceed.
4 MR. EMMERSON: Thank you, Your Honour.
5 And, Your Honours, may I indicate straight away, out of the
6 interests of efficiency, given that much of this witness's testimony in
7 the 92 ter statement traverses ground that has been covered in the
8 statements of other witnesses and about which there has been some fairly
9 extensive cross-examination by reference to documentary sources, I do not
10 propose to repeat the exercise with this witness of putting to him
11 material that has already been put to and explored with other witnesses
12 involved at various stages, and so I propose therefore to take my
13 cross-examination of this witness rather more shortly than I would do, for
14 example, with some of the early witnesses, if Your Honours are happy with
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson, may I take it that this, perhaps among
17 other reasons, also for the reason that direct knowledge of some of the
18 documentary evidence seems not to be within the -- within the reach of
19 this witness where he did not take any statements or where he -- so to ask
20 him to comment on statements taken by others where we have already a more
21 direct -- a more direct evidence on --
22 MR. EMMERSON: Yes. And I -- I trust that the approach I take
23 will tread a path between generality and detail which -- which is
24 acceptable to the Trial Chamber. In other words, I don't propose to put
25 other detail that has already been put in the past.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And the Chamber considers all the evidence in
2 the context of the totality of the evidence.
3 MR. EMMERSON: Thank you.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
5 MR. RE: Before Mr. Emmerson starts, can I just --
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
7 MR. RE: -- ask for a redaction of one line at page 50, line 5.
8 There are two words in that line which perhaps should be redacted for
9 abundant caution.
10 JUDGE ORIE: You're referring to a name? Yes.
11 Mr. Registrar, would you please prepare the redaction.
12 Mr. Emmerson, please proceed.
13 Cross-examination by Mr. Emmerson:
14 Q. Witness 69, can I please ask you to turn to paragraph 31 and 32 in
15 the statement that you have signed.
16 And whilst that's being done, might I ask, please, Mr. Registrar
17 to pull up Exhibit P1152.
18 Witness 69, you -- focus, please, if you will, on the first few
19 lines of paragraph 31 for a moment where you say this: "The area around
20 Lake Radonjic had been a no-go area for the police for a couple of years.
21 This included the villages of Jablanica, Zabelj, Bardonic, and Glodjane.
22 This meant that it was rare for police controls to go into this area and
23 it was only possible if the area was secured."
24 Now, I just want to explore, please, with you in a couple of
25 questions what you mean by that.
1 Could you perhaps look on the screen. The document that you're
2 there looking at and I'm concerned with the first bullet point that
3 appears there, and a report by Colonel Bozidar Delic of the
4 549th Motorised Brigade dated the 23rd of March, 1998.
5 And if you can just get a sense, please. We note that there may
6 be a translation error in respect of the words in the first part of the
7 paragraph, paragraph 1, but if you look at the first bullet point, it
8 reads that: "On the 22nd of March, around 3.00, belts of 7.62-calibre
9 bullets and various other items" - I'll just summarise - "were found in
10 several places in the area of the village of Donji Bites in the forest
11 towards Radonjic Lake. The Djakovica MUP organised an ambush in that area
12 on the 22nd/23rd of March, 1998 but no one showed up, by the morning
13 hours." Do you see that?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. We can infer from that, can we, that officers from the Djakovica
16 MUP were, from time to time, at least, conducting operations in that area
17 in March of 1998?
18 A. Based on the document, one would say so. However, as regards this
19 issue, there are some other officers there. I cannot give you an exact
20 answer as to whether there were or there were none. It wasn't done by us.
21 It was done by the uniformed police of the police administration in
23 Q. Nonetheless, the words in paragraph 31 where you speak of police
24 patrols not entering this area for a couple of years, I mean, do we
25 understand those to be uniformed police patrols that you're referring to?
1 A. Yes, certainly.
2 Q. Just help us, please, because it -- you -- I'm sorry?
3 A. Certainly.
4 Q. You indicate that it was rare for patrols to go into the area and
5 it was only possible if the area was secured. Can you just give us a
6 sense, please, of the frequency of it from -- from March onwards.
7 A. According to the reports presented at the collegium meetings
8 within the police administration in Djakovica, the superiors of the
9 uniformed part of the police stated that the uniformed police is unable to
10 conduct patrols and enter the wider area referred to in order to try and
11 establish and preserve public peace and security.
12 Let me try and clarify that. The reports referred to were the
13 reports of the uniformed part of the police. They were the most credible
14 source of this information and the best information can be provided by
15 their officers and superiors.
16 I am not trying to avoid answering your question; however, I
17 cannot claim something that I'm not 100 per cent sure of.
18 Q. Well, that's all I want to be clear about. You -- is it the
19 position now that you're not 100 per cent sure one way or the other how
20 often the uniformed police patrolled in that area? Is that the position?
21 A. Precisely so.
22 Q. Thank you. Again, if we can return, please, to paragraphs 31 and
23 32 in your statement. You there refer to -- or, I'm sorry, you there
24 assert that the Serbian police stopped going into the area on police
25 patrol during the second half of 1998 altogether unless they launched a
1 police operation?
2 And then in paragraph 32, you refer to the map, which is annex 5,
3 showing what is described as the no-go area, which you describe as the
4 area where the police could not enter from mid-1998 until September 1998."
5 Do you -- do you have the passage?
6 A. Yes, I found it.
7 Q. Again, I'm simply trying to understand at the moment what those
8 assertions amount to, because it -- you appear to be suggesting that once
9 mid-1998 was reached, although there were operations conducted, they were
10 less frequent than they had been in the first half of the year. Is that a
11 correct reading of your statement?
12 A. I fail to understand the question. However, if you're asking me
13 to explain paragraphs 31 and 32, things were as described here. It is
14 based on the reports of superiors from the uniformed part of the police in
15 Djakovica. Those superiors were in charge of securing public peace and
16 order. They stated that their employees could not enter the area in order
17 to do that. I was not one of the superiors in that department; therefore,
18 I can only convey to you what was mentioned at collegium meetings of the
19 police administration in Djakovica.
20 Q. Forgive me, because I'm simply at this stage trying to understand
21 exactly what it is that you yourself are saying in these two paragraphs
22 about the information that you had received. And you -- you appear to be
23 saying in paragraph 31 that the Serbian police stopped going into the area
24 on police patrol during the second half of 1998, which on one view would
25 imply that they were entering on police patrol during the first half of
2 Is that correctly understood or not?
3 A. Perhaps the police did go there during that period but seldom.
4 Again, I have to say that you should ask this of those in charge of the
5 uniformed police. I merely repeated what they had said at collegium
6 meetings of the police administration in Djakovica.
7 Q. Very well. And -- and just focusing then on what they had said to
8 you about the second half of 1998. Again, is it -- is it correctly
9 understood that your testimony is that you were told that they did not
10 enter the area marked on your map as annex 5 until September 1998? Is
11 that correctly understood?
12 A. I don't know how to give you the most precise answer possible.
13 What it says here in paragraphs 31 and 32 is based on the statements made
14 by the police officers in the uniformed police. It is possible that the
15 uniformed police did go there regularly. It's possible. I cannot either
16 confirm or deny that. But you could get the most adequate answer from the
17 police officers -- commanding officers who made their reports at the
18 morning briefings at the police administration in Djakovica, so that my
19 answer is --
20 JUDGE ORIE: Witness 69, you gave a statement. You have now
21 explained to us several times that -- at least in this respect, that your
22 statement was based upon what you heard. If Mr. Emmerson seeks further
23 details of what you may have heard -- you either remember those details;
24 then you could tell Mr. Emmerson. Or you don't remember any further
25 details; and then you have to say, "I don't remember." But there's no
1 reason for you to say, "Ask someone else." I mean, you gave the statement
2 and we are seeking to understand the statement to the best of our
4 What now Mr. Emmerson would like to know is the following: That
5 where in paragraph 31 you state that only under very special
6 circumstances, that is, only if the area was secured, the police would go
7 in there; that you at the same time say that the Serbian police stopped
8 going into the area on police patrol during the second half, so that it
9 was different.
10 Now, the question specifically put to you by Mr. Emmerson is
11 whether during this second half of the year 1998 until early September,
12 whether you heard during the meetings of the police going into that area
13 at all. That's what Mr. Emmerson would like to know.
14 At least, Mr. Emmerson, if I ...
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, Mr. President, I did
16 not want to indicate that you should call somebody else to testify. I
17 testified to the best of my knowledge everything that I knew, everything
18 that I could recall. I don't know how I could provide you any other
20 JUDGE ORIE: The question is quite simple: On from mid-1998 until
21 September did you learn during your meetings with the colleagues, as you
22 described before, did you learn of the police patrols entering into that
23 area at all?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Proceed, Mr. Emmerson.
1 MR. EMMERSON:
2 Q. And can you tell us again, please, with what frequency they were
3 entering into that area during the second half of the year?
4 A. I don't know. I can't remember.
5 Q. Yes. And were -- were you aware of the involvement of police
6 units in a major offensive with the VJ between the 9th and the 11th of
7 August, 1998?
8 A. No.
9 Q. Are you distinguishing, for the purposes of your answers, between
10 police units and units of the PJP or are you including the PJP within your
11 definition of "police units"?
12 A. Yes, the PJP and the police force, the police forces. All the
13 elements that wore uniforms, that were not plain clothes.
21 Now, as for the uniformed police, I may recall something about
22 actions that were carried out in concert, but plans, march routes, the
23 strength, the activities, this is definitely not in my purview.
24 Q. It may be the way I asked you the question, but line 60 [sic], my
25 question was: Were you aware of the involvement of police units in a
1 major offensive with the VJ between the 9th and the 11th of August?
2 Now, can you answer the question if I put it slightly differently?
3 Did you know that MUP or PJP units had participated in an offensive
4 directed, for example, at Gllogjan between the 9th and the 11th of August?
5 JUDGE ORIE: The gestures of the witness seems to indicate that he
6 doesn't know.
7 Do you know or don't you know?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can't remember. I don't remember.
9 MR. EMMERSON:
10 Q. Could we look, please, at Exhibit P1181, which is annex 7 to your
11 witness statement.
12 Do you have that available to you?
13 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
14 A. I only have my statement. Nothing else.
15 MR. EMMERSON: Okay. I think -- perhaps --
16 JUDGE ORIE: If you look at the screen, it will appear for you on
17 the screen.
18 MR. EMMERSON: Now, I'm sorry because of the changes in exhibit
19 numbers that this may not be as smooth as would normally be the case, but
20 what I'm seeking is, so far as the English translation is concerned, if we
21 could pick it up on the page numbered 9 -- I'm sorry, 8 at the bottom; and
22 so far as the B/C/S version is concerned - just bear with me one moment -
23 it will be the page with 7573 in the top right-hand corner. It should
24 be -- KU196 is the first reference.
25 I'm sorry the pagination has changed from one exhibit to another.
1 This is a document that was annex 10 to the 92 ter statement of
2 Mr. Radovan Zlatkovic but is also produced by this witness. And there is
3 a record in the document of a series of armed engagements taking place all
4 under the reference "KU."
5 It might -- it might really assist the witness to take it, I
6 think, in the hard copy.
7 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
8 MR. EMMERSON: And, I'm sorry, could I ask Mr. Registrar to take
9 it to the page before. That -- the one we have up on the screen, I think,
10 is page 9. It's certainly page 9 on my pagination. If we could just
11 start on page 8.
12 And, Madam Usher, the ERN number in the top right-hand corner
13 should be 7573.
14 Can I -- perhaps -- it might be the -- the easiest and simplest
15 and most practical way might be to hand the bundle to me and I'll find the
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson, you're invited to give e-court page
18 numbers for the registrar, because it's far easier for him to -- to find
19 it that way and so we lose --
20 MR. EMMERSON: The difficulty we have is because these exhibits
21 were organised in a different fashion from the first to the second 92 ter
22 statement and then we had the difficulties that we had this morning, it's
23 simply not possible to do it in that way.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
25 MR. EMMERSON: But I think the witness now has the B/C/S version.
1 Q. Can you see, Witness 69, that you -- you're looking at a series of
2 entries, each of them with the initial "KU" and then a number and then the
3 year 1998? Do you have that?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. And for the English translation -- yes. We're -- we're also
6 looking at page 8 of the English translation. I think at the moment we
7 have page 3 on the screen. So it should be "68" in the top right-hand
9 I just want to take this rather more briefly than so far it's
10 gone. But if you look at the first entry about a third of the way down
11 that page, KU 196/98, it records that on the 9th of August, 1998, at about
12 7.30 hours in Biteska Suka sector, Gjakova municipality, an ethnic
13 Albanian DTG carried out a terrorist attack firing at members of the
14 Serbian MUP.
15 Do you see that?
16 A. Yes.
17 THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness please be asked to speak into
18 the microphone.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Would you please come closer to the microphone.
20 MR. EMMERSON: Yes.
21 Q. Now, obviously that's right within the area you've marked on annex
22 5. You would agree with that, would you not?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. And if I can take it very shortly - and I'll be corrected if I put
25 anything to you wrongly. I don't want to go through each and every entry.
1 But in this document that's exhibited to your statement, there are eight
2 entries under the references KU 196, 205, 217, 218, 220, 222, 406, and
3 430, each of which involves an armed engagement between the 9th and the
4 11th of August in the area within your marked section in annex 5,
5 Suka Bites, Bites village, Dujak, Gramocelj, and in the area of Gllogjan.
6 Now, presumably, Witness 69, you would have been aware of those
7 incidents, wouldn't you, reported as terrorist alleged crimes?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. And in each instance they're recorded as having involved armed
10 attacks on the MUP carrying out regular assignments and duties. Can you
11 help at all, please, to explain in the language of the records that you're
12 familiar with what that expression is intended to convey, "regular
13 assignments and duties"?
14 A. Well, again we're dealing with the uniformed police of the
15 Djakovica police administration. The regular tasks and assignments -- and
16 assignments or activities would comprise sector activities and securing
17 that area and also patrol duties, ensuring the free movement of citizens
18 and goods. That's as far as I am able to understand it.
19 Q. If that -- if that were right, Witness 69, that would imply,
20 wouldn't it, that during this period of August the uniformed police were
21 involved in regular patrols in that area?
22 A. On the basis of what it says here, it is so -- or rather, that
23 they attempted to re-establish law and order in these areas.
24 Q. All right. To move to another topic briefly. Could we turn to
25 annex 10 to your signed witness statement, which is now ...
1 [Defence counsel confer]
2 MR. EMMERSON:
3 Q. It's 65 ter 1732, and it's a fairly lengthy document.
4 If -- if the references have transferred correctly --
5 JUDGE ORIE: That is now marked for identification P1184. Is that
6 the one?
7 MR. EMMERSON: Thank you very much. That's the one.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
9 MR. EMMERSON:
10 Q. Yes. If the references have transferred correctly, it should be
11 pages 26 to 30 in the English translation and pages 21 to 24 in the B/C/S.
12 The B/C/S is certainly correct. In fact, if we can take it to the
13 bottom half of the page in B/C/S, that would be helpful. And in the
14 English, pages 26 to 30.
15 Yes, and, again, if we can focus in on paragraph 1 at the bottom
16 of the page.
17 You presumably read these documents in the preparation of your
18 statement, Witness 69; is that right?
19 If you'd just bear with me and focus on the question for a moment,
20 if you would. You considered these documents before you came to sign your
21 witness statement; is that right?
22 A. Are you referring to my statement? Yes, I did read and I did sign
24 Q. You've produced these documents as annexes to your statement,
25 Witness 69, and so the question I'm asking you is whether you read them
1 before you annexed them to your witness statement.
2 A. I assume that I did.
3 Q. Thank you. Without going through all of the following pages, this
4 document refers to alleged KLA attacks perpetrated by the KLA from the
5 village of Baballoq. And, again, in -- in summary, over the pages which
6 follow, it lists a total of 14 alleged incidents dating from the 2nd of
7 May to the 27th of July directed either at MUP check-points in the area of
8 the Baballoq refugee camp or at MUP members positioned at Erecka Suka or
9 at MUP positioned within the refugee camp or, in one instance only - and I
10 think this is item number 11 - at a VJ army helicopter.
11 Now, the questions I want to ask you about this document are
12 these: We have heard some evidence from a PJP commander called Rade Repic
13 who had responsibility for Baballoq during May and June. First of all, is
14 that a gentleman whose name you recall at all?
15 A. Well, barely, but more yes than no.
16 Q. He is -- he has testified that PJP officers would be located
17 physically within the houses of the Baballoq settlement closest to the
18 road and would occupy those premises. Is that something that you were
19 aware of?
20 A. No.
21 Q. Can you tell us, please, from your own recollection - it may be
22 that your memory doesn't assist you sufficiently - but can you tell us as
23 to when the MUP or PJP first began securing the area around the Baballoq
24 refugee settlement with check-points and by stationing forces at
25 Erecka Suka?
1 A. No, for sure.
2 Q. I'll move to another topic. You describe in your statement at
3 paragraphs 33 to 34 the arrests and interrogations of a group of men from
4 Kodralija. Do you have a recollection now of that?
5 A. In the statements, yes.
6 Q. Can you remember those men being brought into the police station,
7 Witness 69?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Were any of them in their underwear when they were brought in?
10 A. I don't know that with any certainty.
11 Q. Well, did you see them being brought in?
12 A. I can't remember the exact moment when they were brought in, but I
13 remember the time when they were brought in for an interview.
14 Q. Mr. Nebojsa Avramovic has testified in relation to their
15 processing as Gjakova police station when they were brought in by officers
16 of the PJP and has testified that he believes that at least some of them
17 were brought in in their underclothes. Do you --
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson, could you give us the --
19 MR. EMMERSON: Yes. That's 6626, lines 11 to 13.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
21 MR. EMMERSON:
22 Q. Is that something you would expect to have been informed of,
23 Witness 69, if suspects had been brought in in their underclothes after
25 A. It's possible that they were brought in, but I really can't
1 remember that.
2 Q. The Trial Chamber has -- sorry.
3 A. But nobody reported that to me.
4 Q. The Trial Chamber has seen and heard the contents of a statement
5 made by Bekim Kalamashi, which was marked as D142 and was read into the
6 transcript between pages 6627 and 6630, as well as other statements from
7 the men arrested at the time, in which it is alleged that prior to being
8 brought into the police station they were beaten by PJP officers and that
9 after being brought into the police station, they were systematically
10 beaten whilst in custody.
11 A. What's the question?
12 Q. The question is: Do you have any comment?
13 A. As far as the PJP members are concerned, I don't know that. That's
14 for sure. And as for people being beaten up once they were handed over to
15 the OKP service, I don't know anything about that, but I'm almost certain
16 in saying that this was not so.
17 Q. Did you often during this period receive allegations of police
18 officers ill-treating people in custody?
19 A. No.
20 Q. So --
21 A. That was not within my purview, anyway.
22 Q. So you -- you don't recall any incidents in which people were
23 complaining that they have confessions or statements beaten out of them at
25 A. There may have been things like that, but I'm sure that there were
1 no such instances in the service where I worked.
2 Q. And whose responsibility would it have been to investigate the
3 involvement of police officers in that sort of activity?
4 A. The police control service and the police sector, the uniformed
5 police. They were dealing with the legality of the policework in any
6 given police administration.
7 Q. And -- and do you have any recollection of that unit conducting
8 any inquiries in your police station in 1998 or 1999, Witness 69?
9 A. I don't know any such thing.
10 Q. Could I ask you, please, now on another topic to turn to paragraph
11 35 of your statement. I'm sorry, paragraph 36 of the old statement.
12 Could we please bring up D171.
13 Witness 69, your record and recollection is that amongst those who
14 first attended the canal were General Colonel Vlastimir Djordjevic and
15 Lieutenant General Obrad Stevanovic; is that right?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. And I think at annex 6 to your witness statement you have produced
18 a record signed - bear with me just one moment - I'll come back to that
20 You have, I think, in your documentation a record to that effect;
21 is that correct? You recall seeing that?
22 A. Yes. Yes.
23 Q. Can you help us at all as to how it came about that two such
24 high-ranking officials took part in what was basically a search operation?
25 JUDGE ORIE: Just for the record, we are now talking about P1180,
1 Mr. Emmerson.
2 MR. EMMERSON: Thank you very much.
3 Q. I don't know whether you heard my question, Witness.
4 A. I remember it, and this would be my answer: Based on the
5 information on the events there, and on orders of the then-head of police
6 administration - and I suppose he did that in agreement with his
7 superiors - those people that I mentioned in my statement attended the
8 crime scene. I was ordered by the head of police administration to remain
9 in the building; therefore, Generals Djordjevic and Stevanovic attended
10 this scene. From the police administration, there was Adamovic and I
11 don't know who else.
12 Q. Perhaps I should put the question from a slightly different
14 Would it have been usual for somebody of General Colonel
15 Djordjevic's seniority to attend a search operation of this kind?
16 A. The knowledge of that taking place was of great importance. I
17 suppose because of that they all participated and went to the crime scene.
18 That is my thinking, my view of that.
19 Q. I wonder if we might just go into private session for one moment,
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
22 [Private session]
11 Pages 9892-9903 redacted. Private session.
3 [Open session]
4 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're in open session.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
6 Please proceed, Mr. Harvey.
7 MR. HARVEY: Thank you, Your Honour.
8 Q. Witness 69, in paragraph 31 of your statement you state that "It
9 was only possible to go into areas such as Jablanica if the area was
11 By "secured," do you mean by the VJ? And if not, by whom?
12 A. First of all, good evening, Mr. Harvey. And the answer to your
13 question is that the area was secured by the police or by military forces.
14 Q. Would you agree that there was very close cooperation between the
15 police and the military on the occasions when any attempt was made to
16 penetrate Jablanica?
17 A. I think so.
18 Q. Were you involved in those plans yourself?
19 A. Never.
20 Q. You mentioned at page 34, line 22 today, you talked about written
21 documents that were found by the service in the field. May I take it that
22 one of the objects of your researches was to discover as many documents as
23 you could that appeared to be written by members of the KLA?
24 A. That was one of our tasks.
25 Q. Were you aware of such documents being seized in the village of
1 Jablanica? At any time during 1998.
2 A. I think so, and I believe the State Security Service later became
3 involved in the matter of those documents.
4 Q. Was that the means by which your service came into possession of
5 minutes of meetings held by members of the KLA in that area?
6 A. Let us suppose so.
7 Q. Was it also one of the instructions given to your service in the
8 field to destroy the headquarters or houses of KLA members?
9 A. Could you please repeat that question.
10 Q. Was it also one of the instructions given to your service in the
11 field to destroy the headquarters or houses of KLA members?
12 A. Certainly not.
13 Q. You are aware, I presume, that the police forces entered
14 Jabllanice on the 2nd and 3rd of August, 1998, are you not?
15 A. Perhaps.
16 Q. Well, does that mean perhaps you're aware or perhaps that was the
17 date or perhaps you remember? Could you explain your answer, please.
18 A. The latter. I cannot remember exactly.
19 Q. Well, is it that you remember that they did enter Jablanica at
20 sometime; you just don't remember the exact date?
21 A. I don't recall the date at all.
22 Q. But you do recall that they entered Jablanica.
23 A. Some people said so.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Witness 69, you increasingly start by not answering
25 questions and say "let's suppose so, could be." Please answer the
1 questions. The question was whether you recalled that they entered
2 Jablanica, whether you were told that this happened. Then Mr. Harvey
3 might want to know who told you. But please focus on the questions and
4 answer them.
5 Please proceed, Mr. Harvey.
6 So the last question was whether you recall that they entered
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, Mr. President, I don't
10 MR. HARVEY:
11 Q. You've no idea if they ever entered Jablanica at any time?
12 A. I don't know how to make it clear to you. Yes, they did, but I
13 don't know the time or the date.
14 Q. Fine.
15 A. I don't know how else to put it.
16 JUDGE ORIE: That's fine. But that's -- your previous answers
17 were not fully corresponding with -- to what you tell us now. So you knew
18 that they were entering Jablanica but you don't remember the date.
19 Please proceed, Mr. Harvey.
20 MR. HARVEY:
21 Q. One of your responsibilities would be to investigate whether any
22 crimes had been committed at Jablanica; correct?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. You have told this Trial Chamber that you had information that
25 there was a prison at Jablanica. What investigations did you have carried
1 out into the truth or otherwise of there being a prison in Jablanica when
2 your forces, the Serb police, were in Jablanica?
3 A. Apart from official notes and the operative material that existed,
4 the members of that team never investigated on the spot in Jablanica where
5 it was rumoured there existed a prison or something like that.
6 Q. They never looked to see if they could find bodies of people who
7 had allegedly been abducted?
8 A. My answer is "no."
9 Q. They never looked to see if they could find evidence of beatings
10 or torture?
11 A. I have to say "no" again.
12 Q. In fact, you never received a report from any of your men in the
13 field who had entered Jablanica that they had ever found anything that
14 they could call a prison there, did you?
15 MR. RE: In -- in what time period are we referring to?
16 MR. HARVEY: In 1998. Let us say the two occasions in 1998. And I
17 will be specific about dates. The beginning of August and the beginning
18 of September 1998.
19 Q. Is that clear enough for you, Witness 69?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. So is it correct therefore that you never received from any of
22 your men in the field who entered Jablanica in August or September of 1998
23 any report that they had found anything that they could call a prison
25 A. I can't recall.
1 MR. HARVEY: At this point, Your Honours, I think it's going to be
2 necessary for us to go into private session. I have some specific
3 questions to put to the witness about his own responsibility for matters.
4 JUDGE ORIE: We turn into private session.
5 [Private session]
11 Pages 9909-9913 redacted. Private session.
8 [Open session]
9 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're back in open session.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
11 MR. GUY-SMITH:
12 Q. I am sure that you would agree, would you not, sir, that the
13 following list would constitute forms of ill-treatment if they were used:
14 The use of rubber batons, kicking, rifle butts, pistol butts, metal bats,
15 baseball bats, electric shock, and finally, the use of fists or hand slaps
16 when discussing anything with a potential - for purposes of our
17 discussion - witness? Those would be forms of ill-treatment, would they
19 A. No.
20 Q. Would it be appropriate, in -- in your opinion as a police
21 officer, when interrogating an individual to use any of the forms of
22 physical behaviour that I have just mentioned as a method of obtaining
23 information from them?
24 A. All of the things -- or rather, not all of the things you
25 mentioned strike me as logical; however, on occasion some policemen may
1 have used force but only out of those which are deemed acceptable or are
3 Q. And with regard to those kinds of force which are deemed
4 acceptable or allowed, would the punching of a woman in the face be an
5 acceptable form of physical use when speaking to her about a matter of
6 serious import?
7 A. No.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Guy-Smith, could you come to your point, because
9 until now these matters are all rather obvious.
10 MR. GUY-SMITH:
11 Q. Are you aware of allegations --
12 And if we could have P6, which is the Spotlight Report, and I
13 believe that it's page 31, up on the screen. And I don't know whether or
14 not there is a B/C/S translation. I believe that there's not.
15 So I'm -- I'm going to read something to you, sir, and ask you to
16 comment on it. And this is with regard to an investigation that was
18 "Besa Arlati, member of the Democratic Alliance of Kosovo
19 organisation in Djakovica was questioned at the Djakovica police
20 department several times in connection with abductions of officers Popadic
21 and Jovanovic. The first time was on 26 May when police chief
22 Sreten Camovic demanded that she tell them everything she knew about the
23 alleged abduction. Besa Arlati said the police inspectors cursed her
24 'Albanian mother' and called her a whore and Chief Camovic punched her in
25 the face. She was held all night in a cellar flooded with sewage some 10
1 to 15 metres deep."
2 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Centimetres.
3 MR. GUY-SMITH: Oh, thank you so much.
4 Q. "On 28 May, she was questioned continuously for nine hours."
5 I pause. Were you aware of those allegations being made against
6 Sreten Camovic?
7 A. No.
8 Q. Were such a thing to happen, would that be appropriate police
9 behaviour? And I believe you told us that the punching in the face would
10 not but the placing of a person in sewage water overnight, would that be
11 appropriate police investigative technique?
12 A. No. Absolutely no.
13 Q. Do you know of any investigation being done at the Djakovica
14 police department by anyone concerning these allegations?
15 A. No.
16 MR. GUY-SMITH: Thank you. I have no further questions.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Just for our information, Mr. Guy-Smith, I have some
18 difficulties in finding this on page 31 of the ...
19 MR. GUY-SMITH: It's the right bottom quarter -- corner, and it's
20 under 2.24.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
22 MR. GUY-SMITH: Did you find it?
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
24 MR. GUY-SMITH: Good.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Yes, thank you.
1 Mr. Re, is there any need to re-examine the witness?
2 MR. RE: No, no need for re-examination. No.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
4 [Trial Chamber confers]
5 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber also has no questions for you at this
6 moment, Witness 69. The only thing that then remains is to look at the
7 annexes to the statement, that is, P1175 up to and including P1184.
8 I would -- I would at this moment exclude for a second P1181, but
9 for the others, are there objections against admission?
10 MR. EMMERSON: There are, and it's a little difficult to formulate
11 them because of the changes in exhibit numbers, but it is our
12 understanding that the ERN ranges in -- in particular, I think it is annex
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
15 MR. EMMERSON: Include the statements to which objection has been
16 taken in the motion and upon which the Trial Chamber has --
17 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. So that would be P1184 where there are
19 I take it you would further have to explore what is -- what is in
20 there --
21 MR. EMMERSON: Yes. I'm sorry to --
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
23 MR. EMMERSON: -- to be cumbersome about this. But given that
24 none of us have a properly printed-out set of annexes according to the
25 index that was only served at 10.00 this morning, may we have the
1 opportunity to cross-refer the objections to the current list of MFI'd
2 exhibits and then return to the Trial Chamber with a response in relation
3 to that, so we don't inadvertently confuse as one document finds its way,
4 so to speak, into a different exhibit number?
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Well, then you have some work to do overnight.
6 Mr. Re, for you perhaps some work to do overnight is -- the
7 Chamber noticed that at P1181 is a document which is composed of many
8 other documents, altogether approximately - pardon - 145 pages, many of
9 these documents already being exhibited -- well, many -- at least some.
10 Could you try to find out which ones are and which ones are not so
11 that we can get an updated list. The Chamber would then appreciate to hear
12 as soon as possible from Defence counsel on objections.
13 Then, is there any other procedural matter we'd have to raise at
14 this moment? If not -- of course, I meant in relation to Witness 69.
15 Witness 69, this concludes your testimony in this court. The
16 Chamber would like to thank you very much for coming to The Hague and for
17 answering all the questions that were put to you. I wish you a safe trip
18 home again.
19 We adjourn until tomorrow, quarter past 2.00 in the afternoon.
20 Mr. Registrar, I take it in this same courtroom.
21 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
22 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. It's confirmed by Mr. Registrar that it
23 will be the same courtroom.
24 We stand adjourned.
25 [The witness withdrew]
1 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 6.57 p.m.,
2 to be resumed on Tuesday, the 30th day of
3 October, 2007, at 2.15 p.m.