1 Wednesday, 5 October 2005
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness entered court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 9:07 a.m.
6 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Nice, I have something to say.
7 Following the sitting last Friday, I caused an inquiry to be made
8 into the words used by Lord Ashdown in the video shown in the
9 examination-in-chief of this witness on Thursday, the 29th. I did this
10 because of the complaint by the accused that my acceptance of the
11 explanation by Mr. Nice lacked objectivity since, in his words, the film
12 spoke for itself.
13 Mr. Milosevic, you will recall, had put to the witness that Lord
14 Ashdown had said that it was a scandal for the international community
15 that they, meaning the KLA, had such poor quality weapons.
16 In the English version of the video, Lord Ashdown said the
17 following: "Tell him we can't -- you know, it's a scandal that the
18 international community haven't done this enough."
19 The CLSS interpretation unit notes that the Albanian interpreter
20 in the video accurately translated Lord Ashdown's words into Albanian, and
21 they also confirm that this is what Mr. Milosevic would have heard in
22 B/C/S: "... it's a scandal that the international community haven't done
23 anything. Be careful with this. I can't promise, but we'll do everything
24 we can."
25 The accused has a right to a fair trial, and this he clearly will
1 not have if the Judges hearing the case are not impartial. When an
2 accusation of lack of objectivity is made and it relates to a matter that
3 is verifiable, then in my view the Trial Chamber should investigate the
4 matter, and this is why I caused an inquiry to be made. The inquiry shows
5 that the gratitude I expressed to Mr. Nice for his clarification, which I
6 note had already been made by Judges Kwon and Bonomy during the
7 examination-in-chief, was well-founded.
8 Mr. Nice.
9 MR. NICE: On the same topic, I can --
10 JUDGE ROBINSON: We don't wish to continue it at all.
11 MR. NICE: No, I realise that. On part of the same topic, I was
12 going to tell you in any event, the issue of maps is being pursued and I
13 understand further map material will be available coming from the region
14 by the end of the week. Your Honours will remember the inconsistency
15 between the positions of Gegaj and Kacanik or whatever it was.
16 WITNESS: BOGOLJUB JANICEVIC [Resumed]
17 [Witness answered through interpreter]
18 MR. NICE: Returning to the cross-examination of this witness --
19 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson.
20 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic.
21 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, I think that what you have
22 just quoted confirms what I asserted because the entire --
23 JUDGE ROBINSON: It does not. I'm going to move on with the
25 Cross-examined by Mr. Nice: [Continued]
1 Q. We return briefly to what was tab 9 in the Racak documents,
2 Exhibit 180, on the overhead projector, with the usher's assistance, the
3 meeting involving this witness and Brigadier General Maisonneuve, a
4 witness in this case.
5 And I want you, please, to look at, although it's in English, to
6 follow two parts with me.
7 On the first page, Mr. Nort, towards the bottom.
8 You were asked by the observer Gilbertson: "Who was in charge of
9 the police yesterday?" You were recorded as answering: "Even as chief of
10 police, we cannot make the final decision. HQ must decide. HQ gave the
12 You were asked, "Who here gave the order for police to go to that
13 location?" You effectively declined to answer that by saying, "Why do you
14 ask? Everything I say is clear."
15 Over the page, please, Mr. Nort.
16 You were asked, six lines down or so: "Who were involved, VJ?"
17 You said, "Who says they were?" And you were told: "The OSCE US KDOM saw
19 And then finally on this topic, at the bottom of that page,
20 please, Mr. Nort.
21 You were asked this: "US KDOM and OSCE observed people murdered,
22 innocents, there's a body count of 50 plus people, there's an
23 investigation going on, people were executed at close range. Can you
25 And the monitor's recorded for the second time explicitly that
1 your answer was evasive.
2 It would be, of course, Mr. Janicevic, for the Chamber to decide
3 what happened at that meeting, but tell us, were you being evasive with
4 the monitors, as they have clearly revealed was their judgement?
5 A. Not for a moment. I was not evasive.
6 Q. Well, if the answer -- who was in charge of the police on that
7 day? Tell us. You didn't tell them.
8 A. I have said. Well, I have said.
9 Q. Well, who was it?
10 A. Goran Radosavljevic.
11 Q. Please tell us why you didn't tell the monitors the name Goran
12 Radosavljevic. Then they could have gone and spoken to him. Why didn't
13 you tell them?
14 A. Please. I had my superior command. My superior command was the
15 MUP staff in Pristina. The monitors could have easily gone to the MUP
16 staff in Pristina. They knew exactly what happened, which police
17 participated. It was said. But there's something else in issue probably.
18 I don't know exactly what.
19 Q. Well --
20 A. Does it say there that I had told them that the MUP staff in
21 Pristina was superior to me?
22 Q. We have --
23 A. They did not translate that for me.
24 Q. You declined to identify the person who was in charge, and that's
25 all there is to it. I'm going to move on.
1 But before I -- as we move on, can I ask, please, for a short
2 private session.
3 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, private session.
4 [Private session]
11 Page 45211 redacted. Private session.
11 Page 45212 redacted. Private session.
11 Page 45213 redacted. Private session.
11 Page 45214 redacted. Private session.
4 [Open session]
5 MR. NICE:
6 Q. Mr. Janicevic, in the course of the day that you were -- in the
7 course of the 15th, you were, of course, on the radio and you were using a
8 call-sign, weren't you?
9 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We used call-signs that applied at
11 the time. Everybody had their own call-sign.
12 MR. NICE:
13 Q. Your call was Breza Jedinice number 1; correct?
14 A. Call-sign Breza Jedinice did not exist. Breza Jedan, meaning
15 Breza 1, did.
16 Q. And that was you?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Thank you. Radomir Mitic, chief of police, he was Breza Tri,
19 number 3.
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. He also used the call-sign Trojka, didn't he?
22 A. Radomir Mitic was Breza 3, Tri, not Trojka.
23 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic.
24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The number 3 and Trojka is the same
1 MR. NICE: It's not up to the witness to interrupt the
2 cross-examination, with great respect. I'm cross-examining on the basis
3 of material available to me and it's not for him to add evidence at this
4 stage, if I may say so.
5 JUDGE ROBINSON: I'm not sure he is adding evidence. I thought he
6 was seeking to clarify something. He has frequently had to do this, and
7 it has been to our advantage, where the B/C/S is concerned.
8 MR. NICE: Your Honour, I've made the point before that sometimes
9 his interventions may assist, sometimes they may, in our respectful
10 submission, have an agenda.
11 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. We'll have to make a judgement on that.
12 MR. NICE:
13 Q. My suggestion to the witness is, on the basis, of course, of the
14 information I have, that Mitic used the code Breza Tri, and he also used
15 the code Trojka. What do you say to that?
16 A. Mitic used the code Breza Tri.
17 Q. Thank you. In the course of the day, you were overheard in
18 communication with Mitic, and that's all too possible, isn't it? Your
19 radio communications could have been overheard by other people in the
20 police station.
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. And --
23 A. Yes. Anyone who was on the line could have heard them.
24 Q. The reference to the police were coded to reference to Plavi
25 or blue?
1 A. Plavi, did we use it in the police? Yes, sometimes.
2 Q. Thank you. The military was also coded as Zeleni, or green. Is
3 it Zeleni or Djeleni [phoen]? Zeleni, I think.
4 A. Zeleni.
5 Q. Zeleni, or green, and that was the code for the army.
6 A. The colour of the uniform.
7 Q. Yes.
8 A. The army uniform.
9 Q. Yes. Do you accept that that was the code used for the army?
10 A. Sometimes. Because the army had its call-signs as well.
11 Q. Do you accept that at one stage in the course of the 15th of
12 January of 1999, in using code, you asked Mitic if it was necessary to
13 engage the army to assist the police, and Mitic told you not at that time
14 because everything was going as planned?
15 A. No.
16 Q. Showing that there was indeed a joint --
17 A. No.
18 Q. I see.
19 A. Never. Mitic -- or rather, I don't remember that Mitic ever asked
20 me whether the army needed to be involved in the action. Had he asked me,
21 I'm sure I would have remembered.
22 Q. At a later stage, you asked Mitic, again all in using your code
23 names, this: "Be careful not to have consequences or casualties." Mitic
24 replied: "Don't worry." And then Ljubisa Boskovic spoke to someone, and
25 after he had done so - this is somebody else in the police station - he
1 explained that there were over 60 casualties in Racak, and this was
2 sometime between 11.30 on 12.00.
3 So do you remember and accept that there was a conversation where
4 you warned Mitic to be careful of -- not to have consequences or
5 casualties and where Ljubisa Boskovic informed you that by that time,
6 about 12.00, 60 had already been killed. Sixty terrorists, it may be
7 described, had already been killed.
8 A. The person who told you that lied do you, Mr. Nice, and here is
9 why: Ljubisa Boskovic was the assistant commander of the police station
10 in Kacanik, and he has nothing to do with Stimlje and Racak. Nothing to
11 do whatsoever. And I never had a conversation like that.
12 Q. And finally, from this particular source, you suggested to Mitic,
13 again all in the appropriate code, that he should recommend to the people
14 in the field to cover their tracks, and Mitic indicated that he would do
15 so. Do you remember doing that?
16 A. That's nonsense, Mr. Nice. Notorious, nonsensical things.
17 Q. Well, another proposition, not necessarily from the same source
18 but from the same geographical area, is to this effect, that the word
19 "blitz" had a code value and the radio. Do you remember that, blitz?
20 A. No.
21 Q. Do you remember the word "magpies"?
22 A. I don't remember.
23 Q. What code word, if any, do you recall the OSCE being known by?
24 A. No.
25 Q. Magpies, I suggest to you, was what they were known by, and
1 "blitz" was the phrase used in code on the radio to alert people to the
2 presence of the OSCE in an area in order that appropriate steps could be
3 taken to stop them seeing what was going on.
4 A. Mr. Nice, please. That was never used, never. I state that that
5 was never used. Words like that were never used. KVM was used, KDOM was
6 used, and an SC vehicle was a term used. Those were terms and words that
7 were used when referring to members of the observation mission.
8 Now, had there been any intention of concealing that, well, we
9 wouldn't have informed the KVM to come out on the spot. The police would
10 not inform the public information media and cameras that filmed the
11 operation throughout.
12 Q. I'm moving on. We've seen, and we can look at it if necessary,
13 that on the 16th of January Milutinovic gave a press conference or -- yes,
14 a statement, suggesting that Racak was a kind of new Markale. We now know
15 from the evidence you gave us yesterday, Mr. Janicevic, that the people in
16 Racak died where they were found. Who gave Milutinovic the idea that he
17 should describe this as a Markale? Was it you or somebody to your
18 knowledge? And by Markale, it's not accepted this is what happened at
19 Markale; by Markale is meant a constructed massacre.
20 JUDGE ROBINSON: Does he agree that the people in Racak died where
21 they were found?
22 MR. NICE: From his answers yesterday.
23 JUDGE ROBINSON: If that is so, then go ahead.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's not true, Mr. Nice, not
25 correct. I never said that the people were found there, that the KVM
1 found them where they had died.
2 MR. NICE:
3 Q. On the 16th, how did you know otherwise, if that's going to be
4 your suggestion? On the 16th of January, how did you know anything about
5 where the bodies had been found so that Milutinovic could be putting out
6 this press release?
7 A. You will have to ask Milutinovic that. I never spoke to him over
8 the telephone in my life, nor have I ever seen him. That's the first
10 Secondly, I heard Milutinovic's statement on television in the
11 evening, after the statement made by Ambassador Walker about what he had
12 allegedly seen and found in Racak.
13 Q. I'm just going to pass you a document. It's tab 23 of the Racak
14 papers. That means that it was originally Exhibit D299, tabs 395 and 396.
15 This is a plan that was dated the 20th of January. Are you familiar with
16 this plan? It seems to have been put together by Dragan Ilic and Vladimir
18 A. I was -- I've been presented a piece of information, 6/99 of the
19 20th of January, 1999.
20 Q. Yes. I think that's the one. It's a plan. Is that the one
21 you're looking at?
22 A. It's not a plan.
23 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic.
24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] There's either something wrong with
25 the microphone of the witness or there's a technical problem, but I never
1 hear the first several words of the witness's answer in Serbian and have
2 to read from the transcript what the witness said.
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I have before me --
4 JUDGE ROBINSON: I'll ask the technicians to attend to that. If
5 it continues, then you'll bring that to our attention, Mr. Milosevic.
6 MR. NICE: It's the wrong document on the ELMO, by the way, and
7 we'll hand up the correct one to save time.
8 Q. Just help me, please: Are you familiar with this plan?
9 A. Yes. This is the plan compiled by the working group.
10 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Nort, I think it's on the third page, or fourth.
11 MR. NICE: Yes.
12 Q. Just to remind us - I don't want to ask very much about it - but
13 you see, what I'm interested in your help with is this: This plan is
14 focused solely on identifying those who'd been killed and finding out
15 things and saying things about them, apparently. Can you explain why
16 there was no plan to investigate those KLA terrorists, if there were any,
17 who had escaped and who were still active? Why was the focus only on
18 those who had been killed?
19 A. The district public prosecutor's office sent out a request for
20 information, the Ministry of the Interior, to the staff of the MUP and the
21 Secretariat of the Interior. The MUP staff, on the basis of that request
22 from the prosecution, drew up a plan for operational and tactical measures
23 and investigation to establish the facts. I apologise.
24 Q. There's never any focus of interest on the people who survived and
25 got away. And I would suggest to you as a policeman facing terrorists,
1 you must be more interested in live terrorists than dead terrorists. I
2 just wonder why it never appears in the documents that come out after
4 The reason, I'm going to suggest to you, is because you gave the
5 game away. You're just engaged in a cover-up at this stage for what you
6 know you've done that is illegal. That's why you only focus on the dead.
7 You forget the fact that you should actually be focusing on the living.
8 A. That is your assertion, not mine. I assert that it is -- that's
9 not how it was, Mr. Nice.
10 Three days -- for three days, the KVM and the terrorists did not
11 allow us to conduct an on-site investigation, and in the space of three
12 days you could have changed the aspect of the site itself a thousand
13 times. You could have done away with evidence. You could have planted
14 new evidence which indicates something else. So who is responsible for
15 that, then?
16 Had the investigation taken place on that very day, the day the
17 anti-terrorist operation was completed, then all the evidence, all the
18 proof, all material evidence would have been found on the spot, on the
19 locality, and we wouldn't have the need to discuss all this here and now,
20 together with members of the KVM, of course. The KVM was never excluded
21 from the investigation process, and the team, the on-site investigation
22 team, at no point in time were they excluded.
23 Q. Very well.
24 A. But we're dealing with something quite different here, and I'm
25 sure you know what we're dealing with, what it's all about.
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 Q. [Previous translation continues]... move to 24 which is a document
2 -- tab 24 in the binder, which is a document of yours. It's formally
3 D299, tab 386, tendered through Stevanovic. This is a report of yours,
4 dated the 25th of January. Just -- only two questions about it really.
5 The Chamber would like to see it on the overhead projector. Its
6 form is as follows: It says: "We have operative information that the
7 following members of the KLA from the village of Racak ... who were killed
8 and identified were involved in the activities of Siptar terrorist gangs,"
9 and then you list a number of people whose names will be familiar to the
10 Judges if they are familiar with the schedule dealing with victims in
11 Racak. So all the names on the first page are on that list.
12 If we go over to the next page, please, Mr. Nort. Top of the page
13 there's a name that's not familiar to us, I think; Mustafa Asllani. But
14 apart from that, the next three names: Haqif Hysenaj, Sheremet Syla, and
15 Fatmir Limani are familiar. So the first series of names are people who
16 died who the Prosecution say died as unarmed civilians.
17 Your document goes on, just so we can see its shape, to say the
18 following --
19 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson.
20 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Milosevic.
21 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] As far as I can see on the
22 transcript as well, and I heard it too, that it's tab 24 of the exhibits
23 from the binder of Mr. Janicevic, whereas in tab 24, the one I have is
24 another document.
25 MR. NICE: We're looking at tab 24 of the Racak papers.
1 JUDGE ROBINSON: It's tab 24 of the Racak papers, not this
2 witness's binders.
3 MR. NICE:
4 Q. Mr. Janicevic, your -- your own report, for you signed this, goes
5 on to say: "Pursuant to information --" move the page up a little bit
6 please, Mr. Nort, thanks very much. "Pursuant to information from the
7 Siptar media on the members of the so-called KLA who were killed in the
8 village of Racak ... we have operative information on the involvement of
9 the following people ..." And then you list people for the most part who
10 it's accepted died as members of the KLA in Racak. One or two may have
11 died elsewhere in the same general area, but they're not named -- not
12 names that appear on the Prosecution's list of people said to have died as
13 unarmed civilians. So we've got Mehmet Mustafa, Hanumshahe Mujota --
14 that's the one exception. That's the daughter, to whom we'll return, or
15 we dealt with her yesterday. Then Skender Qarri - over the page, please -
16 Kadri Syla, and so on. Various names, some of them listed by Shukri Buja
17 and some of them not.
18 But then at the foot of the page, we see this: "The service has
19 information that the other people killed in Racak ... and who were not
20 identified, were actively involved in or assisted members of the so-called
21 KLA ..."
22 If they weren't identified, how could you make that assertion?
23 You see? You see the point? Here you are saying in advance of
24 information --
25 A. The service disposes of operative information that the rest of the
1 people who died in Racak, in Stimlje municipality on the 15th of January,
2 1999, and who were not identified were actively involved in or assisted
3 members of the so-called KLA in the village of Racak. This is a piece of
4 information received from the operative police who knew their names but
5 didn't know all the information, didn't have all the information about
6 them. So I'm certain of what I say.
7 I don't have, however, the report on the basis of which this piece
8 of information was compiled, but it was certainly compiled on the basis of
9 relevant information received from the operative people in Racak.
10 Q. Mr. Janicevic, if somebody is not identified, you can't really say
11 very much about them, can you? Apart from that you don't know their
12 name. So if you don't know their name, you don't know what they did.
13 Can we distribute --
14 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Nice, indictments here are full of references
15 to people unknown who are actually are alleged to have committed crimes.
16 MR. NICE: Your Honour, with great respect, that's a different
17 point, because what's being said there is people were acting in concert
18 and there were others who it may be shown were acting in concert. What is
19 said here is that the service has information, and that's different, in my
20 respectful --
21 JUDGE ROBINSON: Perhaps instead "who were not identified," we
22 should read "who were not fully identified."
23 MR. NICE:
24 Q. Mr. Janicevic, what identification, if any, of these other people
25 did you have by the time you wrote this report?
1 A. For each person killed in the war, we had either a name, a first
2 name or a last name, or the father's name. For example, Asan's son, and
3 things like that. Although you don't know the complete name, the person
4 wasn't therefore identified. Identification is when you have all the
5 relevant data and confirm that it is indeed the person you think it is.
6 Q. Well, can you tell us, please, is there a document showing who it
7 was you were saying here on this date, the 25th of January, was partially
8 identified and partially identified as a member of the KLA?
9 A. When you received this report or piece of information, and I don't
10 know you received it, all the operative data, Official Notes, reports, and
11 pieces of information were attached to it, on the basis of which this
12 document was compiled and sent out. I don't have all those attachments
13 now. I don't even have this report either, and you -- you do have it.
14 Q. You see, the reason I asked the question and I asked it in the
15 very specific way I did -- I'll assist the Judges by distribution, please,
16 of this document. The Chamber will remember a chart that we produced in
17 the course of Jasovic's statement -- evidence, to assist the Chamber.
18 It's been subject to further consideration in light of the material that's
19 been produced by this witness, and I'll come to that at a little later
20 stage. It's been corrected for one or two errors that were located, and
21 they've been shaded in in grey. It's only a matter of two or three of
22 those. But what this document shows - and perhaps the witness could have
23 one - is, and I'll remind the Chamber and familiarise the witness with the
24 format of this document. You see, this is a document that has along the
25 top some of the names of those people who died in Racak and who the
1 Prosecution says died as unarmed civilians, and it has down the left-hand
2 side alleged sources of information about KLA involvement, according to
3 material provided by Jasovic and through Marinkovic and Stevanovic.
4 Now, if you'd be good enough, please, Mr. Janicevic, to go over to
5 the third sheet, you'll see a strong horizontal line, and after-- which
6 represents the date of Racak. And after that, on the 16th of January, if
7 you follow the format of the document, you'll see that somebody called
8 Mustafa Afrim was said to have provided a large number of names, starting
9 with Lufti Bilalli and going on then to Buja Hajrizi and various others,
10 as people who were involved in the KLA. And those names, we see, are not
11 exactly matched but very closely matched to the names that appear in the
12 first part of your report of the 25th of January. A large number of the
13 names there match.
14 Now, we've also produced -- not produced, we've revealed to the
15 Court a 16-year-old boy, as he then was, explains that on the day he was
16 taken to the police station and electrocuted and that this statement is
17 nothing to do with him.
18 My suggestion to you is that your report, naming as it does some
19 people and having to say of others that they're unidentified but that they
20 nevertheless were involved, actually reflects that you were engaged in the
21 process of trying to get material that would justify killing all these
22 people and you'd only got so far with the exercise. Do you understand me?
23 MR. KAY: I must say I don't think the chart is a matter that is
24 appropriate to put before the witness at all. This is a matter for
25 closing argument and as a tool for cross-examination and putting it to the
1 witness, in my submission, it is wholly inappropriate. This is a matter
2 for the final brief of the Prosecution, and these documents should be
3 returned to them. The Trial Chamber shouldn't be considering this
4 material, nor this witness, in cross-examination.
5 JUDGE ROBINSON: I don't quite understand your point, Mr. Kay.
6 MR. KAY: The Prosecution has put in a chart which I'm still
7 struggling to interpret. I don't know how the witness is going to --
8 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.
9 MR. KAY: -- manage that, containing their evidence contradicting
10 Dragan Jasovic's statements, revised version 16/6/2005. It's got the OTP
11 comments, so their arguments. It's got a series of cross-references.
12 This isn't a question at all. Again, it's using a means of
13 cross-examination to try and bolster or produce the argument of the
14 Prosecution. Well, that's a matter for the closing, final submissions.
15 JUDGE ROBINSON: It's more in the form of an aide-memoire, is it?
16 MR. NICE: I think Mr. Kay's problem -- I've forgotten, he may not
17 have been here during Jasovic's cross-examination.
18 MR. KAY: I was here.
19 MR. NICE: Then you should remember it from then. This document
20 was, of course essential to make any sense of the vast quantity, and I use
21 that word infrequently but appropriately, of material provided through
22 Jasovic. And I have to say that, in light of the considerable amount of
23 additional material provided by this witness, we have been engaged in
24 trying to assist ourselves and the Chamber to see if this chart --
25 JUDGE ROBINSON: It's not in evidence, is it? It's not in
2 MR. NICE: No, it's an aide-memoire. To see if this chart should
3 be changed at all --
4 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Nice, wouldn't it be better just to put the
5 last part of your question, which has just gone off the transcript, to the
6 witness and see whether the witness can answer it, whether with or without
7 the use of this document? Mr. Kay's point, I think, is valid in that it
8 will take a little time for the witness to digest this.
9 MR. NICE: It may take --
10 JUDGE ROBINSON: And may confuse him.
11 MR. NICE: It may not. But as a powerful -- as a powerful way of
12 revealing what his police station produced, in my respectful submission,
13 it's absolutely appropriate to use it, because what I've revealed, what
14 this chart reveals, and it's not -- it's got OTP comments on the right,
15 but it seeks to be an analysis of an otherwise indigestible quantity of
16 material produced by the Defence. And the Defence did nothing to schedule
17 their material, nothing whatsoever. It shows as clear as daylight that a
18 boy aged 16 is said to have provided a whole lot of names on the 16th of
20 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, that's not a relevant part of this argument
21 here. As far as I'm concerned, this chart simply confuses me, because I
22 have no idea at the moment how many of the names are common to the report
23 and the chart which would be the statement of Afrim Mustafa. Now, if you
24 were to put the question that way, that they are identical in number or
25 that half of them are referred to or something, then I would begin to
1 understand the position.
2 MR. NICE: Very well.
3 JUDGE BONOMY: But I certain -- I also don't see Mr. Kay's point
4 particularly. You can use this device, as far as I'm concerned, for your
5 cross-examination purposes, but it does not assist me, I should make that
7 MR. NICE: Well, then I'm grateful to the Court.
8 Q. If we look at it, we'll see, Mr. Janicevic, that the person said
9 to have provided this information on the 16th, that's Mustafa Afrim,
10 provided, and if we now look at your report, the first part of your
11 report, we can see that he is said to have provided the name Lufti
12 Bilalli. That's the first name on your list. He's said to have provided
13 the name Buja Hajrizi -- Myfail Hajrizi, the second name. He is not, I
14 think, said to have provided the name -- yes, he is; Muhamed Mustafa.
15 He's said to have provided that name. Bajram Xheladini, he's said to have
16 provided that name. Buja Hajrizi I think is not a name he's said to have
17 provided. Esref Jakupi is a name he's not suggested to have provided.
18 Asllani is a name that doesn't appear in any event anywhere on our list.
19 Hyseni Acif is a name he is not suggested to have provided although one
20 comes on the following from another witness. And Fatmir Limani and
21 Sheremet Syla are not names he is said to have provided, Fatmir is, I
23 So that there is a coincidence -- not a total coincidence, but a
24 high level of names provided -- allegedly provided by this young boy on
25 the day after and appearing in your report. And my suggestion to you is
1 that you and your officers, Jasovic in particular, were putting together
2 material to try and justify the killing of these people.
3 A. That's not true.
4 Q. Well --
5 A. First of all, I'm sorry, but I cannot understand this table. It
6 will need time to be able to interpret this. I never had the opportunity
7 of seeing this kind of table. We do things differently.
8 What you've said is absolutely incorrect. I told you that all
9 information related to the identification of persons who were killed in
10 combat with the police in Racak were collected from citizens, people they
11 saw in the streets, and from operative positions in Racak itself.
12 Everything on the basis this information was compiled was sent
13 further on to the higher instance, to the MUP staff in Pristina. If they
14 gave you this, they should have given you that, too, so you would have the
15 entire material.
16 I had nothing to hide nor do I have anything to hide now.
17 Q. Before we move from the chart and this topic, I can deal with this
18 very briefly. You occupied the same office, do you -- I don't necessarily
19 mean the same room, but the same office that Jasovic occupies at the
20 police station in exile, yes?
21 A. I didn't understand. What did I do? I had the same function?
22 Q. Did you occupy the same office, the same police station as
23 Jasovic occupies?
24 A. We never had the same functions, Mr. Nice.
25 JUDGE ROBINSON: By office, that's --
1 MR. NICE:
2 Q. You're at Leskovac, aren't you?
3 A. Not correct.
4 Q. Are you aware that Jasovic came and gave a lot of evidence here,
5 producing a lot of statements said to have been provided identifying
6 people as members of the KLA? Were you aware of that?
7 A. I'm aware of that from Urosevac, not from Leskovac.
8 Q. Nobody has done an analysis on behalf of the accused of the new
9 material, voluminous as it is, and we've only been able to do the best we
10 can with many documents not translated and with the considerable
11 difficulty of tracing names that sometimes change in the Albanian
12 practice, but our analysis, Mr. Janicevic, is that your material, the
13 additional material you've brought, doesn't add at all to the
14 identification of people killed at Racak as being members of the KLA. It
15 seems to us that you don't add at all to the number of people identified
16 as KLA. It's simply the same people that Jasovic identified.
17 Can you help one way or another whether your statements produced
18 should be changing the number of people identified as members of the KLA
19 or not?
20 A. I was not involved in that kind of work. I did not compare this
21 or check it.
22 MR. NICE: Well, Your Honours, that's -- I'll leave that point
23 there. I'm not suggesting that these exercises are easy to do. They're
24 not. Whether you do them manually or whether you do them by electronic
25 search with or without a Cyrillic facility, it's not easy to pick off all
1 the names. We've done our best, and it's one of the reasons for
2 reprinting this schedule which I venture to suggest can be a document of
4 We have identified some corrections, which you'll see shaded in
5 grey, and there's one other correction that I'm going to make in due
6 course, but it seems to us, from the documents provided, that they don't
7 actually add to the picture of KLA association of those who are said to
8 have died as unarmed civilians.
9 MR. KAY: What I'm concerned with as well is the comments on the
10 side which put Prosecution arguments on the issue, and this has to be
11 noted. Just looking at the first one: "Bajram Hyseni. This person as
12 identified by Jasovic does not exist." I don't know whether that's right
13 or wrong. Comments about beatings and essentially the Prosecution case on
14 each issue in relation to a particular victim or person or deceased.
15 So in those circumstances, in my submission, this material is
16 inappropriate. If Mr. Milosevic was producing argument here that was
17 relevant for his closing submission, he would be told that's relevant for
18 your final submission, we're not concerned with that issue now. The
19 Prosecution, in the same way, must be restrained in the way they produce
20 their material. They are using it in a way that emphasises and supports
21 their argument in their interest without respecting the same rule that is
22 applied to Mr. Milosevic that the argument should be saved for the end of
23 the case, that questions should be put at this stage.
24 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Kay, the witness has said that he doesn't
25 understand the document. The document is not in evidence. I see it
1 really at this stage as an internal document that the Prosecutor has used
2 in his case.
3 MR. KAY: Yes. I hope the Court understands the point I'm making
4 here is that there is argument within it which is part of this process
5 that it is seeking to add to their material constantly as the case
7 JUDGE ROBINSON: We understand the argument.
8 MR. KAY: Thank you.
9 MR. NICE: Your Honour, the document is already before you in an
10 earlier format, with all the comments there.
11 Q. Can we look at one last document from the -- for completeness,
12 from the Racak papers. It's tab 28 in those papers, which makes it
13 Exhibit 178, introduced through General Maisonneuve.
14 And this, Mr. Janicevic, is a record of a meeting at which you
15 were not present, but present at the meeting was Colonel Jelic, who we
16 understand we aren't going to hear from, commander of the 243rd Brigade.
17 And I want your comment on one of the things that he said.
18 If we look at the first page, we can see that Colonel Krsman Jelic
19 is supposed to be identified in the summary as letter D, but in fact he
20 doesn't get identified by that name, he gets identified by the letter J,
21 as we can see.
22 At the foot of the first page -- well, just leaving it there, we
23 can see that Kotur, Colonel Kotur says at the beginning that: "The VJ
24 were several hundred metres away when the attack started." Does that
25 accord with your recollection, that the VJ were several hundred metres
1 away, Mr. Janicevic?
2 A. The army of Yugoslavia was at Canovica Brdo - and I think that
3 that hill is about 700 metres away from Racak - when the anti-terrorist
4 operation started, not attack. We did not attack anyone.
5 Q. And then on the same point, just two other questions. At the foot
6 of the first page, please, Mr. Nort. General Maisonneuve set out for the
7 assembled gathering that he had some questions. His forces had seen VJ
8 tanks firing on houses with civilians who were not firing back. "Later we
9 went into the houses and found the people in their basement." And he then
10 says, "When were you, Colonel Jelic, there? Did you order the forces to
11 do this? If not, who was the commander on the ground?"
12 And then over the page we see the code for the answer given as J.
13 There's nobody mentioned as J and the context makes it clear that this is
14 Krsman Jelic, because he explains that most of the questions have been
15 answered by K for Kotur. But at the foot of the page, right at the foot
16 of the page, he's asked this question by Maisonneuve -- well, we can see
17 he says -- just on the screen at the moment he says this thing: "Weren't
18 attacked from the village but from the high ground between Racak and
19 Belince. They had 200 to 300 metres higher elevation." Then he says
20 this: "This was not a military operation nor was the VJ responsible for
21 any destruction in the town. Our operation happened at the same time and
22 the MUP operation."
23 And then at the foot of the page he's asked: "Confirm your forces
24 did not fire into the village." And he says: "Just between Racak and
25 Belince." Over the page. "You didn't do this to support the MUP
1 operation?" "No."
2 Well, now, I'm not accepting the account he gave, but taking it in
3 stages, do you accept that the VJ was firing, at the very least, between
4 Racak and Belince?
5 A. I said yesterday, Mr. Nice, what I state now as well with full
6 responsibility, that I don't know whether the military had fired. I was
7 not informed about that. But had they been firing, I certainly would have
8 heard it. And be assured that I would have been informed had they fired a
9 single rocket at Racak or Belince. Racak is about 500 metres away from
10 Belince. Belince had nothing to do with the anti-terrorist operation.
11 Q. You see, I'm suggesting to you in the clearest terms that you're
12 not telling this Court the truth, that you know perfectly well this was a
13 joint operation, that the army was there to support, if necessary, and to
14 deter the other KLA, and it was shelling, including into Racak itself.
15 A. Well, Mr. Nice, I was there. You were not there. How can you
16 claim that when you don't know? First of all, you don't know. And this
17 is not correct. There was no agreement on support because there was no
18 need for support. There was no need whatsoever.
19 Q. And so you --
20 A. Please let me finish.
21 Q. Had we had support and had there been an agreement on support, the
22 police would not have withdrawn from Racak at 1530 hours under terrorist
23 fire. Around 11.00 - I cannot give the exact time - until 1530 hours,
24 there was constant fire from infantry weapons, from mortars, from the
25 terrorist positions that were in the area of Krsine or behind that hill or
1 from the direction of Petrovo.
2 The first shells that fell were terrorist ones in the area of
3 Racak because the police were there. Well, that's the truth, Mr. Nice.
4 Q. And can you think of any reason why Krsman Jelic should
5 acknowledge shelling Belince? Can you think of any reason why
6 Radosavljevic should have suggested that this was a joint operation made
7 pursuant to the Joint Command? Can you think of any reason for those two
8 things, please?
9 A. Radosavljevic commanded the radio station. And until about 1515
10 hours that day, he was not in Racak, so he was commanding at a distance,
11 from a distance. He did not see the army.
12 What Krsman Jelic said, that they were firing in the direction of
13 Belince, I don't know about that, whether they were firing or not. You'll
14 have to ask him about that. As far as I've heard, he's going to be a
15 witness too.
16 Q. Yesterday, I asked you some questions generally about OSC -- I'm
17 so sorry.
18 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Nice, your office interviewed
19 Mr. Radosavljevic?
20 MR. NICE: Yes.
21 JUDGE ROBINSON: You haven't -- you didn't call him.
22 MR. NICE: Certainly not. But he was certainly interviewed. I
23 think it was a suspect interview, I'm not sure.
24 Your Honour, if we called everybody we interviewed -- very
1 JUDGE ROBINSON: Well, it seems that his evidence would have been
2 very helpful in relation to Racak.
3 MR. NICE: -- it depends on whether one accepts --
4 JUDGE ROBINSON: Relevant.
5 MR. NICE: Relevant, yes. I would be delighted for him to be here
6 in Court, called by the accused or even by the Chamber. Were he available
7 to us, which I'm not even sure he is, I don't know.
8 Q. I was asking some questions yesterday, Mr. Janicevic, relating to
9 observers including Marcusson, Fantini and Jendensten.
10 MR. NICE: Your Honours will not know, but I can now tell you,
11 that I was asking those questions on the basis of a statement that at that
12 time I was not in a position fully to identify but I now can, the
13 sensitivities of the relevant rule having been dealt with.
14 Q. You see, Mr. Janicevic, there was an American observer called
15 Braddock Scott, and he was present in the area at the time. Between 11.00
16 and 12.00, I must suggest to you, police cars went up the crest of a hill,
17 identified as hill 685 to Braddock Scott, and they established a firing
18 position on top of the hill.
19 What hill do you say the police went up? You may not know it as
20 hill 685. What hill do you say the police went up? We can look at it on
21 the map or something like that.
22 A. I don't know what hill it is. I know that the police were
23 deployed in the morning. Perhaps they changed positions in that sector,
24 but not further than that. The police were at their respective places
25 from 7.00 in the morning onwards, those who were stationed there. From
1 7.00 up until the end of the operation.
2 Q. When he speaks of tanks, would the tanks be Serbian T-55 tanks,
3 would those be army tanks?
4 A. Who spoke about tanks?
5 Q. Would a T-55 tank inevitably and necessarily be a VJ tank?
6 A. The tanks that were at Canovica hill were tanks of the army of
7 Yugoslavia, that's for sure.
8 Q. Because from the same source, I must suggest to you that such
9 tanks were observed by one of the OSCE monitors from the -- firing, from
10 the ridge between Stimlje and Racak, firing between 11.00 and 12.00 p.m.
11 towards Petrovo and Malopoljce. True or false?
12 A. False. Had they been firing, they certainly would have informed
13 me, because there was a police patrol in that sector as well.
14 Q. I'm suggesting you're simply not telling the truth and you're
15 hiding what you know to be the VJ's involvement.
16 JUDGE KWON: Can I clarify one thing? Yes. Answer the question
17 and then I'll --
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Not correct. What Mr. Nice said is
19 his comment, and my assertion is that I am not hiding anything, nor do I
20 have any reason to hide anything.
21 JUDGE KWON: Thank you, Mr. Nice.
22 To my question put to you by me yesterday, you answered that you
23 didn't know. You don't know whether the VJ located position around Racak
24 had tanks. But now today you said -- let me find it. "The tanks that
25 were at Canovica hill were tanks of the army of Yugoslavia, that's for
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 sure." That's what you said just now. Could you clarify that?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, that's what I said yesterday,
3 too. That was an armoured Mechanised Brigade, the 249th, which was at
4 Canovica hill, and tanks and other armoured vehicles are there. I don't
5 know what else was there.
6 So at Canovica hill a combat group of army -- of the army of
7 Yugoslavia was stationed with equipment that was stationed there, and
8 those were tanks and military vehicles.
9 JUDGE KWON: Does Canovica hill appear on this map, tab 70 of
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Where the red circles are in
12 the western part.
13 JUDGE KWON: Could you put tab 70 on the ELMO, and could you point
14 to the point.
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] 70? I think it's this. This area
16 is called Canovica hill, and what is marked in red is the location where
17 the military unit was stationed. That is part of the 243rd Motorised
19 JUDGE KWON: Did they have tanks there?
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, they had tanks there
21 throughout, in accordance with the agreement.
22 Next to this location, where a large group was, over here, within
23 the police patrol, they had one combat vehicle with a few soldiers that
24 were the crew of that vehicle. Their task was to protect the road from
25 Stimlje to Crnoljevska gorge and Dulje.
1 There was yet another group that they had between -- below
2 Kostanje or, rather, behind the church and the elementary school east of
3 Racak and Stimlje, about two and a half to three kilometres away.
4 JUDGE KWON: And minute ago you said Armoured Mechanised Brigade,
5 the 249th, which was at Canovica hill. Was it that you misspoke the name
6 of the brigade?
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Maybe. Motorised Brigade. Armoured
8 units were within that brigade. I'm sorry, I may have misspoken. 243rd
9 Motorised Brigade of the army of Yugoslavia. And there was an armoured
10 battalion or whatever it was within it. I'm not sure. I don't know about
11 that. It's the army officers who know.
12 JUDGE KWON: I'm still confused. Please proceed, Mr. Nice.
13 MR. NICE:
14 Q. Well, wherever the tanks were, Belince and Racak were within their
15 range, weren't they?
16 A. I think that the tanks from Canovica hill were not within the
17 range of Belince and Racak. As far as I know, a tank can fire
18 horizontally and vertically, and they were at an elevation which was at
19 least 50 metres above Racak, at least. So they could not target Racak.
20 Q. You see, Krsman Jelic says they targeted Belince. Are you saying
21 he is completely wrong? He didn't say targeted, he said hit it.
22 JUDGE BONOMY: Can you remind me where that is.
23 MR. NICE: I just remembered it myself. It was the very last
24 thing we were looking at.
25 JUDGE BONOMY: He said just between Racak and Belince.
1 MR. NICE: Between Racak and Belince.
2 JUDGE BONOMY: And then we had other evidence of firing from a
3 position between Racak and Belince in some other direction. I think you
4 led another piece of evidence that referred to that.
5 MR. NICE:
6 Q. Do you accept, Mr. Janicevic, for my next question, that where the
7 tanks were they'd be in range of firing on Petrova and Malopoljce?
8 A. You will have to ask Krsman Jelic that because I'm not an army
9 officer, and I'm not very knowledgeable about tanks, the firing of tanks,
10 their range, et cetera.
11 Q. You see, the reason I ask you that question, and we can see where
12 the -- well, the Chamber will know where to the south and the south-east
13 of Racak those two places are. The same United States OSCE observer,
14 Braddock Scott, records that in the afternoon, at about 1500 hours, he saw
15 a tank fire two rounds directly at a house, he having seen tanks and
16 mortars firing at Petrova and Malopoljce generally, and he saw a tank fire
17 at a house, and a short time after that he saw people run away.
18 Now, if the VJ was firing at Petrova and Malopoljce, you'd have to
19 know about that, wouldn't you?
20 A. If they had fired, I would certainly have been informed by my own
22 MR. NICE: Well, Your Honour, that is a witness who is available.
23 JUDGE KWON: Just one question.
24 MR. NICE: Yes.
25 JUDGE KWON: Where is -- Mr. Janicevic, where is the headquarters
1 of 243rd Motorised Brigade? Where was it located, the headquarters?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] At the Milan Zecar barracks in
4 JUDGE KWON: In Urosevac. Thank you.
5 MR. NICE:
6 Q. And is it right -- again the same source for my question: Is it
7 right that the tanks left between a quarter to four and 4.00, went to an
8 assembly area in the hills north-west of Stimlje? Do you remember that?
9 A. No.
10 MR. NICE: I see the time, but may I ask one more question before
11 I --
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Excuse me. The hill to the
13 north-east of Stimlje is the base where the army was. It's Borovi at
14 Canovica hill, marked here in red.
15 Q. Do you remember, Mr. Janicevic, I asked you about one of the
16 sources of information relied upon by Jasovic and thus by the accused, the
17 16-year-old Afrim Mustafa, who was picked up before he gave his statement
18 on the 16th of January, at a field in Stimlje. My suggestion to you is
19 that it's something you must know about, is that he was then beaten up by
20 the police in the course of trying to get a statement from him, and I must
21 suggest to you this: In the course of his treatment, he was told by the
22 officer dealing with him - inspector, probably - "How can you be alive?
23 We killed all the people there in Racak."
24 Does that make sense to you as something that would be said by a
25 policeman on the 16th of January, because that's what you the police tried
1 to do, kill everyone in Racak?
2 A. That is a pure lie, Mr. Nice. The police was trying to arrest
3 terrorist group that was based in Racak. That's one thing.
4 Second, you're talking about the 16th of January. On the 16th,
5 there were at least 200 verifiers in Stimlje. They were at the police
6 station all day. And you are saying that this inspector beat up this boy
7 in the presence of the verifier. You are simply not right. You have been
8 lied to.
9 At this moment, you cannot find a single Albanian person who would
10 confirm to you that Serbs or the Serb police did anything right. Two
11 hundred thousand -- 250.000 Serbs have been expelled from Kosovo.
12 JUDGE ROBINSON: We're going to take the break.
13 Mr. Nice, I have to ask: How much longer will you be in your
15 MR. NICE: I'd hoped to finish in the next session but things have
16 moved a lot more slowly than I'd hoped for. The -- and it may be that
17 this is a witness with whom I'll have to run on. The problems of Racak
18 are detailed. We've been provided with a great deal of material and I'm
19 certainly not going to be able to go through his exhibits, but I've tried
20 to take the Court through methodically the material upon which, from the
21 way he was explained to us as the authoritative witness, he should be able
22 to help us, and I have some other topics to deal with. I'll do my best.
23 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you. We'll break for 20 minutes.
24 --- Recess taken at 10:35 a.m.
25 --- Upon resuming at 10:58 a.m.
1 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Nice, you may continue.
2 MR. NICE:
3 Q. Mr. Janicevic, is it still your case that not only was the army
4 not involved but there were no Serbs dressed as police or as army who were
6 A. As far as the army is concerned, I assert that they did not take
7 part in the anti-terrorist operation on the 15th. As regards Serbs, I
8 guarantee that no Serbs, apart from active duty policemen, took part in
9 the anti-terrorist operation. No civilians were involved.
10 Q. Finally, because all sorts of things are mentioned in the overall
11 collection of papers about Racak which we can find if we search for them,
12 is there any question in your judgement or recollection of any
13 paramilitary group being involved?
14 A. That is a blatant untruth, Mr. Nice. First of all, there were no
15 paramilitary groups in Kosovo as such except for the paramilitaries of the
17 MR. NICE: If the Court would find it helpful at some stage to
18 have the map that I produced yesterday which seeks to match the witness's
19 map positions on our own map, that might help them. Not so much now but
20 in the next few minutes.
21 And if the witness could be shown by Mr. Nort the various pages of
22 the part of Exhibit 156, tab 7, to which I'm going to draw his attention.
23 Q. I want you to look at various pages here, various pictures,
24 because on your own account, Mr. Janicevic, whoever died in Racak died at
25 the hands of your police, and you were introduced to us as the person who
1 basically knew everything and could say everything about what happened at
2 Racak, so we want your assistance, please.
3 Mr. Nort, can you show him the first photograph. If you can leave
4 them in the binder on the overhead projector, it may be easier.
5 Now, this is three men who were seen to have died. We can see
6 them there, their names and ages and everything. How did they die?
7 You're the man in charge; tell us.
8 A. I was not there. I did not see how they got killed.
9 Q. You've seen the reports. Tell us, please, if you can, how they
11 A. I see here caps on their heads, and during any fall, even the most
12 ordinary fall, a cap falls from one's head. I don't see what this site is
13 or where it is.
14 Q. Very well. We'll come back to that --
15 A. I only know that --
16 Q. It's not near a trench, is it?
17 A. I don't know.
18 Q. [Previous translation continues]...
19 A. This is a picture in the --
20 Q. Next photograph, please, Mr. Nort.
21 The next photograph shows 65-year-old -- beg your pardon, I may
22 have missed one.
23 Can you go on to the next one, please, which should be -- the next
24 one that's indicated -- the next one. These are the three men themselves.
25 Next one. And can you go to the next yellow tab, please, or the green
1 tab. That's it. That's fine.
2 Here we see Ahmet Mustafa, age 65, dead at the side of a house,
3 not in a trench. Can you tell us, please, from your records or
4 recollection how he died? And if not, can you point us to a
5 contemporaneous document that's going to tell us how he died?
6 JUDGE ROBINSON: Does the photograph show him at the side of a
8 MR. NICE: Yes. Or a building. Whether it's a house or not, I'm
9 not sure.
10 Q. Can you tell us how he died?
11 A. He is lying next to a wall. I can't tell you how he died. I'm
12 not a medical person, I was not on the spot, I didn't see him die.
13 You have the forensic reports of three teams which describe it.
14 Q. You see, we haven't heard from anybody yet in this case who pulled
15 a trigger and killed anyone, and apparently you're the person who is
16 providing the information. So that's why I'm asking you these questions.
17 Can you go to the next tab, please, Mr. Nort, which simply gives
18 the title that we're now looking at something called "Crime location 3,
19 scene 6."
20 If the Chamber is looking at its chart, it will see 3, 6
21 two-thirds of the way down the page, on a road, and it sees the
22 identification of the people who were killed there.
23 If we turn over to the next tab, please, Mr. Nort, we can see that
24 scene shown on the map. No. It should be -- it should be page 945. You
25 may have gone one page too many, I think. Yes. One page back, please.
1 That's it.
2 If we look at that, this shows where this man died, you see. It's
3 street, not a trench, nothing near a trench, nor is it a bunker. And
4 incidentally, the accused raised the use of the word "bunker." If
5 necessary, there was a long passage yesterday, or the day before yesterday
6 -- the hearing day before yesterday, where this witness used "bunker"
7 about four times as a relevant place for people to be dead. That's his
9 Right. Somebody died here in the street. Is there a report
10 explaining how he died, who killed him, who pulled the trigger?
11 A. Mr. Nice, during street fighting, when it's practically
12 hand-to-hand battle, when fighting goes on for every corner of a street,
13 every house, when policemen are fighting the terrorists, how can I know
14 and how can even they know who killed whom and who pulled the trigger?
15 Q. Mr. Janicevic, let me remind you. We looked at the
16 contemporaneous documents yesterday, including documents drafted by you,
17 and you accepted that your account showed people dying in trenches, you
18 suggested, or near to trenches, and nowhere else.
19 Now, can you explain, please -- and this was on the basis of
20 information coming to you from your subordinates, presumably. Can you now
21 please explain to us how it comes about that somebody died in a street if
22 they were only ever going to be killed when they were in trenches?
23 A. Please. I presented a map that was drawn from memory. There are
24 people who got killed in trenches. Other people were killed in street
25 fighting, close to houses, behind walls, at the entrance to the village.
1 Q. [Previous translation continues]... not your evidence yesterday.
2 A. That's what I said on the first day, Mr. Nice, when I was showing
3 that map. I said that on the first day.
4 Q. Can we look at the next page. Sorry, it's my mistake. I just
5 want to quickly look at the next page, which is -- just shows a picture of
6 where somebody called Nazmi Imeri died. And then next page, please, which
7 is also the next sticker. It shows the man who had been by now moved into
8 a house. 78-year-old Nazmi Imeri. Can you tell us where, why and how,
9 from contemporaneous reporting to you, this 78-year-old man died?
10 Apparently he died by the -- by the whatever it was, washing line on the
11 previous picture. Can you tell us why he died?
12 A. I can't tell you. First of all, I can't tell you because in that
13 sector, in that area, shooting came from all sides. There was crossfire.
14 Terrorists were shooting at policemen and policemen were shooting at
15 terrorists. How can I tell you who killed him, who targeted him if anyone
16 targeted him, and who pulled the trigger?
17 Q. Can we look at the next tab, please, which is a title page. This
18 little next section is Crime Location 3, scene 7. The Court can see that
19 marked and can see that the associate of this witness who drew the map
20 identifies some two bodies as being found in that position, whereas the
21 Prosecution's case is that three bodies -- no, I beg your pardon. The
22 Prosecution's case is indeed that two bodies were found there, a
23 22-year-old and a 54-year-old. But there was a little boy there. He was
24 able to point out where people died.
25 And if you go over to the next sticker, please, which is the next
1 page, it's an aerial view, we can see where this scene is, at a road.
2 It's nothing to do with a trench.
3 You see, Mr. Janicevic?
4 And if we then go over to the next sticker.
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. We can see the young boy pointing out where these two people died.
7 And if we go over to the next sticker, we see the woman, young
8 woman, Hanumshahe Mehmeti, and the following photograph is the photograph
9 of her father Bajram. Next photograph, please.
10 Are there records that are going to tell us how those two people
11 died at that location? Is there anyone who has reported to you how those
12 people died at that location?
13 A. What I received was a general report on what happened that day.
14 Nobody reported to me on individual people, nor can anybody know who was
15 killed where and when. That's one thing.
16 Second, the on-site investigation was not carried out. For three
17 days we were unable to perform the on-site investigation because the KVM
18 and the terrorists would not allow us. You would have to ask them why
19 they didn't allow it.
20 Q. Just a few more of these and we'll be done. Can you look at the
21 next sticker, please, which relates to Crime Location 3, scene 8, which
22 the Court will see -- yes, it's the one at the top which is nearly
23 obscured by the line connecting it, I think.
24 Right. Now, this reveals that Ijet Emini's body was found in one
25 place and his head in another. From reporting coming to you,
1 Mr. Janicevic, can you explain that?
2 A. I cannot explain that, but I told you before that there was street
3 fighting as well, that every wall was used as a shelter, both by the
4 police and the terrorists. Every wall, every house, every shed, every
5 stone practically. And fighting lasted until 1500 hours.
6 In a village of about 200 houses, they managed to take control of
7 everything in about eight hours.
8 Q. You do understand, Mr. Janicevic, that the reason I went so
9 carefully through the contemporaneous documents available to us yesterday,
10 giving you a chance to comment on your own writing and the writings of
11 others, is because thus far there is no piece of contemporaneous writing
12 that suggests other than that everybody was killed in the trenches from
13 which the weapons were taken. And you're now giving this very detailed
14 account of house-to-house fighting and I suggest it's simply because
15 you've been caught out and you didn't lay enough plans to cover the
16 ground. Isn't that the truth?
17 Isn't that the truth? You've just been caught out because you
18 know perfectly well that these people were butchered.
19 A. That's not correct, Mr. Nice. That's simply not true.
20 Q. Let's look at the next sticker, which for the Chamber's
21 assistance --
22 A. This is preposterous what you're saying.
23 Q. [Previous translation continues]... scene 9. It's on the
24 left-hand side of the map, and the Prosecution's case is that three people
25 died there. Let's leave it at that one for the time being, please. It's
1 very similar to a position identified by this witness's colleague in the
2 flat where they drew the map three weeks ago as being one where six bodies
3 were found.
4 Now, if you look at the first photograph, here's a 21-year-old
5 man. Next page, please. Here's a boy, described here as 14, elsewhere as
6 12. Can you help us, please, so that we may know - his father died and
7 his brother but he may have other relations - so that everyone can know
8 why he died.
9 A. I cannot tell you because I don't know.
10 Q. What was he doing for the KLA, please?
11 A. I don't know how he died. I don't know where he died, and I don't
12 know what he did for the KLA, but I know -- but I know that a group of 80
13 members of the terrorist KLA were stationed in Racak. They had committed
14 numerous crimes.
15 Are you sure that it was the police who killed this boy during the
16 intervention? Can you prove that?
17 Q. No one else, on your own evidence, is responsible for the death of
18 these people.
19 A. Please, from 6.30 until 1500 hours a fierce battle was going on
20 and there was shooting from all sides. Terrorists were shooting at
21 policemen, policemen were shooting at terrorists.
22 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Janicevic --
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Could anybody confirm that?
24 JUDGE ROBINSON: May I ask whether the information that you had
25 about the group of KLA in Racak, did it indicate whether in that group
1 were children ages 14 or 15?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. No, no. We had information
3 that only about 50 civilians were in Racak.
4 MR. NICE:
5 Q. Does it appear, then, that this person may be an innocent victim
6 of the events of Racak? Are you prepared to make that concession,
7 Mr. Janicevic?
8 A. I don't know whether she was innocent, and I don't know how she
10 Q. I think it's a boy, isn't it, Haljim Beqiri?
11 A. Have you heard of suicide bombers aged between 12 and 18? Were
12 they involved in terrorist activities?
13 Q. Mr. Janicevic, do you recognise that the dead are entitled to some
14 dignity? Do you?
15 A. Absolutely.
16 Q. Now, then, do you have any material to suggest that this 12 or
17 14-year-old boy did anything by way of terrorism as you make that
18 suggestion in a public court? Do you? If so, produce it.
19 A. I do not have any such material. But when 90 per cent of
20 residents were driven away from the village, 50 remained behind, and they
21 were practically the logistical support of the terrorist organisation that
22 was operating from there, and that boy was probably among them.
23 Q. Probably. You have no material to show that this boy was involved
24 in the KLA at all, do you?
25 A. Neither do you have any material to show that the police killed
1 this boy. Do you have such proof? Can you claim that the police killed
3 Q. Would you be so good now as to take volume 2 of your exhibits and
4 go to tab 52. Do you want to remind us of what tab 52 is or do you want
5 me to tell you what you said about it?
6 A. I did not draw up this list. It's the commission who did it.
7 Q. The commission --
8 A. It's a list of security related --
9 Q. The commission? What commission?
10 A. The commission set up by Urosevac SUP.
11 Q. To do what?
12 A. And it worked at the Ministry of the Interior.
13 Q. To do what?
14 A. It worked together, record and make a unified report on all
15 security related incidents in Kosovo and Metohija in 1998 and 1999, all
16 incidents, regardless of where and when they happened, all security
17 related incidents involving loss of life as a result of armed clashes in
18 Kosovo and Metohija in the period from the 1st of January, 1998, to the
19 1st of June, 2001, in the area of Urosevac SUP.
20 Q. You go on to the item 25, the 40 bodies found on the 15th of
21 January. Have you found it?
22 A. Yes.
23 MR. NICE: Perhaps we can put it on the overhead projector,
24 Mr. Nort, if you wouldn't mind.
25 Q. Now, this boy is identified -- sorry. You see this boy's name
1 appears there. You can see it in the block of the people simply described
2 at the moment as 40 dead bodies found on the 15th of January. If we look
3 in the middle of that block, we can see his name there, this time
4 described as Beqiri Haljim from Racak, aged 12, sandwiched between his
5 father's name and other names.
6 Do you -- what does that mean, do you say, in that document; that
7 he's a member of the KLA or that he isn't?
8 A. This document mentions the names of all people who got killed in
9 Racak on the 15th of January. It doesn't say whether they were members of
10 the KLA.
11 Q. So are you accepting that he may be an innocent victim, if the
12 only one, but an innocent victim?
13 A. That is a possibility. There is that possibility as well.
14 Q. Can we come back to that in a minute. Can we go back to the
15 photographs now, please, Mr. Nort. There's one other document I've got to
16 find in relation to this but I'm temporarily misplaced it.
17 Right. Looking at the next photograph in the collection, please,
18 we see his father. So there it is, a father and two sons. Any
19 explanation for their death, as to how they died? Any whatsoever?
20 A. No, I have no explanation, because I don't know how they died.
21 Q. But of course the people who pulled the triggers, the people who
22 were doing what you're saying was the hand-to-hand fighting, they're still
23 alive, aren't they, because no one from the police died in the course of
24 this operation, did they?
25 A. Nobody from the police died, but a certain number of terrorists
1 did die who were also shooting, Mr. Nice, shooting very fiercely at one
2 and all; at the police and at their own men, too, probably.
3 Q. Was it good luck, great skill, or something else that meant that
4 it was a case of 40-odd terrorists and no police who died when, as you
5 say, all the terrorists were armed? Was it luck or skill? Tell us.
6 A. The policemen who took part in the anti-terrorist operation had
7 undergone more training, especially of the pursuit group, who were among
8 the first to enter and were in the forefront of the operation, and they
9 were equipped with protective devices. They had special vests and
10 helmets, protective vests and so on, bulletproof vests.
11 Q. Let's just look at a few pictures of the ravine and then we'll
12 look at something different. If you go on, please, Mr. Nort, to I think
13 the next sticker, we come to the ravine itself. And the Chamber will want
14 to remind itself -- if we look at that photograph, actually. Can we just
15 look at that photograph because it gives quite a good view of the ravine.
16 No, I think the wrong photograph. Yes. Could you go on to the next
17 sticker, please. It shows the ravine. Thank you.
18 It shows the ravine, and we can see how the so-called ravine
19 bifurcates in the middle of this picture and then rejoins, and we'll just
20 look at a couple, if you can put them on sequentially, Mr. Nort, a couple
21 of pictures to remind everybody what the victims looked like in the
22 ravine, or what the dead people looked like in the ravine. Just go
23 through a couple of stickers, please, turn them around. That's Hakip
24 Imeri, age 33. Next one, please, next sticker. This one will do and then
25 we can turn to something else.
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 This one, as you see, shows a number of people, 52 years old, 44,
2 30, 20, and 61 in the ravine, and we can see from the picture that the
3 ravine is comparatively deep and, even in January, although the foliage
4 has gone from the plants for the most part, nevertheless the plants are
5 themselves quite high. Perhaps if you go on one -- two more stickers,
6 Mr. Nort, we can have a picture of that as well. Yes. You can see there
7 on the right-hand side that the bushes and so on are quite high even if
8 they aren't covered in believes.
9 Now, you're not able to give any detail from records or
10 recollection of how those people died in the ravine, are you?
11 A. Walker would be best placed to tell you that, perhaps.
12 Q. What, how they died?
13 A. Please. Take a look at that ravine little closer and take a look
14 at this side here. The group of verifiers was there from 7.00 a.m. Is it
15 possible that they weren't able to see this distance of 450 to 500 metres,
16 what was going on there?
17 Q. The account that's been given in evidence is that, as driven up
18 that ravine, people were laying in wait for them and that they were mown
19 down. Even if the verifiers were in position as you state, and even if
20 they were using field glasses, it would be possible for people to obscure
21 themselves behind that foliage -- not foliage, behind that brush, wouldn't
23 A. Which people do you mean? You mean the ones who died?
24 Q. [Previous translation continues]...
25 A. How could they hide behind the foliage when the greatest height is
1 one metre? But you can see the area from which the verifiers were able to
2 observe this, and there was a television crew up there as well. For that
3 many people to be killed, you need to do quite a lot of shooting. So how
4 could the policemen bring in the 20-odd people that Walker mentions in his
5 statement under constant fire from the terrorists and bring them in quite
6 calmly and quietly there? There was shooting coming from all sides.
7 Q. Very well, let's go to the -- just one thing. You're not
8 suggesting, are you, that there's any reason why the OSCE monitors would
9 deliberately suppress observations of the killing of these people in
11 A. I'm not claiming that all the monitors would do that. There were
12 honourable people from different countries. But as for individual
13 observers and monitors, I cannot say anything good about them.
14 Q. As a policeman with the years experience you have, you can provide
15 some expertise for us, please, on the next exercise, which won't take very
16 long. Same exhibit but the next part of it, I think. Tabs -- if you can
17 hand it to Mr. Nort, please. And to save time we'll go straight to tab 12
18 of Exhibit 176 -- 156.
19 JUDGE KWON: Before -- my machine is not working. I'll use Judge
20 Robinson's microphone.
21 What do you think about the idea of letting the witness mark the
22 point where allegedly the verifiers were --
23 MR. NICE: Happy to do that.
24 JUDGE KWON: -- on the previous picture --
25 MR. NICE: Certainly.
1 JUDGE KWON: -- so we can verify the evidence later at some stage.
2 MR. NICE: Yes, I'm entirely content for that to happen.
3 JUDGE KWON: Now it's working. Thank you.
4 MR. NICE: Can -- if we --
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I already marked that on the
6 previous photograph.
7 JUDGE KWON: On the previous picture. Could you -- could Mr. Nort
8 put the previous picture which shows the ravine.
9 MR. NICE: And shows the ravine with the bodies in it. The
10 witness is saying he's marked a similar photograph, as indeed he has.
11 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
12 MR. NICE: But nevertheless, this one has the bodies in it, and we
13 can then surrender this version of ours and --
14 JUDGE KWON: So could you mark the position where the verifiers
15 were at the moment. No, no with a pen, a coloured pen.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] On this photograph it's a little
17 blurred, that area, so I might get it slightly wrong, a metre here or
18 there, but I think that the verifiers were up here, if I can see it
19 properly on this blurred version.
20 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Janicevic, do you remember you marked with
21 numbers 1, 2, 3, where the verifiers were located? What number is this?
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] But you can't see it as well here on
23 this photograph. It's blurred. The background is blurred on this
24 particular version, so I can't recognise it that well.
25 JUDGE KWON: The position you marked right now, is it position
1 number 1 or 2?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think it's 2. Give or take a
3 dozen metres left or right. But anyway, it was 50 to 100 metres. As I
4 say, it's rather blurred here, indistinct.
5 JUDGE KWON: So could you write down number 2 in there.
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can't write down the number
7 because I'm not sure which one it is. There was a group there but I'm not
8 sure which one, because as I say, it's very blurred and you can't even
9 distinguish the different houses in that area.
10 JUDGE KWON: Yes. Thank you. Thank you. We had that picture
11 already, D313. Yes. Thank you. Let us proceed.
12 MR. NICE: That had better be produced as an exhibit, I think,
13 separately to be copied, and if we could hand that to the Registry and we
14 could go on to the next bundle of photographs.
15 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, that's exhibited.
16 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit 929.
17 MR. NICE: If you could, Mr. Nort, very swiftly -- I don't know if
18 you can get it -- don't bother with the text. Go straight on to the first
19 set of diagrams. It will be picture number 31 -- ERN number 313 at the
21 Q. While this is coming, Mr. Janicevic, were you aware that the
22 European forensic team of which Helena Ranta was a member attended at the
23 time but also attended later with metal detectors in November 1999 and in
24 March 2000? Were you aware of that?
25 A. Yes, I do know about that.
1 Q. Thank you. If we place that photograph, just to give you a
2 flavour of what this examination revealed. Blue, if you can see it, hands
3 for bullets. Red stands for shell casing. So you see, the preponderance
4 of shell casing is on the side of the ravine, the preponderance of bullets
5 are within the ravine.
6 As an experienced policeman, that is consistent -- next
7 photograph, please, which has got it in magnification -- that is
8 consistent, is it -- sorry, the next sticker I meant, actually, if you can
9 do that.
10 That is consistent with the people in the ravine being shot at
11 from those on the side of the ravine. There's another picture of it.
12 We'll look at the next one after that, which is enlargement, please. The
13 next sticker.
14 A. May I be allowed to answer to that part of your question, because
15 you've asked me several questions.
16 Q. Next sticker, please, Mr. Nort. It's got --
17 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Nice, the witness wanted to answer that
19 MR. NICE: Yes.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] May I?
21 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, yes.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I cannot agree with your assertions
23 at all, Mr. Nice, and here is why: On the 16th of January, the 17th and
24 18th and 19th of January, there was heavy fighting between members of the
25 Liberation Army of Kosovo, the so-called Liberation Army of Kosovo, of
1 course, and the police on the other side in that sector in order to take
2 control of the area again and take up positions again in order to ensure
3 the normal functioning of the investigation and that the investigation be
5 Now, to look for bullets seven or eight months later, a year
6 later, without the presence of the legal authorities, without the presence
7 of legal authorities, is quite preposterous.
8 Gentlemen Judges, do you have that in any country, that seven or
9 eight months later you look for bullets on a battleground where fighting
10 went on for five days and then to show to the court, or to you yourselves,
11 that those bullets were bullets that were found on the first day, that
12 were there from the very first day, whereas all the other bullets, 16, 17,
13 18th and 19th, that those were those bullets and these were the bullets
14 that were used on the 15th, that fell on the 15th when the people were
15 killed, as the Prosecutor is claiming. I claim that that is quite
17 MR. NICE: The next --
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I as a policeman myself would never
19 do anything like that.
20 MR. NICE: [Previous translation continues]... please. It's the
21 number in the top corner.
22 Q. This is an enlargement and it shows, as you see, all the bullets
23 -- it's 330 at the top right-hand corner. That's it.
24 You see, it shows the bullets in the ravine, one or two shell
25 casings, and all the rest of the shell casings along the side of the
2 Now, this was the European Union's mission. Helena Ranta, the
3 woman who at one stage it was thought was saying it wasn't a massacre,
4 although that's been dealt with. As a policeman -- forget the issue of
5 whether it was right to collect the material then or not. As a policeman,
6 that shows a massacre, doesn't it? It doesn't show a fight.
7 A. Please, a massacre would -- you could say that it was a massacre
8 only if an investigation were carried out and the people were killed in
9 the spot that you say they were, or if the investigation had been
10 conducted that same day or the following day, with all the ballistic
11 research and everything else necessary to prove that the location and the
12 site was as it was when the crime took place and that it hadn't undergone
14 Now, more than a year later, the site changed umpteen times, and
15 after the 20th, too, when there was fighting in Racak and around Racak.
16 So that whole region was engulfed by fighting during the war.
17 Q. Two more pictures for me, Mr. Nort. Sorry?
18 Mr. Nort, could you go and get from the file - it's a bit later
19 on, several stickers later on - 2406. It's a photograph we've already
20 looked at elsewhere but we'll look at it again very briefly, and 2411. If
21 you'd get those two photographs.
22 A. We've already seen those.
23 Q. Yes, exactly, but I just wanted to remind you about the
24 disposition of the bodies. Now, if you'd now like to look at the next
25 photograph, 2411. This is what was found, you see, by way of bullets
1 marked in blue where the men's bodies were found. Shell casings grouped
2 together at the right-hand side in white, with three shell casings further
3 over by the bodies, maybe going off to finish one of them off. And no
4 indications of those men firing back.
5 A. Was that found in 2000 as well?
6 Q. No. The end of 1999 or 2000, I can't remember exactly which.
7 A. At the end of 1999, you could have found thousands of casings in
8 Racak and the surrounding parts, thousands. I don't know whether those
9 forensic people of yours had any special powers in order to be able to
10 determine which of the casings had been used to kill the persons who were
11 allegedly killed there. I cannot agree with this at all.
12 Had the investigating judge been able to conduct an on-site
13 investigation, then I say with full responsibility quite certainly the
14 responsibility and accountability of each individual would have been
15 established if they had committed crimes, whether the crime of killing or
16 the crime of wounding or injuring or whatever. However, in this case, one
17 year later, one year on, and after six months of fighting, to present some
18 evidence of this kind, some material of this kind, cannot be valid. I
19 just don't understand how you think they could be. As a policeman, I just
20 don't understand it.
21 Q. Well, I'll come back to one point about the boy in due course if I
22 can find the document I'm looking for. And I'm now going to deal with as
23 limited in number as possible the exhibits that you've produced and I'll
24 try and deal with them in sequential order. So if the Chamber and the
25 witness would like to take volume 1 of the exhibits.
1 By the way, you used the phrase "so-called KLA" a few minutes ago.
2 That's a phrase, isn't it, that Serb officials use about the KLA?
3 A. And do you think that it really was a liberation army?
4 Q. The answer to the question is --
5 A. I do apologise, but I'm answering your question.
6 Q. In the same way as you've referred to yourself as the Serb police,
7 and indeed you did refer to yourself as the Serb police rather than the
8 police of Serbia and Montenegro or anything like that, you wouldn't say
9 that I'm a member of, or I was a member of, the so-called Serb police,
10 would you?
11 A. The KLA was an illegal organisation, and for each and every
12 illegal organisation that's what you say.
13 Q. I mean, you would never expect a member of the KLA to say, "I'm a
14 member of the so-called KLA." He'd say, "I'm a member of the KLA,"
15 wouldn't he? Just like you say, "I'm a member of the Serb police."
16 A. Well, sometimes they would say that, the people who had left the
17 KLA and who had to flee for some -- well, I assume subjective personal
19 Q. Do you remember there was a problem with Jasovic's statements
20 where he says they were signed by people who were either friends,
21 relations or members of the KLA itself, that they all used the phrase the
22 "so-called KLA"? Have you realised there's a bit of a problem with that?
23 A. There's a problem with respect to the taking of statements or with
24 the so-called term, or the term "so-called"?
25 Q. All right. I'll come back to that if I find the time.
1 I asked you yesterday about knowledge of Urosevac police station
2 being a police station of violence. Are you still saying that you never
3 heard of any reports of violence being used there?
4 A. I say with full possibility before this Trial Chamber, before
5 these Honourable Judges, that had I known and heard that violence had been
6 applied, that policeman responsible for that working in the SUP offices
7 would no longer be a policeman, and I say that with full responsibility.
8 Q. And at the time of the conflict when the Pranvera restaurant was
9 in use by inspectors for holding people, even then?
10 A. Not even then. We would incarcerate people for crimes, for theft,
11 for stealing vehicles pursuant to the Criminal Code and Article 242.
12 Q. You may know this, we've had a witness, K5, protected witness who
13 worked in the police station --
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. -- explaining ages ago, years ago, he told us how Dragan Jasovic
16 and Sparavalo were beating up somebody taken from the Pranvera bar. Can
17 you think of any reason why that would be said if it wasn't absolutely
19 A. That is a notorious untruth. He had a million reasons to say
20 that, a million reasons, Mr. Nice. Because for -- on thousands of times
21 he was taken into custody because of theft, attempts at violence, rape,
22 and so on, that particular witness of yours, K5.
23 Q. Why pick on the very two men, Jasovic and Sparavalo, for whom
24 others have said they were violent? Why pick on those two and make up
25 something completely false about them beating up a prisoner? How on earth
1 could that come about, do you think?
2 A. Well, probably they filed the most reports and conducted the most
3 interviews with him and took him into custody for many crimes that he had
5 Q. And what about deaths in custody in your police station, people
6 falling out of the window or whatever. Did that happen ever?
7 A. Falling out of windows? I know of only one case.
8 Q. Oh, I see. What happened to him, then? Was that from a police
9 inspector's office or was it an accident?
10 A. I'll tell you all about it in just a moment. Let me tell you
11 about it.
12 I think it was in 1986 or 1987, that particular incident, when
13 from the office of inspector of state security, from the fourth floor,
14 through the window --
15 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Nice, you don't want to know about this, do
17 MR. NICE: No. The only thing I do want to know about is
18 something that was raised by His Honour Judge Bonomy.
19 Q. It was at the time we were looking at tab 13, but you don't need
20 to turn to it, where you were trying to describe, or where you were
21 describing what happened before any of these Jasovic reports came to be
22 prepared, and you said they were verified by commanders of police stations
23 in some way and it had to go through three or four levels before it
24 reached the head of the SUP. And you then said that for every information
25 that came in, the inspector goes on the spot in the field to check what's
1 going on.
2 Well, is that true or is the reality simply that Jasovic got
3 people off the street, took statements from them, and sent them back on
4 the street again?
5 A. What you've just said is not true. Every reported event,
6 incident, was recorded properly. There is a diary or logbook of events
7 and incidents, and I think that that was presented, and it exists in
8 Leskovac. And any -- even the most -- the smallest misdemeanour, every
9 person whose ID papers were checked is recorded, and every incident, even
10 minor ones.
11 Q. So that when -- when Jasovic prepared statements from people
12 saying that other people were members of the KLA, there was a complicated
13 checking process, was there? Every reported incident was recorded, there
14 is a diary or logbook of events. Was there some checking process that he
15 went along to check that everybody was a member of the KLA who had been
16 named, or did he just take it from the statement?
17 A. In addition to the fact that this was recorded in their
18 statements, it was checked out in the field to see whether the people were
19 really members of the KLA or not. And I said, and I wouldn't want to
20 uncover the names of the people that we contacted, I don't want them to
21 have any problems in Kosovo as a result, but any information coming in to
22 us was checked out a number of times, checked and re-checked. And then it
23 was either rejected as being false or accepted as being true.
24 Q. So if we've got this right, therefore, when Jasovic produces a
25 statement of 30 KLA names, there should be a whole series of supporting
1 files still available to us in Leskovac and we haven't seen them. Is that
2 right? There should be supporting files for each name, I suppose.
3 A. Mr. Nice, as far as I know, in 90 per cent of the cases of names
4 which Jasovic and Sparavalo mentioned in their statements or reports, you
5 received files on them from the state security. So every statement by
6 Jasovic, every piece of information regarding terrorist activities, the
7 terrorist KLA organisation in that area, were sent to the public security
8 service in charge of affairs of that kind, and their analysis department
9 processed them and sent them on further.
10 Q. Well, we haven't seen any such documentation. All we've had is
11 the statements, and I must suggest to you what you're telling us is simply
12 made up to give credit to -- let me finish -- something you've just made
13 up, to give --
14 A. I'm telling you --
15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson.
16 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Milosevic.
17 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I assume that what was said in
18 English is what the transcript says, and it says public security service,
19 whereas the witness said state security service.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's right.
21 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] That is to say, the statements
22 pertaining to terrorism were sent to the state security, not to the public
23 security. And he also said that Mr. Nice received a large number of
24 documents from the state security.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm sorry for interrupting, but this
1 was even publicised. The former deputy head of state security,
2 Mr. Mijatovic, said in his book what documents he sent to The Hague
3 Tribunal, all the documents he sent to The Hague Tribunal. And this is
4 between 19 and 20.000 documents.
5 Every statement of Jasovic's was re-checked several times. What
6 could not be verified was rejected, and what was confirmed is contained in
7 the documents.
8 MR. NICE:
9 Q. Who did this checking process?
10 A. The state security sector.
11 Q. Who? Name. Can we have a name for the person who did the
13 A. They were not my employees. They were not employed by the SUP of
14 Urosevac. They were employed by a completely different unit.
15 Q. So --
16 JUDGE ROBINSON: Do you have any idea how many of the statements
17 were rejected?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know that, Mr. President. I
19 don't have that information. But may I just add something, please? May
21 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In this joint work, in order to make
23 the proceedings shorter, often a group of operatives from the state
24 security service were involved together with Sparavalo and Jasovic and
25 they immediately checked and re-checked the information received from the
2 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Janicevic, what I still don't understand in
3 this is what was involved in checking the information. How was it done?
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Operative information that is
5 obtained from such interviews is checked in several days. An operative
6 that receives this statement takes out the core of the matter, the
7 substance, and then he goes out into the field contacting his own
8 position, as it is called, that is to say the operative of the service who
9 is in that sector, and then through him he checks whether the information
10 is correct or not.
11 I don't know if I was clear.
12 JUDGE BONOMY: No. Does that mean he goes and interviews somebody
13 else to see if he confirms the information that's been given by the
14 original witness?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Somebody else who would confirm the
16 accuracy of that information, and that other person is someone who works
17 for the state security service.
18 JUDGE BONOMY: Yes, but is the person from the state security
19 service going out and interviewing some other contact of his, or is the
20 representative of the state security service just simply saying whether or
21 not this is consistent with information he has?
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, Mr. Bonomy. He contacts what we
23 call operative position, or source, or a person who works for the state
24 security service. It's not that I'm saying something in public that I
25 shouldn't be talking about.
1 JUDGE BONOMY: Do you mean an informant?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, different terms were used for
3 people from whom information was received; informers, friendly contacts,
4 associates of the service, et cetera. In this case, the state security of
5 the republic used informers and associates, but for real checking they
6 used associates.
7 JUDGE BONOMY: And you're claiming that all the reports of these
8 checks were disclosed to the Office of the Prosecutor?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I claim, on the basis of what I read
10 in the book written by the deputy head of the state security sector,
11 Mijatovic, who is close friends with Mr. Nice. I know that because he
12 says so.
13 MR. NICE: Some things come as news to people as you're standing
14 in Court. This may be one of them.
15 Q. So what is the document we've been looking for? Is it a report by
16 this other person who goes out into the field? Just what is it you're
17 saying exists to confirm Jasovic? Because he never told us about it, not
18 one word. What's the document we should be looking for? Come on.
19 A. I'm repeating this yet again. You probably have those documents
21 Look at the zones. Look at the operative zones, what kind of
22 documentation you have, and you'll see what was checked and what was not
23 checked. What was checked is what is there.
24 Q. Can we then go to Exhibit -- Exhibit 18.1. If you'd open it up at
25 18.1. This is an untranslated document with a big list of names. I can't
1 deal with the document itself. You've told us a bit about it. You told
2 us of this, that the most important name was Camil Ilazi, nicknamed Barli,
3 commander of the 161st Brigade. But can you just confirm that as to this
4 document and its alleged voluntary supplier of information, that's Adem
5 Salahu, can you confirm that he was actually arrested when he was about to
6 leave the country at the Djeneral Jankovic border, must have made, insofar
7 as he made a statement at all, then, and thereafter went to prison in
8 Belgrade, or at least in Serbia, where he died, so that he's not somebody
9 to whom we can turn for verification. Is all of that right?
10 A. I don't know whether that's right, but I have no reason to doubt
11 the fact that he gave such a statement. There is no reason for me to
12 doubt that because names are referred to or, rather, most of the names
13 referred to here were members of the KLA and that is a matter of general
15 I don't have any information to that effect that he died in
16 prison. This is the first time I hear of that.
17 Q. But of course people who are detained for questioning are dealt
18 with on your basis, I think, exactly the same as those who are arrested
19 for some reason, as it may be this man was. He didn't have a lawyer with
20 him, and he's not apparently offered a lawyer or anything like that, is
21 he, even if he's on his way to prison?
22 A. I don't know whether you read the Law on Criminal Procedure of the
23 Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.
24 Q. I think it's more important whether you've read the Law on
25 Criminal Procedure and you can tell us what the rights of the person going
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 to prison are, the man who is about to be charged with an offence. Did he
2 have the right to have a lawyer present when he was interviewed?
3 A. Yes, in the presence of an investigating judge. In the pre-trial
4 proceedings there was no right, there was no such right to have a lawyer
5 present, because the only thing that is done then is taking a statement
6 which is not part of the case file.
7 Q. That's why -- that's why --
8 A. According to the current law, the presence of a lawyer is
10 Q. That's why it was easy to beat people up when they were in your
11 police station, or to maltreat them, because they had no rights. Once
12 they were in the police station, they were at your mercy.
13 A. You're wrong, Mr. Nice. Nobody was beaten up at the police
14 station where I was head of the SUP. That is absolutely not true. I said
15 a few moments ago, and I repeat yet again, had I known, had I established
16 or had I heard about something like that and done nothing about it, had I
17 established that someone had done something like that, he would have not
18 stayed on in the service. All legal measures would be taken against such
19 a person, as legal measures were taken against other people, and we have
20 proof for that.
21 Q. Tab 25, please. Now, in the time available it hasn't been
22 possible to see or make any contact with many of the people whose material
23 you bring, but tab 25 is one who it has been possible to see. This is one
24 who you say deals with events at Kacanik. I must suggest to you -- first
25 of all, I must suggest to you that this man, approached entirely neutrally
1 and simply asked about this statement, explained that it wasn't in any
2 sense a voluntary statement of his, that he was with a number of people in
3 a line of cars at Ferizaj, on the way towards Ferizaj going from Kacanik
4 and there was a police checkpoint where he was removed. Does that fit
5 with your understanding of this statement? You've produced it.
6 A. No.
7 Q. He was simply taken, along with a lot of other men from that
8 checkpoint, to Ferizaj or Urosevac police station, belt, shoelaces and
9 valuables removed, and 18 put into that small cell you have there on the
10 ground floor. I've got a picture of it somewhere, but I'm not sure I've
11 got time to find it, show it, but 18 in a cell, and he was then the first
12 person called out.
13 Do you know anything about the taking of this statement that
14 you've produced that we haven't seen before?
15 A. No, I don't know anything about what you've been saying just now.
16 I know that the statement had been taken, it was presented to me down
17 there, and I've seen it here.
18 On the basis of the statement, he claims what is contained in the
19 statement. Now, whether he confirmed that to you now or not, I don't
20 know. You haven't told me about this until now, but I claim to you with
21 full responsibility that you will not find a single Albanian who will dare
22 confirm that he gave a statement that was not under duress, Mr. Nice.
23 Q. How do you say that? I mean, are you saying that the totality of
24 the Albanian nation is incapable of telling the truth? Because that's
25 pretty well what it amounts to. And if that's your position, we'd better
1 know it. Is that really what you're saying?
2 A. I claim, I claim that all the persons you ask who were brought
3 into custody or came of their own free will or in some other way came to
4 members of the service to give a statement will not dare confirm that,
5 because they would be no more after doing such a thing.
6 Q. You see, he says, and I must suggest to you that it's emerged
7 absolutely without prompting of any kind, he explains that he was both
8 beaten with a baseball bat and he was then electrocuted, first on his
9 hands and then the devices were connected to his ears. Then he collapsed.
10 That's what happened in your police station, Mr. Janicevic, and that's why
11 your police station is recorded --
12 A. That is absolutely not true, Mr. Nice. That is not true,
13 Mr. Nice.
14 Q. You noticed yesterday, didn't you, that OSCE had complaints on
15 the 13th of January about people being electrocuted at your police
16 station. We know that Human Rights Watch published a report about your
17 police station in February 1995 about people being electrocuted. And you
18 told us that there were rumours of abuse and torture. Just think back to
19 the reality of 1990s. These things happened, didn't they, and you just
20 have to deny them because you can't face them.
21 A. First of all, I can face everything that I've done and that I know
22 was done. As for the rest that you've been saying, it has nothing to do
23 with the truth, nothing to do with the truth.
24 Electrocution and electrodes placed on ears and other parts of the
25 body, and beatings, that is a blatant lie, not to use another word.
1 Q. Volume 2, please. Now -- volume 2, please. Can we go straight to
2 tab 35. You've produced things like tab 35 as a report of a proper crime
3 and punishment system being in place. Tab 35 concerns the illegal taking
4 of an electric corn husker from a shop. That says nothing, does it, about
5 the policy of your police or your prosecutors or your judges to deal with
6 people who either murdered in the course of ethnic cleansing or engaged in
7 ethnic cleansing, does it? It's an irrelevance to show somebody
8 prosecuted for an electric corn husker. Do you accept that?
9 JUDGE KWON: What tab is it?
10 MR. NICE: Have I got the wrong bit?
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm sorry, what was that?
12 MR. NICE: I thought I was looking at 35. If I'm looking at the
13 wrong bit of it. I've got a translation that --
14 JUDGE BONOMY: My number 35 is headed "Crime terrorism."
15 MR. NICE: Mine is a criminal report, and the translation I have
16 has for Zvonko Stakic established that he took an electric corn husker.
17 JUDGE ROBINSON: That's not what we have.
18 MR. NICE: That's 39, apparently. If it is 39, at least it's 39
19 in our organisation -- I'm sorry. It should be 39. Sorry. In which case
20 there's been some -- there was some problem of tab numbers, and that
21 relates to 39.
22 Q. Same point, although I wasn't necessarily going to turn to that,
23 but same point. To deal with the offences of theft against members of
24 your force says nothing about whether people were being prosecuted for the
25 grave offences of ethnic -- involved in ethnic cleansing, does it?
1 A. Where was this ethnic cleansing, please, and who was doing the
2 ethnic cleansing? Is it not clear to you that Kosovo and Metohija was
3 ethnically cleansed after the 15th of June, 1999?
4 Q. Can we now look at the three documents that exercise some -- well,
5 revealed some concerns or questions from the Bench? That's tabs, as I've
6 got them, tabs 36, 7, and 8, I think. And these are the three men,
7 Nikolic, Ivanov, and Djeletovic. His Honour Judge Bonomy thinking, or
8 appearing to think, correctly, that we've heard of these names before.
9 Now, these men are charged with what crime?
10 A. Murder.
11 Q. And whereabouts was this murder allegedly committed?
12 A. The area of Kosovo Polje.
13 Q. Now, what were you doing getting involved in alleged crimes in the
14 area of Kosovo Polje? Outside your area of responsibility, wasn't it?
15 A. Then you haven't followed what I was saying as well as my CV,
16 Mr. Nice. From the 15th of June, 1999, I was appointed chief of SUP in
17 Pristina. Kosovo Polje is a department within the SUP of Pristina.
18 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Milosevic.
19 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The -- there was a mistake made
20 here. The 15th of June --
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Sorry, I misspoke. From the 15th of
23 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] On the 15th of June you left Kosovo.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Oh, yes, that's right.
25 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. Thank you.
1 MR. NICE:
2 Q. All right. So you're there in Pristina, but let's just learn a
3 little bit more about these three men because we've heard about them and
4 about you before. These three men are the men suspected of being involved
5 in the killing of Fehmi Agani, aren't they?
6 A. I don't know about that. This is the first time I hear of that,
7 that they were suspected of killing Fehmi Agani.
8 Q. We may be able to see a document about that if we have time, but
9 are you aware that there's been a letter written by Natasa Kandic to the
10 Serbian public prosecutor dealing with these three men - a long time ago
11 now, three and a half years ago now - identifying them as the Agani
13 A. Natasa Kandic is no investigating organ. I don't know where she
14 gets the right to be involved in investigations. That is the first thing
15 I wish to say.
16 Secondly, any citizen has the right to report on his or her
17 suspicion of someone having committed a crime. If that is the way she has
18 acted, then it's all right. I'm not the public prosecutor or the district
19 prosecutor or the republican prosecutor or am I in charge of that branch
20 of government in Serbia. So I'm not in a position to know what's going on
21 there. But I assert that while I was chief of SUP, every crime was
22 identified irrespective of whether the perpetrators were known or unknown.
23 And also, measures were taken to investigate crimes even when the
24 perpetrators were unknown. This was one such --
25 JUDGE BONOMY: Can I ask you, is this -- is this killing a
1 notorious killing?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is multiple killing, multiple.
3 JUDGE BONOMY: No. The killing of Fehmi Agani, is this a
4 well-known event?
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Oh, yes, it is. And a criminal
6 report was filed, an investigation was carried out.
7 JUDGE BONOMY: How come you don't know whether these are the
8 accused in relation to that killing?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I know that they were not accused.
10 JUDGE BONOMY: Why didn't you say that at the time? You were
11 asked that earlier by the Prosecutor, and you said you didn't know. But
12 you do know that these are not the accused in that killing. Is that the
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] For the killing of Fehmi Agani, I
15 know that these are not the accused. I knew then. Now, I don't know
16 whether they were accused later. Then that would be a different matter.
17 JUDGE BONOMY: In relation to the documents we're looking at, do
18 you know who the victim was?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm sorry. I cannot remember who
20 the victims were. It's a multiple killing in the area of Kosovo Polje.
21 Let me see. It's written here. I can read out the names, if needed.
22 JUDGE BONOMY: Are the victims the people set out under the
23 Statement of Reason?
24 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter cannot hear the witness.
25 JUDGE ROBINSON: Please repeat that.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, in the third decision.
2 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.
3 MR. NICE:
4 Q. Blakcori, isn't it, if my memory's right? Yes, Blakcoris.
5 A. Yes, there were five persons killed.
6 JUDGE ROBINSON: It's time to break now.
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
8 MR. NICE: Just two questions to round this off, with your leave,
9 if that would be convenient.
10 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.
11 MR. NICE:
12 Q. You see, there are two things, I'm going to suggest to you, about
13 this. One is, as Defence Exhibit Stevanovic tab 168 [Realtime transcript
14 read in error "128"] shows, that you were the officer who signed a report
15 about the demonstration of Serb citizens seeking release of these three
16 suspects in June 1999 and that, for whatever reason, these men only ever
17 served a month in gaol. Are those two propositions correct?
18 A. That's not correct. When we left Kosovo and Metohija, they were
19 still in prison, according to what I know. What happened afterwards, I
20 don't know.
21 In Kosovo Polje, people wanted to have them released, but I said
22 that all measures should be taken in accordance with the law, and that is
23 what was done. And after all, it was not within my jurisdiction and my
24 powers afterward.
25 JUDGE BONOMY: Are we going to see that document?
1 MR. NICE: Tab 168. I can look it up for you over the break.
2 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, it's recorded as Exhibit 128.
3 MR. NICE: Sorry, I think it's tab 168 of the Stevanovic
5 JUDGE ROBINSON: We will adjourn now for 20 minutes.
6 --- Recess taken at 12:26 p.m.
7 --- Upon resuming at 12:50 p.m.
8 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Nice.
9 MR. NICE: I have 168 from Stevanovic, if the Court wants to see
10 it. I wouldn't myself use it because it's already been given in evidence,
11 but it's available.
12 Could you place this on the overhead projector, before we move on.
13 It's "As Seen, As Told," which is whatever it is exhibit number. I always
15 Q. You see, this is the volume of "As Seen, As Told" -- or it will be
16 when it comes up. I'm not getting it. Has the Court got it on its
18 JUDGE BONOMY: No.
19 MR. NICE: Right.
20 Q. This is the volume of "As Seen, As Told" produced very shortly
21 afterwards, and this is about Urosevac. It says: "Numerous Kosovo
22 Albanians were brought to the police stations in Urosevac (as well as in
23 Kacanik) for 'informative talks.'" Refers to chapter 9 for arrest and
24 detention. "Such 'arrests' were made in the villages of Bicevac, Reka,
25 Palivodenica, Mala something else, all in Kacanik, as well as in Urosevac
1 and Stimlje. Brutal interrogations were carried out by police in order to
2 collect information on UCK members, sympathisers and military
3 intelligence. By this time torture with electric shocks was regularly
4 reported, in addition to beatings, as a way of extracting information.
5 Some victims of these 'informative talks' came to report to the OSCE KVM
6 office in Urosevac. For the first time some names of perpetrators were
8 Look this is contemporaneous accounts of what Kosovo Albanians
9 were saying. It's not their position today, which you say makes them all
10 into liars. They were saying these things then. Why, unless they were
11 completely true?
12 Exhibit 106, I'm reminded. Thank you, Mr. Reid.
13 A. I didn't say they were all lying. Liars are those who say that
14 this is true. This is not the truth. Of course not everybody is lying.
15 80 per cent of Albanians are good people who deserve every respect. But
16 there is a group of people who is involved in a different kind of thing.
17 Q. Before the ICTY features, before coming to give evidence against
18 fellow Albanians in the year 2005, why in 1999, tell us, should people be
19 falsely saying, on apparently quite a widespread basis, that they were
20 electrocuted and beaten up in your police station when all you were doing
21 was trying to help them, from what you tell us?
22 A. Correct. Anybody who came to me for help, anybody who came to the
23 police station to get assistance, received it, certainly received it.
24 There was no maltreatment. If there had been, I would certainly have
25 heard about it. I would have known, and I would have taken certain legal
2 Q. If you can hand that back, Mr. Nort. We'll move on now to
3 Exhibits 40 through to about 45.
4 You've produced here, Mr. Janicevic, accounts of thefts of --
5 thank you very much indeed -- car tyres, cooking oil, I think,
6 loudspeakers, packages of sanitary towels and dry yeast and a brand
8 Whatever you were doing to policemen for that sort of offence says
9 nothing about your disciplining, does it, for serious offences? There was
10 a washing machine as well. Untranslated document. And that's the best
11 you can produce, basically, isn't it; theft of a washing machine, theft of
12 some sanitary towels?
13 A. Mr. Nice, if I as the superior decided to remand them in custody
14 and detained people for the theft of a washing machine, don't you think I
15 would have detained them for murder or any more serious crime if it had
16 happened? I decided to put somebody in detention for stealing something
17 that was worth the equivalent of 300, 400 euros.
18 Q. Now, tell us, you must have felt very sorry for the people leaving
19 Kosovo, their home country. Did you feel sorry for them leaving their
20 home country because of the NATO bombing or because they were being driven
21 out by the KLA? Did you feel sorry for them?
22 A. I felt sorry in both cases, because I had many friends among them,
23 and indeed I still have them.
24 Q. The authorities expressed their concern about people being driven
25 out by forces outside their control by helping their departure; is that
1 right? Perhaps by putting on all those trains. Is that what they were
2 doing, showing their sympathy with people in misfortune? Were they?
3 A. Please.
4 Q. Mark the pages I'm about to take you to --
5 A. Please. Your suggestion has nothing to do with the truth,
6 Mr. Nice.
7 Q. Well, let's --
8 A. There is no such force. You're talking about forced expulsion and
9 I'm telling you there was no such thing. It didn't happen. At least, not
10 on the part of the police.
11 Q. You leapt to a question I hadn't asked. I was asking you if on
12 your account the authorities must have felt sorry?
13 A. That's what you said.
14 Q. You see, if we look at this exhibit, which is about the complaint
15 filed against Ljubisa Zoric, and we turn to the English translation, we
16 find that his crime was not to take any money from people as they left the
17 country but to take too much. So is this right that as people were driven
18 out of their own country, they were actually charged an exit tax at the
19 border? This is what it says. Top of the English translation, line 4,
20 tab 50.
21 JUDGE BONOMY: Which exhibit is this, Mr. Nice?
22 MR. NICE: Tab 50.
23 JUDGE BONOMY: Tab 50.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That is not true.
25 MR. NICE:
1 Q. I'll just read what it says, because perhaps you can explain it to
2 me. It says: "Reasonable grounds to suspect that Ljubisa Zoric abused
3 his office to obtain illegal gain that amounted to 3.455 dinars because on
4 the 23rd of April -" well, that's in the centre of conflict - "while he
5 was collecting the exit tax from citizens leaving the country at the
6 Djeneral Jankovic road border, he charged a higher amount than the one
7 established, with the intention of keeping the difference ..."
8 So is the position that the authorities, facing the terrible
9 consequences of NATO bombing, were charging their citizens to leave?
10 That's what it reads like, doesn't it?
11 A. This does not refer to those citizens that you have in mind, at
12 least as far as I can see. It says on the 23rd of April, 1999, he
13 collected exit tax from -- that's a different sort of case.
14 Q. [Previous translation continues]... crossing was a refugee
15 nightmare, to use the word for the first time by me in four years of this
16 case, and not to use it improperly. It was an absolute nightmare for
17 refugees at these crossings. Are you saying that as well as all the poor
18 people who were trying to find somewhere to spend the night, there were
19 others who were passing through respectably with a suitcase in their hand
20 and paying an exit tax? Is that really what you're saying?
21 And while you're thinking about it, did they get a receipt for
22 their payment?
23 A. Let me just read this, please. "There is reasonable grounds to
24 suspect that reported Ljubisa Zoric from Kosovo Polje, in the official
25 capacity of a counter clerk of Saobracaj Srbija PTT JP - post office VI in
1 Pristina abused his office to obtain illegal gain amounting to 3.455
2 dinars in the following manner: On the 23rd of April, 1999, while he was
3 collecting the exit tax deposit from citizens leaving the country at the
4 Djeneral Jankovic road border crossing, he charged a higher amount than
5 the one established, with the intention of keeping the difference for
6 himself and thus obtaining illegal gain."
7 Q. It's already been highlighted once, so you must have read it once.
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. What does it mean if it doesn't mean what I suggest, and did they
10 get a receipt?
11 A. It's possible that -- well, he didn't issue any receipts. If he
12 had issued receipts, this criminal report would not have been submitted.
13 He was probably acting unlawfully. That's why the criminal proceedings
14 were instituted against him.
15 Q. One of the things the accused told us about you is that you knew
16 everything about Racak and, by implication, you knew everything that was
17 going on in your area of responsibility.
18 Just yes or no, were those unhappy refugees charged an exit tax?
19 A. I don't know that, whether the tax was collected. If it had been
20 charged, it was certainly -- it must have been according to the law,
21 according to the provision that applied to everybody, including refugees.
22 I certainly didn't collect any taxes.
23 Q. Tell me --
24 JUDGE BONOMY: Were you aware of such a law?
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That was a government decree on exit
1 tax. It was in force -- it had been in force for over two years at the
3 JUDGE BONOMY: What was the provision?
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know how it reads, I don't
5 have it with me, but a tax was charged for leaving the country in a motor
6 vehicle or otherwise; the amounts differed.
7 MR. NICE:
8 Q. We've -- Mr. Janicevic, we've been given the odd reason,
9 explanation by Defence witnesses in this case for why people might have
10 had their documents or their -- their documents taken away from them at
11 Djeneral Jankovic and other borders. Do you know why people had their
12 documents taken away from them at the borders, if they did?
13 A. I have told you this already. The first time I heard about
14 documents being seized was when this indictment was made public.
15 Q. Very well.
16 A. This was within the jurisdiction of the border police, not within
17 the jurisdiction of Urosevac SUP. If one of my officers had done it,
18 certainly legal measures would have been taken.
19 Q. Volume 3, please, of your exhibits.
20 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Nice, is this not the first time we're hearing of
21 an exit tax or deposit?
22 MR. NICE: It certainly is. And I know --
23 JUDGE KWON: I think it very relevant. Could we explore to find
24 the basis for that. If you could find the law in due course.
25 MR. NICE: I'll try and find out some more, because it came fresh
1 to me as it leapt from the page, and I haven't been able to do any
2 research so far. This witness tells us he can't help us, and with your
3 leave, I press on simply because the pressure of time. But I'll try and
4 find out some more elsewhere and see what we can find out about it. It
5 may be if we can speak to the offender himself, if we can get hold of him,
6 which is never that easy, the alleged offender, he might be able to tell
8 Q. In volume 3, the first exercise is a very short one. You will
9 remember that yesterday I took you to a report of yours that you had not
10 included in your papers dated the 15th of January and that showed 60
11 possible terrorists reported as being killed. If we look at your tab
12 64.7, we see the report for the 13th of January. If we look at 64.8, we
13 see the 16th of January, suggesting that you had access to a sequence of
14 -- 64.7 and 64.8 are the 13th and 16th of January respectively,
15 suggesting that you had access to a file with a sequence of documents, and
16 I just want to ask you again, did you omit the 15th of January
17 intentionally, realising that it gave the game away?
18 A. No, that's not correct.
19 Q. Very well.
20 MR. NICE: Well, Your Honours, the point is made in the question,
21 and unless you need to find them again, you'll see there reports of the
22 same type for the 13th and 16th of January.
23 Q. If we move on in this bundle. It was in respect of Exhibit 65
24 that you were asked questions about the -- about things generally, and the
25 accused offered this explanation to His Honour Judge Bonomy when asked
1 whether Radosavljevic was going to be called, he volunteered on your
2 behalf, or said on your behalf: "In relation to what happened in Racak,
3 Mr. Janicevic knows everything."
4 Now, that was the accused's words, not yours. Do you accept his
5 description of you as somebody who knows everything that happened in
6 Racak, which is why I've been going through documents with you in detail,
7 or is your position now that you don't know everything that happened in
8 Racak on the 15th?
9 A. I know what I have told you and what I read in the reports.
10 That's what I said in this trial over the past few days.
11 Q. But manifestly you don't know everything. You don't know what the
12 trigger pullers know. You don't know what the commander in the field
13 knows, and you don't know what Radosavljevic knows, do you?
14 A. Well, you will have to ask Radosavljevic yourself, because I can't
15 ask him.
16 MR. NICE: Your Honours, can I invite you to have in mind, if not
17 in possession, the visual aid I used with -- I've mislaid it. Can this be
18 played on the overhead projector, please, and available for distribution,
19 and if the Chamber could go to tab 65.25.
20 This is a very slightly amended version of the document that was
21 made available to the Court before. I'll explain it to the witness and
22 then the relevance of Exhibit 65 leads to the slight amendment of the
24 Q. This document, Mr. Janicevic, shows in summary form on the
25 left-hand side the names of people who on the evidence of the Prosecution
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 went from Sadik Osmani's house to the ravine and were killed. On the
2 right-hand side it shows, on the Prosecution evidence, the list of people
3 who went from Drita Emini's house, having been instructed to go to the
4 ravine, but they all escaped. The green markings indicate those for whom
5 there are Jasovic or other statements suggesting that they were members of
6 the KLA, and you will see that the survivors, at the moment, have two
7 green shadings, suggesting that two of them may have been associated with
8 the KLA, whereas on the left-hand side, if you move across to that, all
9 those who died, nearly, were marked as KLA, and of the five who survived,
10 although they went up to the ravine, at the bottom there, only one was
11 marked as the KLA, the suggestion being that this shows how the whole
12 thing was a cover-up.
13 If we look at 65.25 now, please, this is a statement taken from
14 somebody in January 1999, and the Chamber will see at the foot of the page
15 that it is said that Enver --
16 A. Your suggestion is not accurate, first of all.
17 Q. In the English, at the foot of the first page, and in the B/C/S at
18 the top of the second page, you'll see a reference in this report to Enver
19 Emini having given 2.000 Deutschmarks.
20 MR. NICE: Your Honours, for that reason and that reason alone,
21 and out of an abundance of caution, we have shaded the right-hand column
22 now at number 25 in green. It may be thought that it doesn't change the
23 point, but still, for completeness, the exercise of comparing these
24 multiple statements with the lists of names that are material to your
25 deliberation will probably continue. Thank you very much.
1 Q. Then I ask you this question: Can you think of -- Mr. Janicevic,
2 can you think of any reason why all the people, nearly, who survived are
3 free of the allegation that they are members of the KLA where those who
4 did die -- I'll start again. Of all those people who on the evidence were
5 in Racak at the time of this event, can you think of any reason why the
6 survivors are free of the taint of being associated with or members of the
7 KLA whereas all those who died were members of the KLA?
8 A. That's not correct, Mr. Nice.
9 Q. What's not correct about it?
10 A. It's not true that those who survived were free of suspicion of
11 having been associated with the KLA and those who died were members.
12 Through operative work in the field and from sources in Racak itself, in
13 Petrovo village, in Shukri Buja's headquarters itself, we had established
14 who was in the KLA.
15 Q. Now, I may have missed things. Indeed, the correction we've made
16 actually comes from the original Jasovic papers, not from your papers, and
17 there's a huge number of untranslated material that we've tried -- not a
18 huge number, a large number of untranslated material that we've tried to
19 schedule and sort out, but so far we haven't been able to find any
20 material produced by you, Jasovic, Stevanovic, or Marinkovic to show that
21 those people who escaped with their lives were being described as KLA, and
22 the reason for that, I suggest to you, is because, like the criminals that
23 you were, you forgot to make your story complete. If you were going to
24 make up that the people who died were KLA, then you also ought to have
25 made up that those who survived were, and you forgot to do it. Isn't that
1 the truth?
2 A. That's not true. Not true, Mr. Nice. And please don't offend me.
3 I am not a criminal and I didn't make anything up. I did not make up a
4 single word. If somebody is inventing, it's you. You made a lot of
5 things up. On the map that you showed me yesterday --
6 Q. Let me ask you one more question because we are really pressed for
7 time. I am simply presenting to you in pictorial form and doing the best
8 analysis we can what the material you and Jasovic brought to us shows. I
9 am revealing to you that, on the evidence, the people on the right
10 survived; the people on the bottom on the left survived. That's the ones
11 -- the bottom five survived. And the ones on the top left were killed.
12 The material, as analysed, shows that it's only the ones who were killed
13 who were shown on your material as being KLA, apart from three other-odd
15 You're a detective -- or not a detective, you're a policeman.
16 This is where you live. This is all your work. Please explain to us how
17 this comes about. It's not me lying. We're just asking you questions and
18 putting propositions. How did it come about?
19 A. Do you mean how this separation came about, the separation of
20 people who were in the KLA from those who were not? Those who were
21 carrying guns, who were fighting, died. Those who were not fighting were
22 in their houses.
23 A month ago, approximately, I heard a witness speaking here who
24 said that a group had been captured by the police and then brought back to
25 their homes. The police brought them to their homes to shield them from
1 crossfire so that they shouldn't get killed in the clash between the
2 police and terrorists.
3 If we had planned any executions and killings, we would have had
4 to be crazy to invite verifiers and TV crews to watch us. Who would be
5 such a madman? Can you, can anybody explain, maybe you could explain to
6 the Honourable Judges and not to mislead them, why the Verification
7 Mission did not allow us to perform the on-site investigation for three
8 days? Why somebody who will not -- who I will not name was allowed to
9 manipulate the evidence?
10 Q. If you want to make that good with evidence, you can. We've heard
11 the evidence of how the decision was made that they should go in without a
12 force of arms and that there was a conflict of decision-making, so that's
14 JUDGE BONOMY: You obviously don't need to deal with that in
15 answer to the witness, Mr. Nice, but am I missing something here? Is it
16 not an obvious potential explanation for this situation that the ones who
17 died and were members of the KLA were fighting, and that the ones who
18 survived were civilians?
19 MR. NICE: Well, there are two points to that, and the answer is
20 that Your Honour is missing something. The evidence is that each
21 household was directed up the ravine --
22 JUDGE BONOMY: I appreciate that. But that's not the point. I
23 understand that you then have to put everything together and come to a
24 conclusion, but you put the raw position shown on this plan, these are the
25 ones killed and they're all KLA and these are the ones who survived and
1 they are not, then one obvious explanation is the one that the witness has
2 ultimately given.
3 MR. NICE: I'll deal with it through the witness because it's the
4 next question that was in my mind a minute ago, and it's this:
5 Q. In all the papers that we've looked at contemporaneously, there is
6 no suggestion, is there, of innocent civilians being allowed -- first of
7 all, there's no suggestion of innocent civilians being in Racak. Your
8 case was that they were all KLA.
9 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson.
10 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic.
11 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] This session is improper. The
12 witness himself said several times that according to his information there
13 were about 50 civilians in Racak, and that's precisely what's on record
14 here. We've heard it.
15 JUDGE BONOMY: That, in my opinion, is a quite inappropriate
16 intervention. I suspect it may even have been a deliberate intervention
17 to somehow or other direct the witness how to answer the question, and
18 I've heard this happen a number of times, and I can't any longer remain
19 silent on the matter.
20 The question was not about what the witness had said before. The
21 question was about documentary material, and the whole value of the
22 question and answer has been undermined by the intervention.
23 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, I allow you to speak when you
24 indicate you wish to speak because you have a right to object. If you're
25 misusing the function, then that's a different matter. If you have an
1 objection to make, then I will allow you to object before the witness
2 answers. But if the purpose of your intervention is merely to provide
3 information to the witness, that is wholly improper.
4 MR. NICE: [Microphone not activated].
5 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please, Mr. Nice. Microphone for
6 Mr. Nice.
7 JUDGE ROBINSON: Let Mr. Nice move on.
8 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I just wish to remind you that
9 Mr. Nice wasn't telling the truth, because the witness already said that
10 several times, that there were approximately 50 civilians. So I'm not
11 telling him and leading him on to say what he's already stated.
12 MR. NICE: His Honour Judge Bonomy has made the point.
13 JUDGE KWON: Just let the witness deal with it. The witness can
14 answer the question. It is not your job to answer in advance on behalf of
15 the witness.
16 Mr. Nice.
17 MR. NICE: Your Honours, for want of time I'm going to move on.
18 The value of the point has indeed been undermined by the intervention.
19 Can I draw to the Chamber's attention that from where we were
20 until about 66.25 there are a very large number of untranslated documents
21 that I'm not going to deal with.
22 At tab 66.25 -- at 66.25 there's a statement taken by Amrush --
23 allegedly taken from Amrush Gashi. So far as this man is concerned, he
24 was one who's been able to see, and I must suggest to you that on this
25 occasion as well the man was stopped in Stimlje on whatever the date it
1 was, asked to produce his identification, taken for interview, a statement
2 was prepared for him to sign, and throughout the taking of the statement
3 he was beaten by sticks.
4 Q. That's my suggestion to you. This is a statement you have
5 produced and that's my suggestion to you. Presumably your answer's going
6 to be the same as before, is it?
7 A. Of course that hasn't got anything to do with the truth. First of
8 all, it is not tab 25. 66.25 is just a piece of information, a report.
9 It's not a statement of any kind. If you mean the tab that I'm looking
11 Q. [Previous translation continues]... Amrush Gashi, and I'm going
12 to move on.
13 Can we go, please, to 66.36, and this one we do need to be sure is
14 correct. And although the Chamber may have differing views on the utility
15 of the chart, I respectfully invite it to consider its utility now.
16 Do you remember I asked you to help us with the young boy aged 12
17 or 14 who was shown to be dead? Do you remember that?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Now, if you look at this statement, which was produced in Jasovic
20 and is also your 66.36, we can see in the English on the middle of page 3,
21 and in the B/C/S -- in B/C/S I think on the same -- on the first page, we
22 can see, just over a third of the way down under a general heading: "I
23 personally know that the following persons were in the so-called KLA in
24 Racak village." Reference to Haljim Beqir and his brother a Haljim
25 Beqiri --
1 JUDGE BONOMY: Is this 66.36?
2 MR. NICE: Page 3 of 66.36.
3 JUDGE BONOMY: Mine only has two pages.
4 JUDGE KWON: Second page.
5 JUDGE BONOMY: Oh, number 3. All right.
6 MR. NICE: Yes.
7 Q. Now, although the names are always a bit variable because that's
8 the way Albanian names can seem to be, this is clearly the same person and
9 the person who gave the -- allegedly gave the interview and has given a
10 statement, the Chamber may recall, Nazmi Zimeri, to the Prosecution, was
11 this boy's school teacher. And he says in terms that he was a young boy
12 and a former student of his and adamantly was, of course, not a member of
13 the KLA, and yet your documents produces it; evidence, some evidence that
14 this 12 or 14-year-old boy was a member of the KLA.
15 And if the Chamber is happy to use the chart, it will see that
16 this is the only time that boy's name is mentioned, and of course it's
17 mentioned -- It's the only time that that boy is mentioned by any one of
18 those coming to Jasovic.
19 You can't point to this boy being KLA. His schoolteacher says he
20 wasn't. Of course he wasn't. This is just part of the cover-up, isn't
21 it, because if the boy's dead, you've somehow got to justify his killing.
22 A. I state again, and it seems to me that I can't quite obviously
23 explain things to you: On the 15th there was an anti-terrorist operation
24 carried out. We weren't able to conduct an investigation for three days,
25 and then one year later you are suggesting and putting questions to me and
1 you are answering your own questions, Mr. Nice, and presenting evidence.
2 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Nice, there may be some merit in that.
3 MR. NICE: I'm putting my case to this witness as swiftly as I
4 can, and --
5 JUDGE ROBINSON: Let him answer the question.
6 MR. NICE: Certainly, yes, I'll let him answer the questions.
7 Q. Anything else you want to add on this proposition that the naming
8 of this boy, who appeared also in that other exhibit, that list of names,
9 is part of a cover-up? What's your answer again?
10 A. That's not true. It wasn't any cover-up of evidence. At no point
11 was it a question of any kind of cover-up --
12 Q. Go, please, to volume 4 of your exhibits.
13 A. -- once.
14 Q. And straight away to tab 71. You see, this is the chronology. We
15 looked at it yesterday for one purpose and now we must look at it for
16 another. This is the chronology that you say unfortunately somehow became
17 detached from its last and signed page which bore your signature. But if
18 we look on the first page in both versions and to the second paragraph,
19 you on the 29th of January, as you say is the relevant date, wrote this:
20 "One Urosevac SUP company of 110 policemen was assigned to carry out the
21 operation in the village of Racak. Before they were sent on the mission,
22 they were warned the service had information indicating that the village
23 of Racak is a tough stronghold and the main base of Siptar terrorists.
24 They brought a large quantity of weapons to the village which they
25 distributed among the locals who placed themselves at their service ..."
1 And then read this, please: "... and those who refused to accept the
2 weapons, and also women and children, left the village."
3 So your own narrative suggests, whatever you say today, that
4 either your belief at the time or your stated belief was that this place
5 was empty of civilians.
6 A. At that time and in that place, of the 2.000 or so civilians, I
7 said that we later found that there were 50 persons, whereas the most --
8 the vast majority of the population of Racak had left the village because
9 they were afraid of the conflicts between the terrorists and the police
10 and because of daily attacks by terrorists against members of the army and
11 police and citizens; kidnapping, ambushes, killings, and so on.
12 Q. Where did you find these civilians? Were there -- because
13 understand the point: For a policeman, an armed police force or an
14 armed --
15 A. When the anti-terrorist action was under way.
16 Q. So by the time of the preparation of this document, your original
17 expectation at finding an entirely armed village had been replaced by an
18 understanding that you were doing dangerous things in a place where there
19 were 40 innocent civilians. Where do you record that in writing? Where
20 do we find that in writing?
21 A. And who said there were 40 innocent civilians, in the first place,
22 in a place where many evil things had taken place? When was that said?
23 When did I say that? I said that we had operative information according
24 to which in Racak there were 80 members of a terrorist brigade within the
25 composition of the 161st KLA Brigade, in fact, and I said who the
1 commander was, the commander of that terrorist group. And I also said
2 that, roughly speaking, there were about 100 people, according to our
3 information, a total of about 100 people in the village itself, together
4 with the terrorists.
5 Q. All right. Maybe I misunderstood you in about 50 people. I asked
6 you this question: "When did you find these civilians were there?" And
7 you said: "When the anti-terrorist action was under way." So on your own
8 answer in the last couple of minutes, in the course of the operation you
9 found out that there were some innocent civilians present in the village.
10 Will you please point us to any contemporaneous document --
11 A. After -- after the anti-terrorist operation, in the reports of the
12 commander, the leaders who were there, and it was a component part of this
13 chronology of events here. Take a look at it carefully. I am sure you
14 have it all.
15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson.
16 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Milosevic.
17 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Nice, when he presented this
18 document, said that it was compiled on the 29th of January. Now, not to
19 ask a leading question on my part, could that please be checked out,
20 because the information which I received says differently. It's the 29th
21 of January, according to the transcript here.
22 JUDGE ROBINSON: It's the 19th.
23 MR. NICE: My recollection is the witness said it was the 19th
24 yesterday. If I misspoke, my error.
25 Q. Was it the 19th that you prepared this document?
1 A. 19th of January, yes.
2 Q. Thank you. I'm going to move on. You see, the young boy is one
3 person of many. There is no -- there is no reference in any of the papers
4 before or after Racak to innocent civilians being there whose interests
5 were protected, is there?
6 A. Well, if I have to repeat the same thing a thousand times, I'll do
7 so again.
8 JUDGE ROBINSON: What's the point now, Mr. Nice? This really is
10 JUDGE BONOMY: The words "flogging" and "horse" are coming to
11 mind, Mr. Nice.
12 MR. NICE: Yes, I'll finish. I've just got to deal --
13 Q. As to the Kotlina-Kacanik passages of your evidence which you
14 dealt with briefly and I'm going to deal with even more briefly, at 82 to
15 84, our analysis would suggest that the names you produce -- I'll show you
16 what I mean by this --
17 MR. NICE: Your Honours, we've only been able to, again, cope with
18 the material in the way it is.
19 Q. The names that you have identified as being in the KLA -- if the
20 usher could just pass this, put this over on the overhead projector.
21 If you look at the top list of names, the Kuqis, the Lokus, the
22 Rexhas and the Vlashis, we haven't been able to find any identified KLA
23 member or associate in the documentation that you've presented, and I just
24 want you to give a chance in case we've missed something or we aren't
25 reading things correctly: Do you know of any of your documentation that
1 suggests any of those people was a member of the KLA?
2 A. I don't remember whether I have it or not to compare. I haven't
3 got time to do that either. I see your list now. Actually, I'm looking
4 at it for the first time now. But I claim that in Kotlina there were 80
5 members of the terrorist organisation. On the basis of operative
6 information that we disposed of. And that piece of information is the
7 same one that the verifiers had and the department or, rather, the
8 department that was stationed in Kacanik and at the other place.
9 Q. I just want to know if any of these names are known to you and if
10 they're traceable to any document that you say shows they're members of
11 the KLA. I think the answer is no, probably.
12 A. I don't have time to compare it with my documents. I haven't had
13 this list before me up until now, so I can't give you either a positive or
14 a negative answer.
15 Q. One last question -- one last topic in about two questions. How
16 many police do you say there were in Kosovo in the 1990s, roughly?
17 A. In total in Kosovo, is that what you mean?
18 Q. Yes.
19 A. The whole of Kosovo, you mean?
20 Q. Yes.
21 A. About 10.000, I think. Approximately 10.000. I'm not quite sure.
22 Q. We may hear in due course from a document where the accused was
23 speaking in April of 1995 of the figure of a hundred thousand being
24 present in Kosovo to combat terrorism, explaining that there was also the
25 need to have the army present because fear could guard the house there,
1 could guard Kosovo. Do you accept, if that's what is eventually heard in
2 evidence, that in fact there were many more policemen, up to a hundred
4 A. I really don't know how many there were throughout Kosovo, but I
5 know that there were -- I didn't have more than 500 policemen. With the
6 reservists, a total of 600, let's say, in all the five police stations.
7 MR. NICE: Thank you.
8 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you, Mr. Nice.
9 Questioned by the Court:
10 JUDGE KWON: I have just one question to the witness. If the
11 witness could have tab 33 from Racak -- sorry, tab -- was it 5? Tab 5 of
12 Racak binder. Yes, tab 5, and as well as tab 71 from his binder -- or tab
13 33 from Racak binder, which is a chronology.
14 Mr. Janicevic, do you have them in front of you?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I have one.
16 JUDGE KWON: Tab 5 is a dispatch sent to --
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] What tab number was it, 30
19 JUDGE KWON: Chronology, 71 of your binder. Tab 71.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I have both of them now.
21 JUDGE KWON: So the dispatch sent on 15th of January was sent by
22 you around 8.00 in the evening.
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's right.
24 JUDGE KWON: And before this, there was another dispatch which was
25 sent around 2.00 in the afternoon on the same day.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's right.
2 JUDGE KWON: In which the killed terrorists would be at least 15.
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's right.
4 JUDGE KWON: And this tab 5, you said the killed Albanian
5 terrorists would be about 60. At the bottom of the page. Which is a
6 rough estimate. And this is a kind of internal dispatch.
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's right.
8 JUDGE KWON: But in tab 71, which was written on 19th, four days
9 later, you said the number of killed KLA is about 40. That's right. All
10 these, we went over these.
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's right.
12 JUDGE KWON: This chronology is based upon information you
13 gathered so far, so we can call it as kind of informed report compared to
14 the dispatch of 15th.
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's right.
16 JUDGE KWON: What I'd like to know, what I find interesting, is
17 some paragraph after two paragraphs from the paragraph which dealt with
18 the number of killed terrorists, the 15th dispatch. There you said the
19 following was found on the dead terrorists: Three Brownings, two
20 carbines, 36 automatic rifles, 1.802 rounds of ammunition of various
21 calibre, six hand grenades, two rifle bags for hand grenades, et cetera.
22 Same thing, same paragraph is repeated on the 19th chronology. My
23 question is: How could you at the time describe with this level of
24 exactitude about the ammunitions which were seized at the moment, given
25 that this dispatch, which was sent on 15th, is a rough one, as you said
1 before. Do you follow my question?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I do follow your question, and I'm
3 going to answer it now. On the 15th of January, at about 1400 hours, a
4 dispatch went to the Ministry of the Interior and MUP staff and
5 headquarters. The dispatch was of an informative nature and contained
6 information that the action was under way and that according to the first
7 preliminary reports, in Racak at least 15 persons -- 15 terrorists had
8 been killed. After the terrorist action had been completed and the
9 investigation started, and then of course it was interrupted, the
10 investigation was interrupted, what followed was another dispatch, a
11 second dispatch, prepared on the basis of oral reports by the participants
12 in the anti-terrorist action, that is to say the commanders of the company
13 and platoons who gave their positions and impressions because they didn't
14 know themselves the exact number of dead and where they were killed, in
15 what sector, because an on-site investigation had not yet been conducted.
16 Now, in the chronology of events, it says that about 40 terrorists
17 were killed and the chronology was compiled after the investigation had
18 been carried out. An investigation was carried out, and then in the
19 mosque 40 bodies were found and all 40 bodies were transported for
21 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Janicevic, that's what we heard yesterday.
22 But my question is how could you describe with this exactitude about the
23 weapons that had been found there without any crime investigation?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The weapons, the weapons, on the
25 same day when the anti-terrorist action was completed, was seized and
1 taken to the police station, so it wasn't left to stand by the bodies
2 where the fighting had been. But on the 18th --
3 JUDGE KWON: That clarifies the matter. Thank you.
4 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, we're going to adjourn now. You
5 will have some time to prepare your re-examination, and I take this
6 opportunity to remind you that, in re-examination, there's no reason to
7 ask a question on every single point that was raised in cross-examination.
8 That is not at all the purpose of re-examination.
9 Look at the witness's evidence, form a general picture of how he
10 came across in cross-examination. Was he positive? I would say this
11 witness was fairly positive, was fairly certain. Focus your
12 re-examination on those areas of his cross-examination where you think
13 there might have been some wavering, some area of uncertainty, where you
14 think your case needs to be supported by further questioning to
15 rehabilitate him. And if you do that, I don't think you would need to
16 spend more than an hour or two in re-examination.
17 So we will adjourn now and we'll --
18 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson.
19 JUDGE ROBINSON: -- resume on the 18th of October at 9.00 a.m.
20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson.
21 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes Mr. Milosevic.
22 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'll do my best, of course, but I'd
23 just like to ask, since Mr. Nice mentioned a moment ago some alleged
24 document of mine dating back to 1995 mentioning 100.000 policemen, to
25 provide me with that document. I want to see what document of mine that
2 MR. NICE: I was referring to --
3 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please, Mr. Nice.
4 MR. NICE: I was referring to the 35th session of the Supreme
5 Defence Council on the 30th of April, 1995, and I think in the English --
6 3rd of April, I beg your pardon, 1995, and I -- I've got the extract here,
7 but in English it's on page 24.
8 JUDGE ROBINSON: That should enable you to find it, Mr. Milosevic.
9 We are adjourned.
10 You will return, then, Mr. Janicevic, on Tuesday, the 18th of
11 October, at 9.00 a.m., and you are not to discuss your evidence with
13 We are adjourned.
14 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.50 p.m.,
15 to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 18th day
16 of October, 2005, at 9.00 a.m.