1 Monday, 10 September 2007

2 [Open session]

3 [The accused entered court]

4 [The accused Tarculovski not present]

5 --- Upon commencing at 2.18 p.m.

6 JUDGE PARKER: Good afternoon.

7 We understand there are one or two procedural matters.

8 Mr. Saxon.

9 MR. SAXON: Your Honour, at this time, perhaps I will turn the

10 microphone over to my colleague, Ms. Motoike who has a motion to make

11 regarding the next witness.

12 JUDGE PARKER: Ms. Motoike.

13 MS. MOTOIKE: Thank you. Good afternoon, Your Honours. May we

14 move into private session, please.

15 JUDGE PARKER: Private.

16 [Private session]

17 (redacted)

18 (redacted)

19 (redacted)

20 (redacted)

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11 Pages 4694-4704 redacted. Private session.

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted)

4 (redacted)

5 (redacted)

6 (redacted)

7 (redacted)

8 (redacted)

9 (redacted)

10 (redacted)

11 (redacted)

12 (redacted)

13 (redacted)

14 (redacted)

15 (redacted)

16 (redacted)

17 (redacted)

18 [Open session]

19 THE REGISTRAR: We're back in open session, Your Honour.

20 [Trial Chamber confers]

21 JUDGE PARKER: Are we ready for the witness, Ms. Motoike?

22 MS. MOTOIKE: Yes. Thank you, Your Honours. At this time, the

23 Prosecution would call Tatjana Groseva.

24 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.

25 [The witness entered court]

1 JUDGE PARKER: Good afternoon, Ms. Groseva.

2 Would you please read aloud the affirmation on the card that is

3 shown to you.

4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will speak

5 the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

6 WITNESS: TATJANA GROSEVA

7 [Witness answered through interpreter]

8 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you very much. Please sit down.

9 I would mention that the Prosecution moved that there be some

10 protective measures granted. I should tell you that the Chamber has felt

11 it had to refuse that application, as your situation didn't come within

12 the scope of the Rules. So there are no protective measures in place.

13 Yes, Ms. Motoike

14 Examination by Ms. Motoike:

15 MS. MOTOIKE: Thank you.

16 Q. Ms. Groseva, do you recall giving a statement -- well, let me

17 first ask you this as a formality. Is your name Tatjana Groseva?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. And do you recall giving a statement to the Office of the

20 Prosecutor on the 26th and 31st of October in 2005?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Do you recall that on -- I'm sorry. On 17 August, 2006, that this

23 statement was certified by an officer of this particular Tribunal?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. Did you have an opportunity at that time, in August of 2006, to

1 read the statement in your native language?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. And did you also at that time have an opportunity to make

4 corrections to this particular statement?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. And were some of these corrections handwritten by you in your

7 statement itself?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. And were these corrections also certified by the officer who

10 certified your statement at that time, in August?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. And were the contents of your statement and the corrections that

13 you made true and correct?

14 A. Yes.

15 MS. MOTOIKE: Your Honours, I would seek to tender the 92 bis for

16 Ms. Groseva which bears ERN N002-7344-N002-7351. English translation of

17 this statement bears ERN N001-9638-N001-9642. And the particular

18 corrections that she made, the translation for that bears ERN

19 ET-N002-7344-N002-7351.

20 JUDGE PARKER: The statement and the corrections will be received

21 as an exhibit.

22 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honour, exhibit number P434.

23 MS. MOTOIKE: And with the Chamber's permission I would like to

24 read a brief summary of this witness's statement.

25 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.

1 MS. MOTOIKE: Ms. Groseva is employed in the Ministry of Interior

2 for Macedonia and she has been employed there since 1992. In early 2003,

3 the witness was a member of the commission formed by then Minister of

4 Interior Hari Kostov. The commission was formed to investigate the events

5 that had occurred in the village of Ljuboten during August 2001. The

6 commission formed in 2003 questioned persons allegedly involved in the

7 events in Ljuboten and as a member of this commission, Ms. Groseva was

8 tasked to record its activities.

9 In particular, she took handwritten notes of the statements made

10 by the members of the commission as well as the persons who were

11 interviewed by the commission. These notes were then summarized into a

12 document entitled an information, which was then reviewed by the other

13 members of the commission for accuracy. After the commission members

14 verified the accuracy of the information, it was then sent to the Minister

15 of Interior. Upon receipt of the information by the minister, the

16 information Ms. Groseva produced became an official document related to

17 the commission's activities.

18 Q. Ms. Groseva, following up on your statement I have a few

19 questions.

20 In paragraph 3, you reference a document which relates to the

21 formation in 2003 of this commission to investigate the events that

22 occurred in Ljuboten and your participation as a member of that

23 commission. Before I actually pose the question, we do have binders with

24 respect to the exhibits I intend to show this witness.

25 MS. MOTOIKE: Could we have those distributed, please, with the

1 usher's assistance. Thank you.

2 Could we please display what's at tab 1 of the binders. It is an

3 exhibit marked for identification as P00379. In e-court it is under 65

4 ter 285, page 7.

5 Q. Ms. Groseva, you have a hard copy of the exhibits in front of you.

6 If you could turn to tab 1.

7 A. One.

8 Q. I believe there is a Macedonian version in the back, yes.

9 It's also displayed before you on the screen there. If I could

10 just run through this document quickly with you, Ms. Groseva. At the top

11 here it says: "Republic of Macedonia, Ministry of the Interior," has a

12 date 11 March 2003. And it's addressed to Mrs. Tanja Groseva and then it

13 says: "Subject, decision on the establishment of a commission." And in

14 the body of the correspondence it actually notes that there is a photocopy

15 of another decision dated 7 March 2003 which is attached.

16 Do you see that, Ms. Groseva?

17 A. Yes, decision to establish a committee.

18 Q. And had you received this document, that is addressed to you, had

19 you received this particular correspondence?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. If we could please display -- it is also marked for identification

22 as P00379. In e-court, it is at 65 ter 285.5. It's pages 8 through 9.

23 This is at tab 2 of today's binders.

24 Ms. Groseva, do you see here on the top of this particular

25 document, in the corner it says: "Republic of Macedonia, Ministry of the

1 Interior," it is dated 7 March 2003. It indicates that there was a

2 decision made by the minister of the interior on the establishment of a

3 commission.

4 Do you see that?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. At the bottom of the page, actually, there are numbered 1 through

7 5 there that is visible on your screen in Macedonian, but if we could

8 display page 2 of the Macedonian in e-court, please. Or the next page --

9 thank you. That would be the number 6 and 7 and there you are listed at

10 7, is that correct, Ms. Groseva?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. And if we could turn to the next page as well in English. Thank

13 you.

14 At the very top of the page in English and in the middle of the

15 page in Macedonian it then sets forth the tasks of the commission. And it

16 says that the -- in the paragraph labelled Roman number II it says

17 that: "The commission shall have the task to investigate and analyse all

18 materials and documents relating to the events which took place in the

19 territory of Ljuboten Skopje in August 2001, ascertain the composition and

20 capacity of the unit which took action in this period including it says

21 (identity of each of its members individually), establish the causes and

22 circumstances surrounding the deaths of the victims and the material

23 damage inflicted in order to establish the truth about the aforementioned

24 events, investigate how the legal powers of the unit were exercised and

25 assess the consequences of the action."

1 Do you see that, Ms. Groseva?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. And then going on it details more tasks. "The commission referred

4 to in part I of this decision shall make all contacts needed for the truth

5 to be established and shall consider the findings of the institute for

6 forensic medicine in connection with the assessment of the consequences of

7 the action.'?

8 And then it goes on to say in the next paragraph: "That the

9 commission shall have the task to ascertain the responsibility for the

10 action involving the events in the territory of Ljuboten village in August

11 2001." And then lastly it says that: "The commission shall prepare a

12 report on its activities and submit it to the minister of the interior."

13 Do you see those paragraphs, Ms. Groseva?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. And is this the commission, these two pages, is this the decision

16 that you received regarding the commission that you were appointed to?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. And what I read to you earlier, when it says that the

19 commission -- one of the commission's tasks was to ascertain the

20 responsibility for the actions in Ljuboten in August of 2001, can I ask

21 you what was your understanding as far as what the goal of the commission

22 that you were assigned to?

23 A. I apologise, could you please repeat the question.

24 Q. What was -- what was your understanding -- what was the goal of

25 the commission that you were a member of at that time?

1 A. Pursuant the decision that we had received, we, as a committee,

2 started working on the first objective, to ascertain what has happened at

3 the Skopje village of Ljuboten in 2001.

4 Q. So you were tasked -- your understanding was to gather information

5 regarding the events in Ljuboten?

6 A. At Ljuboten, yes.

7 MS. MOTOIKE: Your Honours, just for clarification, there are a

8 number of exhibits that I actually am going to address with this

9 particular witness that most of them originate from P 00379 which has been

10 marked for identification, but at this point through this witness I intend

11 to leave them as marked for identification and we will address them later

12 with additional witnesses.

13 Q. Ms. Groseva, you said that you began the tasks and started to

14 gather information essentially as part of your commission. Did you follow

15 a standard procedure with respect to the activities of the commission?

16 A. I apologise, I think one part of the question was not interpreted

17 well.

18 Q. Was there a standard procedure that you followed in carrying out

19 the activities of the commission?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. And what procedure was that?

22 A. Well, the procedure was the following. The committee would have a

23 meeting where it would invite people, individuals that it believed would

24 be able to provide useful information. Then we would interview those

25 persons and I took notes of all of it.

1 Q. And when you interviewed these persons, can I ask you, did you

2 issue summons to these particular individuals to appear before the

3 commission?

4 A. Since it was employees in the Ministry of the Interior, we did not

5 issue summons but people were invited to participate in the work of the

6 committee, except in a case when it was civilians.

7 Q. Okay. And as part of your interview process with all of these

8 individuals whether they be civilians or employees of the ministry, can

9 you tell me were there any threats made to these individuals to speak?

10 A. No.

11 Q. To your knowledge, was any coercion made towards these persons who

12 were asked to speak to the committee?

13 A. As far as I know, no.

14 Q. And were those persons who were interviewed also given an option

15 of not answering questions that were posed by the commission?

16 A. I can't call it an option, but that is an interview with those

17 persons, and if they did not -- if they had no answer for what they have

18 been asked, then the record was made that they had no answer to that.

19 Q. In paragraph 4 of your statement you indicate that you were

20 actually not present during the first meeting of this commission in 2003.

21 Can you tell us, do you recall when that first meeting was?

22 A. I think it was May and I was absent because I had an official trip

23 to the Republic of Croatia.

24 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Apostolski.

25 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Your Honours, my learned

1 colleague, I apologise for interfering in your questioning, but on page

2 22, line 3, it is interpreted interview and while the witness said as

3 conversation so the witness might be able to confirm this interview and

4 conversation are completely different notions in Macedonian, and it was

5 interpreted interview.

6 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.

7 MS. MOTOIKE:

8 Q. Ms. Groseva, when you were asked -- when the commission asked for

9 these persons to come and speak to the commission what would you term

10 the -- the discussions that -- that you had, the commission had with these

11 individuals?

12 A. Discussions.

13 Q. Okay.

14 MS. MOTOIKE: Could I please show what's been marked for

15 identification as P00379. It's 65 ter 285.24 in e-court, pages 58

16 through 60.

17 Q. This is tab 3 of today's binders.

18 Ms. Groseva, do you recognise this document that's been displayed

19 on the screen? You also have it in front of you in hard copy at tab 3.

20 A. Yes.

21 MS. MOTOIKE: If we could just run through it really quickly. At

22 the very top it says: "Ministry of Interior of the Republic of Macedonia,"

23 it says: "Sector for analysis and research entry number 316," 6 May 2003

24 is the date. In the middle it says: "Report on the meeting of the

25 commission investigating the events in Ljuboten village."

1 And then in the first paragraph it goes on to state that there was

2 a meeting in the middle part of the paragraph: "Attended by the ministry

3 leadership of which the following were present: General Zoran Jovanovski,

4 Baftijari Hamdirefet, Besim Ramicevic, Surlaj Sefset and people who were

5 called for an interview to clarify the specific circumstances, as well as,

6 the chief of the PSOLO, police station for the security of persons and

7 facilities, Gjorgji Mitrov; the former assistant minister for security,

8 Zivko Gacovski; associated inspector from the present security sector,

9 Johan Tarculovski; an employee of the Kometa security agency,

10 Goce Ralevski.

11 Do you see that?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. And are all these persons besides the last people that they

14 mention, these people in the first part of this sentence are they the

15 members of the commission?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. And were you present at this particular meeting by the commission?

18 A. No.

19 Q. As a member of this commission, are you familiar, though, with the

20 contents of this particular report?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Later on in the report on the same page it goes on to state what

23 information the commission had received. And then on the second page - if

24 we could turn to the second page in e-court, please - I'm sorry, it's

25 actually the third page in Macedonian, second page in English.

1 At the bottom of the hard copy that you have in front of you,

2 Ms. Groseva, it says it is submitted to under-secretary of the police

3 department. Do you see that?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. And is this report part of the documents that were produced by the

6 commission?

7 A. Yes, from the first meeting of the committee.

8 Q. And could I ask you to take a look at the very last sentence of

9 the last paragraph on page 3 of the Macedonian, page 2 of the English. It

10 says: "Tarculovski made an Official Note of his verbal statement and

11 handed it to the commission."

12 Do you see that?

13 A. Yes.

14 MS. MOTOIKE: If we could please -- let me ask you this first,

15 Ms. Groseva, did you have an opportunity to see that particular note of

16 the verbal statement?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. And had you been made aware of the contents of that particular

19 note as a member of the commission?

20 A. Yes.

21 MS. MOTOIKE: Could we please show P00379, it's marked for

22 identification. In e-court, it is 65 ter 285.10 at pages 23 through 24.

23 It is at tab 7 of today's binders.

24 Q. Displayed before you, Ms. Groseva, is what's a handwritten note in

25 Macedonian. It appears in typed form in English and at the top it says:

1 "Official Note." And on the second page of the Macedonian - if we could

2 go to that, please, in e-court - and you have the hard copy in front of

3 you, Ms. Groseva. At the very bottom there it says: "Name" and it says:

4 "Inspector Johan Tarculovski" and there's a signature. Do you see that?

5 A. [No interpretation]

6 Q. Is this a note --

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. Is this a note that you had seen previously as a member of the

9 commission?

10 A. This is a note that, together with the information from the first

11 meeting, was left in the dossier in the record of the work of the

12 committee.

13 Q. And based on your knowledge and information from the commission,

14 Ms. Groseva, what date was this statement actually taken?

15 A. The statements were taken on the same day that we had the

16 interviews with our colleagues.

17 Q. So if this note -- sorry, let me just clear something up.

18 This Official Note then that we're looking at is the note that was

19 referred to then in this report or -- the report dated 6 May 2003. Is

20 that correct?

21 A. So the information was prepared by representative from the

22 department for analysis and research. And the statements that were given

23 by the colleagues, specifically this, they were an Official Note.

24 Q. My question was in tab 3 of today's binder that we saw previously

25 the report dated 6 May 2003, the very last page, it made a reference to an

1 Official Note by Mr. Tarculovski. My question to you is, is this the

2 Official Note here located at tab 7, the one that we've got on the screen

3 now?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. And so if this report indicated there was a meeting on 5 May 2003,

6 then your understanding is that this Official Note that we're looking at

7 here on the screen would have been generated on 5 May 2003. Is that your

8 understanding?

9 A. That is the procedure. That was the way we worked. But I was not

10 present at this meeting, and, therefore, I cannot state whether it

11 happened on that day or one of the following days, that this was prepared.

12 Q. Was there a second meeting by the commission?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. Okay. And did you yourself attend this second meeting?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. Okay. And did you also generate a report as you stated in your

17 statement regarding this second meeting?

18 A. Yes.

19 MS. MOTOIKE: Your Honours, I have an issue actually with respect

20 to the next document that I would like to display with this particular

21 witness. This actually I have to give some procedural background if the

22 Chamber will allow.

23 At some point, actually specifically 9 August 2004, the

24 Prosecution had received in response to a request for assistance from the

25 Macedonian government particular documents specifically the ones that are

1 contained within the exhibit marked for identification as P00379. The

2 correspondence -- the response relating to the RFA from the Macedonian

3 government is located at P00379, 65 ter 285.3. And in that response it

4 details particular documents that the Prosecution then added to its 65 ter

5 list. However, this morning, in proofing with Ms. Groseva, it was

6 discovered that there was one additional document that is report that was

7 generated by Ms. Groseva that had not been previously provided to the

8 Prosecution in response to this request for assistance.

9 So this document as soon as -- Ms. Groseva actually asked the

10 government there to fax this document, we then received it and then

11 disclosed it to the Defence with the proofing note for Ms. Groseva.

12 My question then, I guess, I would ask permission to add this to

13 the Prosecution's 65 ter list at this time.

14 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Mettraux.

15 MR. METTRAUX: Thank you, Your Honour.

16 Well, simply to indicate that the document was indeed transmitted

17 to us in the course of this morning. The indication was given of the same

18 facts that were given to us at this stage. We haven't had the opportunity

19 to give much thought and consideration to this particular document to be

20 quite frank, Your Honour, nor to conduct any investigation in that

21 respect. I think the real issue in this particular case will be the

22 question of admissibility and perhaps the best situation in this case

23 would be simply to allow the Prosecution to use this document with this

24 witness with the caveat that the Defence should be permitted to

25 investigate, if necessary and to ask questions of this witness and the

1 next to decide whether or not it otherwise meets the requirement for

2 admissibility.

3 JUDGE PARKER: I understand from Ms. Motoike that she doesn't

4 intend to tender it as an exhibit merely to have it marked for

5 identification. Is that correct?

6 MS. MOTOIKE: Yes, Your Honour. As with the other exhibits that

7 I'm using with this particular witness, the intention is to mark it for

8 identification at this point and also because we don't have an English

9 translation of the document yet, it is in Macedonian only, and then with

10 additional evidence that the Prosecution intends to elicit with respect to

11 this particular exhibit and all these related documents we would then at

12 that point be seeking to tender it.

13 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Apostolski, is there anything to add?

14 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I have nothing to

15 add except, what my colleague Mr. Mettraux mentioned. We just received

16 this document in the morning. We did not have time to look at it, so it

17 would be also my suggestion that this is accepted as -- as an evidence for

18 identification.

19 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you. I assume in due course the witness will

20 identify the document.

21 MS. MOTOIKE: Yes, thank you, Your Honour.

22 And, Your Honours, we have hard copies of this particular document

23 in Macedonian because it has an ERN number which I will give, it is

24 N006-5024-N006-5027. It is in Macedonian language and, again, the

25 intention is to have the full English translation provided as soon as it

1 is available.

2 Q. Ms. Groseva, you have the hard copy of this particular document in

3 front of you now. And I'd just like to ask you, you spoke of a second

4 meeting by the committee and you indicated that you generated a report

5 with respect to this second meeting. Is the document that you have in

6 front of you, is that the report that you generated?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. Since everybody has it in hard copy while we wait for it to come

9 up on the ELMO, I would just like to go through a few points of this

10 document, Ms. Groseva?

11 At the very top of the this document I believe it says: "MOI from

12 the Republic of Macedonia." Is that correct?

13 A. Yes, yes.

14 Q. And it is numbered 376, dated 28 May 2003 and then if you could,

15 please, in the middle I believe it says: "Information" but could you read

16 that out, please, so that is a translated --

17 A. [Previous translation continues] ... Yes.

18 Q. [Previous translation continues] ...

19 A. Information for the activity that have been undertaken so far by

20 the committee for investigation into the circumstances and the factual

21 situation according to the events and things that have happened in the

22 village of Ljuboten.

23 Q. Now in paragraph 4 of your statement, you actually detail a

24 procedure that you had with respect to generating these informations --

25 THE INTERPRETER: Microphones.

1 Q. -- can I ask you, is the same procedure that have you already

2 detailed in your same statement is the same procedure utilised by you in

3 generating this information?

4 A. This information represented an intersection of a given period for

5 what was it that the committee was working on, and inside there is the

6 content that deals with what the committee plans to do in the future.

7 Q. Can I stop you there. When you said "inside," is that at point 2

8 on page 2?

9 A. No, I mean in the content of the information.

10 Q. Okay. Can I direct your attention to page 2.2. Does this

11 particular point talk about the -- the plans that the commission has after

12 this meeting and what they're going to undertake?

13 A. No.

14 Q. At some point during this meeting was there a discussion about

15 the -- what tasks the commission was going to take?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. And --

18 A. It is in the paragraph 3.

19 Q. And could you read that paragraph for us so that we have a

20 translation.

21 A. "Based upon the activities undertaken so far, some of the

22 committee members at a meeting held on 30th of May in 2003, agree that it

23 is necessary to invite Johan Tarculovski again for an interview."

24 Q. Thank you. And my question to you earlier was: You had indicated

25 in your statement that you would take notes at the commission meetings and

1 then those notes would then be put into an information. Is that the same

2 procedure that you utilised for this particular information?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. And the notes that you took at these meetings, were those notes

5 taken contemporaneously with what was happening at the meetings?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. And following up on that --

8 MS. MOTOIKE: Actually, Your Honours, could we please mark THIS

9 for identification at this point?

10 JUDGE PARKER: It will be marked.

11 THE REGISTRAR: That will be P435, marked for identification.

12 MS. MOTOIKE: Thank you.

13 Q. Following up on that last point that you just made, Ms. Groseva,

14 about the intention of the commission, did the commission then meet again

15 in November of 2003?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. And, actually, in paragraphs 4 and 6 of your statement you speak

18 of these additional meetings by the commission in November 2003, and you

19 also refer to some documents.

20 If I could show you those, please. One of them being P00379,

21 which is marked for identification. It's at tab 10 of today's binder.

22 I'm sorry, it is P00379, 65 ter 285.7 in e-court, pages 19 through

23 20.

24 Q. Ms. Groseva, do you see the document that is before you. At the

25 very top left-hand corner it says: "Republic of Macedonia, Ministry of

1 Interior, number 824," it is dated 12 November 2003. And then in --

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. In the middle it says: "Minutes of a meeting of the commission

4 for inquiry into the events and incidents in Ljuboten village." It goes

5 on to state that: "On 12 November 2003 at 1400 hours a meeting was held

6 at the Ministry of the Interior for members of the commission for inquiry

7 into the events and incidents in Ljuboten village. And

8 Mr. Johan Tarculovski and his attorney, Mr. Simeon Dvojakov."

9 Do you see that?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. And do you recognise this particular document?

12 A. Yes.

13 MS. MOTOIKE: If we could please turn to page 2 in both documents

14 in e-court.

15 Q. In the bottom of this page here, Ms. Groseva, it says: "Statement

16 given by," and it says: "Johan Tarculovski" and there's a signature and

17 then to the right there it says: "President of the commission,

18 Major-General Zoran Jovanovski" and there is a signature there. Do you

19 see that?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. And do you recognise both of those signatures?

22 A. Not those signatures.

23 Q. Did you generate this particular -- these minutes?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. And is this a record of a statement made by Johan Tarculovski that

1 you speak of in paragraph 6 of your witness statement?

2 A. Yes. That is from the second interview with Mr. Johan Tarculovski

3 that was led by the committee.

4 Q. And so this would be taken in relation to a third meeting by the

5 committee?

6 A. Yes.

7 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Apostolski.

8 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I would not like to

9 interfere with my colleague's work while she is interviewing the witness

10 but I would like to point out that in the -- in the minutes, again, we

11 have the issue of interview translated as interview and on page 33, line

12 19, there also -- page 26, lines 5 and 6. So I would like to ask the

13 interpreters when the witness answers "discussion" to be interpreted with

14 the appropriate word in English.

15 Thank you.

16 JUDGE PARKER: [Previous translation continues] ...

17 MS. MOTOIKE:

18 Q. Ms. Groseva, you indicated in paragraph 6 of your statement that

19 this particular document was prepared immediately after the commission

20 meeting, during which this statement was made. Did you follow the same

21 procedures that you have already told us about and outlined in your

22 witness statement in taking these minutes?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. And were these minutes an accurate reflection of what was said by

25 Johan Tarculovski at that time?

1 A. If he has signed, I can only assume that it does reflect the

2 truth.

3 Q. I guess my question was more -- when you took these minutes so

4 when you took these minutes you were taking these minutes

5 contemporaneously with -- at the time that the statement was made. Is

6 that my understanding?

7 A. After the interview was completed with Mr. Tarculovski, in the

8 presence of his attorney, before he left, these minutes were prepared.

9 Q. And they were prepared by you?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. And then at some point did you then see the statement being

12 signed?

13 A. I cannot recall.

14 Q. When this statement was being taken, do you recall whether or not

15 there were any objections to the taking of this particular statement by

16 Johan Tarculovski or his lawyer?

17 A. No. As it was in the original, as it was written, that's how it

18 was signed as well.

19 Q. So do you recall any objections posed by his lawyer or

20 Mr. Tarculovski himself?

21 A. To the best of my knowledge, no.

22 Q. You indicated earlier that sometimes summons were issued to

23 particular individuals. Can I ask you: At this particular meeting, was

24 Mr. Tarculovski summoned?

25 A. Yes.

1 Q. Okay.

2 MS. MOTOIKE: Could we please show P00379; it's marked for

3 identification. It's at 65 ter 285.9 in e-court, page 22. It's at tab 8

4 of today's binder.

5 Q. Ms. Groseva, have you seen this document before?

6 A. The general power of attorney from the attorney?

7 Q. Yes. If I can just run through --

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. Thank you. If I could just run through the top it says: "An

10 Attorneys office, Simeon Dvojakov, D-v-o-j-a-k-o-v." And in the middle

11 there will it says: "Universal power of attorney." And it says: "I, the

12 undersigned, Johan Tarculovski from Skopje," goes on to say: "Hereby give

13 a universal power of attorney to Simeon Dvojakov, attorney at law." Do

14 you see that?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. And then it says: "Power of attorney given by Johan Tarculovski"

17 and there's a signature.

18 Is this the same attorney, Ms. Groseva, who represented

19 Mr. Tarculovski at the meetings in November 2003?

20 A. [No interpretation].

21 Q. And is this particular document part of the documents that you saw

22 in your capacity as a member of this commission?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. Okay. And could we please show P00379, marked for identification,

25 65 ter 285.8 in e-court, page 21.

1 Ms. Groseva, you indicated that in the meetings in November 2003

2 Mr. Tarculovski was summonsed. Can I ask you to take a look at this

3 particular document that's being displayed at the very top it says:

4 "Receipt." It says: "Today on 12 November 2003 at 1400 hours, I

5 received summons number 10-239, dated 12 November 2003 from Ministry of

6 Interior requesting that I report on 12 November 2003 at 1400 hours."

7 Goes on to say: "I was advise of my right to engage a lawyer. I

8 was warned of the consequences pursuant to Article 142, paragraph 3, of

9 the Law on Criminal Procedure." And then it says: "Served by and received

10 by," and there's two signatures. Do you see that?

11 A. [No interpretation]

12 Q. And, Ms. Groseva, have you seen this document before?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. And when did you see it?

15 A. It -- it was given to the committee by the colleague that was

16 actually -- delivered actual summons.

17 Q. And apart from this advisement here in the receipt, it says:

18 "Advised of my right to engage a lawyer," apart from that advisement,

19 were any other advisements provided to the persons who the commission

20 interviewed in 2003?

21 A. No.

22 JUDGE PARKER: Is that a convenient time, Ms. Motoike?

23 MS. MOTOIKE: Yes. Thank you, Your Honour.

24 JUDGE PARKER: We will have the first break now, return at a

25 quarter past 4.00.

1 --- Recess taken at 3.42 p.m.

2 --- On resuming at 4.16 p.m.

3 JUDGE PARKER: Ms. Motoike.

4 MS. MOTOIKE: Thank you.

5 Could we go back to one exhibit, please. Tab 10 of today's

6 binders, and it is -- P00379, marked for identification, 65 ter 285.7 in

7 e-court, pages 19 through 20.

8 Q. Ms. Groseva, this is one of the documents that we looked at right

9 before the break, and it's the minutes that you indicated you took. Could

10 I ask you: Did the commission give Mr. Tarculovski an opportunity to

11 review this prior to signing?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. And was everyone interviewed by the commission given opportunities

14 to sign -- to review their Official Notes before signing?

15 A. I apologise, I'm not sure whether the translation was proper.

16 Q. Well, I can move on. I'm actually going to show you a couple of

17 those.

18 You indicated in your statement from this time-period of 12

19 November through 20 November 2003, that the commission actually conducted

20 other interviews with individuals on different days. Were you present at

21 those interviews as well?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. And with respect to those interviews, did you maintain the same

24 role and that is, basically, to take the notes?

25 A. Yes.

1 Q. And again, with respect to these additional interviews, were you

2 taking the notes contemporaneously with the proceedings; that is, at the

3 time the persons were making the statements?

4 A. Yes.

5 MS. MOTOIKE: If I could please show the witness P00379, marked

6 for identification, 65 ter 285.11. It's at page 25 in e-court. Tab 11 of

7 today's binders.

8 Q. Ms. Groseva, the top of this document says: "Ministry of the

9 Interior of the Republic of Macedonia," down below that it says:

10 "Submitted by Staff-Sergeant Miodrag Stojanovski." It is dated 20

11 November 2003. It's entitled: "Official Note" and then there's a

12 paragraph that goes on to describe some events on the 25th of July, 2001.

13 Do you see -- have you seen this particular note before?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. Does this note look like the one that was submitted by

16 Miodrag Stojanovski to the commission?

17 A. This is the note submitted by Miodrag Stojanovski.

18 Q. And do you know, were these Official Notes produced immediately

19 after Mr. Stojanovski spoke with the commission?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. Okay. It references here on the bottom, the second-to-last

22 sentence: "The list of volunteers issued with weapons is enclosed in the

23 attachment."

24 Do you recall receiving an attachment at that time as a member of

25 the commission?

1 A. Not on the same day when we had the meeting, but after several

2 days such lists were submitted.

3 Q. Okay. And what was your understanding as to what the list

4 contained?

5 A. I just attached the lists to the file and they contained

6 information about the issuance and return of weapons and equipment, but I

7 couldn't say anything more specific about that.

8 Q. Okay.

9 MS. MOTOIKE: Could we also show P00379, marked for

10 identification, 65 ter 285.13, in e-court pages 28 through 37. It's at

11 tab 12 of today's binders.

12 Q. Ms. Groseva, what's appearing on the screen here is a handwritten

13 document in the Macedonian language with the English translation to the

14 left. At the very top it says: "Ministry of Internal Affairs of the

15 Republic of Macedonia." Goes on to state a date of 19 November 2001. In

16 the middle it says: "Official Note." And it says: "Subject, the events

17 at Ljuboten."

18 Could we go to the last page in English, please, which is page 5,

19 I believe. And the last page in Macedonian, which ends in 8936.

20 Ms. Groseva, you have the hard copy of the Macedonian language

21 while we're waiting for the e-court display. At the very bottom it

22 says --

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. -- at the very bottom it says: "Submitter," and it says:

25 "Ljube Krstevski." Do you see that?

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. And again is this also an Official Note that you, as the member of

3 the commission received during the interviews of Ljube Krstevski?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Okay.

6 MS. MOTOIKE: Could we please show next tab 13, which is P00379,

7 marked for identification, in e-court it is 65 ter 285.12, pages 26

8 through 27.

9 Q. And, Ms. Groseva, and this document is handwritten in the

10 Macedonian language. It might be a little hard to read on the screen so

11 the hard copy is in front of you. It says: "MOI of RM dated 19 November

12 2003." Again in the middle it says: "Official Note; subject, events that

13 took place in the village of Ljuboten in 2001." And then it goes on to

14 speak of tasks and duties on Sunday.

15 And then if we could turn to page 2 in both documents, please.

16 The note then goes on to speak of a particular vehicle and being

17 at the Chinese wall near Ljuboten village and at the very bottom it says:

18 "Submitted by" and then there's a signature. And the translation it is

19 illegible. But could you tell me, have you seen this particular note

20 before?

21 A. Yes. This is one of my colleagues who we have interviewed,

22 Ginovski Vanco [phoen].

23 Q. And, again, this note was it taken in relation to the commission's

24 interviews that were conducted in November 2003?

25 A. Yes.

1 Q. Okay.

2 MS. MOTOIKE: Could we also show what's been marked for

3 identification as P00379, in e-court it is 65 ter 285.14, pages 38 through

4 39.

5 Q. And, Ms. Groseva, this is again a handwritten document in the

6 Macedonian language. At the very top it says: "MVR Ministry of Interior"

7 and then it says: "Submitted by Vladomir Cagorovic" and it's dated 19

8 November 2003. In the middle it's entitled, Official Note. And it says:

9 "Subject, report on my work engagement during the events in Ljuboten

10 village in 2001." And then it goes on to say: "At the request of the

11 commission investigating the events in Ljuboten village of Ljuboten on 12

12 August 2001, I hereby submit the following report on my work engagement

13 during the events."

14 Do you see that, Ms. Groseva?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. And then if you look at page 2 in both documents, there's a

17 signature at the bottom. Do you see that as well?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. And with respect to this Official Note, is this also one of the

20 Official Notes that you received as part of the interviews that were

21 conducted in November of 2003 by the commission?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. In paragraph 4 of your statement, you indicate that after these

24 interviews were conducted, you produced a single information in agreement

25 with the rest of the members of the commission.

1 MS. MOTOIKE: Could we please show Exhibit P00379, marked for

2 identification, in e-court it is 65 ter 285.6, pages ten through 18.

3 And this particular document, Ms. Groseva, is entitled:

4 "Information on the activities undertaken by the investigation committee

5 about the events and happenings in the village Ljuboten." And up in the

6 corner, left-hand corner of both documents it is says: "Ministry of

7 Internal Affairs of the Republic of Macedonia, number 871 and it's dated

8 25 November 2003."

9 In the first paragraph it goes on to say that: "In the period

10 from 12 November to 20 November 2005," I believe the English translation

11 should be 2003 as I see the Macedonian says 2003, "members of the

12 investigation committee about the events and happenings in the village

13 Ljuboten held three meetings at which conversations were held with persons

14 for whom within the framework of the previously undertaken activities

15 information was obtained that took part in the events in the village

16 Ljuboten. That is, the same persons have information about the persons

17 that took part in the armed activities in the village Ljuboten, as well as

18 for the course of events and happenings in this village."

19 Do you see that?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. And do you recognise this as being the information that you

22 ultimately produced?

23 A. [No interpretation].

24 Q. And the document is a little lengthy, Ms. Groseva, so I would ask

25 you to use the hard copy that is in front of you. And as you look through

1 the document could you please just take a look at all the pages and note

2 the persons that are listed on the pages in which there's information

3 regarding statements taken from them. Do you see that within the

4 document?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. And with respect to this particular information, again, was the

7 same procedure that you utilised in your previous informations used here,

8 and that is to say, did you take notes again at the same time the

9 statements were being made and then you ultimately put it into the

10 information?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. You also indicated in your statement that after you had finished

13 the information it would then be, for lack of a better word, circulated or

14 given to other members of the commission to be reviewed for accuracy. Is

15 that what happened to this particular document?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. And then eventually, can you tell us, was this document submitted

18 to the Minister of Internal Affairs?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. And is the information contained in this document accurate as to

21 what you -- as to the notes that you took with respect to the proceedings

22 and the statements that people made during these interviews?

23 A. I am taking their statements down completely, but you do not put

24 everything into the information. The more important parts are included so

25 there could be a difference between their Official Note and the

1 information, but this is why other members of the committee are there who

2 are present and who approving this document.

3 Q. Okay. So from that, I take it that you took the notes and then

4 put it into the information and then it went to all the commission members

5 to review. Is that my understanding?

6 A. Yes. And no transcript is made, in stenographic sense. So the

7 important parts of the statements are entered into the information.

8 Q. And then each person who is interviewed is also -- an employee

9 with the MOI is also asked to produce an Official Note as well. Is that

10 my understanding?

11 A. Yes. Upon request of the members of the committee, all colleagues

12 produced Official Notes immediately after the interviews. This is why

13 they are handwritten and, sincerely speaking, some are very difficult to

14 read. But that was then immediately after the interviews.

15 Q. Okay. And also incorporated in this information are statements

16 that were obtained from Johan Tarculovski during the interview in November

17 2003?

18 A. That is on the first page.

19 Q. So they're contained in the --

20 A. Of the information, yes. Yes.

21 Q. So if a person who was interviewed is a non-Ministry of Interior

22 employee, that is a civilian, then would it be safe to say that minutes

23 are produced, like the ones that we saw for Mr. Tarculovski?

24 A. Yes. Since already during the second interrogation

25 Mr. Tarculovski first indicated that he is no longer an employee of the

1 Ministry of Interior, and this is why minutes were produced regarding his

2 statement.

3 Q. Okay. Lastly in paragraph 7 of your statement, you indicated that

4 copies of each document produced by the commission was provided to

5 Besim Ramicevic. Was Mr. Ramicevic also a member of the same commission?

6 A. Yes.

7 MS. MOTOIKE: Could we please show what has been marked for

8 identification as P00251, and I believe this is under seal, so I'd ask

9 that it not be published. It's at 65 ter 250 in e-court.

10 This is tab 16 of today's binders.

11 Q. And, Ms. Groseva, this document in the upper left-hand corner

12 says: "Republic of Macedonia, Ministry of Interior, it is dated 16 June

13 2003. It's addressed to the office of the International Criminal Tribunal

14 for the former Yugoslavia, Skopje." And then it says: "Regarding report

15 on activities to date concerning the investigation into events in the

16 village of Ljuboten."

17 Do you see that?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. And without reading any of the paragraphs aloud, Ms. Groseva, just

20 draw your attention to page 2 of the document in Macedonian, paragraph

21 4 --

22 MS. MOTOIKE: Could we go to that in e-court, please. That's page

23 1 of English still.

24 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

25 MS. MOTOIKE:

1 Q. And do you see the fourth paragraph on this document. It has

2 reference to a date of 5 May 2003. Do you see that, Ms. Groseva?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Okay. And are you able to -- without reading it aloud, are you

5 able to see the contents of that particular paragraph?

6 MS. MOTOIKE: The corresponding paragraph in English is the

7 last paragraph of page 1. And it carries over to page 2 in the English,

8 if we could go to that page, please.

9 Q. Is this -- the information that's contained in this particular

10 paragraph, if we could just pull up to the top of the page in English,

11 please. Does that correspond or at least contain similar information to

12 the information that was in your report -- not your report, but the

13 commission's report dated 5 -- 6 May 2003?

14 A. 5th of May, you mean.

15 Q. The report that was generated by the commission. Is this

16 information in this paragraph?

17 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters could not hear what the witness

18 said. It was simultaneous with the counsel.

19 MS. MOTOIKE:

20 Q. Sorry. Ms. Groseva, let me be a little bit more clear. The

21 information contained in the paragraphs here on this particular page are

22 they similar to the information that was contained in the report from the

23 commission dated 6 May 2003?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. And how about the lower paragraphs, meaning the bottom paragraphs

1 of this particular page.

2 MS. MOTOIKE: If we could scroll down in the English as well too.

3 And, actually, it is on page 3 of the Macedonian.

4 Q. Do you see this paragraph the second -- well, the first full

5 paragraph on the page in Macedonian, the bottom of the page in English,

6 indicates lists of names and persons. Do you see that, Ms. Groseva?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. Okay. Is this information also similar to the information that

9 has been provided in the report -- or the information that's dated 28 May

10 2003?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. Ms. Groseva, did the commission, to your knowledge, act

13 independently, that is without any influence of any other persons or

14 institutions?

15 A. I can speak for myself as a commission member, that I was not

16 under any pressure or threats when doing the work. But I'm speaking as

17 one of the members. I could not speak on behalf of the other members.

18 Q. Okay.

19 MS. MOTOIKE: Your Honours, thank you. I have nothing further.

20 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you very much, Ms. Motoike.

21 Ms. Residovic.

22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I apologise.

23 JUDGE PARKER: [Previous translation continues] ...

24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Could we have a five-minutes break,

25 just a short one?

1 JUDGE PARKER: I think we need to do that, Ms. Residovic.

2 We will adjourn and resume at ten minutes to.

3 --- Break taken at 4.43 p.m.

4 --- On resuming at 4.51 p.m.

5 JUDGE PARKER: Before you commence, Ms. Residovic.

6 Ms. Groseva, we have been informed that you are not feeling

7 well and would feel that you need to have an opportunity to rest and

8 recover overnight. Is that the situation?

9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honours. Before I arrived

10 here, I had 20 days of sick-leave. I have a serious problem with my

11 shoulder, but I promised that I will come here and I came here.

12 Yesterday, I arrived at 2200 hours. Today I was busy since 9.00

13 so I already have unbearable pain in my shoulder and sincerely speaking, I

14 am losing my focus. I can't fully follow the trial. This is why I would

15 like to ask you if that is possible to make a break.

16 JUDGE PARKER: Ms. Residovic, you've heard the situation. Is

17 there anything particular submission you would make?

18 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] No, Your Honours. We fully

19 appreciate the reasons that the witness indicated.

20 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you. Very well.

21 We will adjourn now and we will resume tomorrow at 2.15. So that

22 should give you quite an opportunity to rest and, we hope, fully recover.

23 Thank you, Ms. Residovic.

24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I thank you as well.

25 JUDGE PARKER: We adjourn now.

1 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 4.55 p.m.,

2 to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 11th day of

3 September, 2007, at 2.15 p.m.

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25