1 Wednesday, 1 June 2005

2 [Open session]

3 [The accused entered court]

4 --- Upon commencing at 2.21 p.m.

5 JUDGE PARKER: If the witness could be brought in.

6 While that is happening, could I just mention to guide and assist

7 counsel that on this Friday it will be necessary for the Chamber to

8 adjourn at about 12.30 rather than 1.45.

9 [The witness entered court]

10 JUDGE PARKER: And on Monday, the 6th of June, it will be

11 necessary to adjourn at about 5.45. There will be yet another special

12 meeting of Judges to consider proposals to change court procedures, so we

13 will have to shorten the hearings on those two days for that purpose.

14 Good afternoon, Mr. Sopi. If I could remind you that the

15 affirmation you made at the beginning of your evidence still applies.

16 The court officer will switch on your microphones and we'll be ready to

17 go.

18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't understand the translation.

19 JUDGE PARKER: Are we tuned into the correct channel for the

20 witness? Could you just check.

21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

22 JUDGE PARKER: Is that better now?

23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

24 JUDGE PARKER: Could I say that I did remind you that the

25 affirmation you made at the beginning of your evidence still applies.

1 Mr. Nicholls.

2 MR. NICHOLLS: Thank you, Your Honours.

3 WITNESS: ELMI SOPI [Resumed]

4 [Witness answered through interpreter]

5 Cross-examined by Mr. Nicholls:

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. Mr. Sopi, I'm going to ask you a few questions now, not too many.

8 The same as yesterday, we need to speak a little bit slowly to allow for

9 the interpretation. And if you have any problems understanding my

10 questions or hearing me through the headphones, let us know right away.

11 A. Yes, it is clear to me.

12 Q. You went over your background in the questioning by Mr. Mansfield

13 in some detail and I just want to go over that again a little bit. You

14 were born in Lapusnik. Correct?

15 A. Yes, that's correct.

16 Q. And I gather that other than your military service and brief

17 periods working abroad, you've lived most of your life in Lapusnik?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. And in the same house. Is that right?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. And today, you still have an extended family in Lapusnik, don't

22 you?

23 A. Yes, that's correct.

24 Q. You also talked about how life in Lapusnik was very hard under

25 the Serb oppression before the war?

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. Not just in Lapusnik but in Kosovo?

3 A. That's correct.

4 Q. And you came to the conclusion, the people, that the only way out

5 of this oppression was to fight?

6 A. Yes. That was the only way out.

7 Q. And the only ones to fight at that time were the KLA?

8 A. There was no other possibility.

9 Q. That's right. And speaking now about Lapusnik. The whole

10 population of Lapusnik supported the KLA from May 1998 onwards, didn't

11 they?

12 A. That's correct. Every KLA member was like a family member to

13 people in Lapusnik.

14 Q. And it goes without saying that the entire Sopi family always

15 supported the KLA in Lapusnik?

16 A. Not only the Sopi family, but Gashi, Thaqi, Krasniqi families.

17 All families that were in Lapusnik supported the KLA as if they were

18 their own family members.

19 Q. That's right. Letting KLA members stay in your homes?

20 A. In all houses starting from the school at Lapusnik and to the

21 school in Kishna Reka. All this was a KLA military barracks. Due to

22 difficult circumstances and continuous shelling, it was necessary to

23 change the places where they rested. It wasn't safe to stay just in one

24 house.

25 Q. And you're proud of your service in the KLA, aren't you, your

1 help to the KLA?

2 A. Yes, I'm proud.

3 Q. You yourself were a member of the Pellumbi unit?

4 A. I was in Celiku unit in the beginning but in the end of June I

5 went to Pellumbi unit.

6 Q. And your son was a member of Celiku 3?

7 A. Of the KLA, yes, but he was in Celiku 3 unit.

8 Q. Could you just tell me if he had a pseudonym in 1998?

9 A. No, he didn't have one.

10 Q. And because of their defence of Lapusnik, you've described the

11 KLA members who came from outside of Lapusnik as holy and as sacred.

12 Correct? You did that yesterday.

13 A. Yes, that's correct. This is what I said and it goes not only

14 for me but for the entire population of Lapusnik, because as I mentioned

15 yesterday the Serbs came to our thresholds and they, the KLA, were there

16 to rescue the population and that's why they were sacred. The population

17 was scared, seeing what had happened in Likoshan, Qirez, and Prekaz.

18 Q. All right. Thank you. Could you tell me the name of your son

19 who was in Celiku 3?

20 A. His name is Bekim Sopi.

21 Q. And yesterday you described the three accused in this case as

22 friends; that's how you view them, isn't it?

23 A. Yes. Comrades in arms. I didn't know Fatmir and Isak Musliu

24 before 9th of May. As for Haradin, I knew him from my childhood.

25 Q. The people in Lapusnik follow this trial pretty closely in the

1 media, don't they?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. It's in the papers almost every day as well as being on

4 television.

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. And we didn't get this yesterday I don't think in your

7 background, but you're currently in the TMK. Is that right?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. Can you just tell us what your position is.

10 A. I am the commander of the transport battalion and my rank is a

11 major.

12 Q. I want to ask you now just a couple of questions about the

13 Pellumbi unit, make sure I'm clear. You joined the Pellumbi Unit, the

14 north side of the Pristina-Peja road, in June?

15 A. Yes, in the end of June. I don't remember the date, but it was

16 in the end of June.

17 Q. And until 26th of July, then you were with that Pellumbi unit

18 working shifts at your assigned position?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. And when your shift was done, whether it was day or night, you

21 would walk back to your house on the other side of the road to sleep?

22 A. Yes, because my house was nearby and that's why I always went to

23 sleep in my house.

24 Q. And the KLA fought in Lapusnik until 26th July, when all of the

25 soldiers and the population were forced to quickly flee into the hills?

1 A. That's correct.

2 Q. And the people unfortunately had to leave virtually everything

3 behind. Correct?

4 A. Everything they had they left behind. Some old men who were not

5 -- who were unable to leave remained in their houses, and the Serb forces

6 found them in their houses. There's a person called Bajram Gashi who was

7 killed in his house and whose body was burned. He was of the age 85 or

8 86.

9 Q. And the soldiers also had to leave very quickly and bring almost

10 nothing with them?

11 A. That's correct. There wasn't any possibility to take anything

12 with them. I mentioned yesterday as well that on that day the Lapusnik

13 gorge was attacked by 140 cannons -- correction, tanks. They used

14 cannons, hand-held rocket launchers. I don't know the name of the

15 equipment because I'm not a military person; therefore, for them it

16 wasn't possible for them to take anything with them.

17 Q. I want to ask you now about a man named Ruzhdi Karpuzi who came

18 to Lapusnik around the 9th of May. Do you know him?

19 A. Yes, I know Ruzhdi Karpuzi very well. I know that he came to

20 Lapusnik but I don't remember the date when he came. I don't know the

21 date, but I know Ruzhdi. He had problems with his leg and to my

22 knowledge and what I was told by my friend, Ruzhdi injured the same leg

23 on the 26th of July and is an invalid.

24 Q. That's right. When he came to Lapusnik he was suffering because

25 of an injury he'd had before the war and he had a bad limp, didn't he, to

1 he was allowed to do some lighter duty in Lapusnik?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. And what he did was keep records in the oda of Gzim Gashi's

4 compound, the same compound where you would eat your meals in June and

5 July?

6 A. I can't tell you what he did, but as the number of the KLA

7 soldiers grew bigger in Lapusnik, he began to take notes, to keep records

8 of soldiers who were coming to Lapusnik in order to prepare a report that

9 was necessary for guard duty.

10 Q. Thank you. And my point is: Part of the reason he didn't that,

11 isn't it, is because you describe the work going on, ditches being dug.

12 Correct?

13 A. The reason was that he stayed there during calm days; however,

14 when there was fighting going on I always saw him at positions as well,

15 fighting.

16 Q. Okay.

17 A. Because there was no need for him to keep records that much.

18 There were only 24, 25 soldiers at that time. And as I said, this number

19 grew bigger later on.

20 Q. All right. Haradin Bala, you've personally known him since

21 childhood?

22 A. Yes, I know him.

23 Q. And besides that, your family has close family ties with his

24 family. You talked about -- I'm not sure if I remember correctly, your

25 -- yeah.

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. You described yesterday seeing him in Lapusnik. My question is:

3 Did he take part in an intense -- in fighting between the 17th and 19th

4 of May or was he too sick?

5 A. I don't remember.

6 Q. You don't remember whether he took part in an intense 17-hour

7 fire-fight during those days?

8 A. I said that there was such an intense fighting on the 29th of

9 May, not on the 17th to 19th of May.

10 Q. I know that's what you said. I'm asking you about the 17th to

11 19th.

12 A. I don't remember saying 17th or 19th of May. What I said was

13 that I saw him on the 29th [Realtime transcript read in error: "19th"] of

14 May when Kumanova called Haradin Bala and asked him, Why are you here and

15 you should come with me to Luznica. This is what I said; I did not

16 mention 17th or 19th because I don't remember the dates seven years after

17 the events. One can remember some more important dates as the 9th of May

18 or 26th of July. However, I cannot remember other dates. The 29th of

19 May for me is a date easily remembered because the fighting went on for

20 17 hours.

21 Q. Right. And you're right, Mr. Sopi, you said "29th" yesterday. I

22 was asking you about the 17th and 19th as well. What kind of car did

23 Haradin Bala have? You said you saw him with a car.

24 A. I don't know.

25 Q. You have no idea?

1 MR. GUY-SMITH: Excuse me, I don't -- I apologise for

2 interrupting. However, I believe there's a minor mistake on line 12 of

3 page 8. It should be the 29th of May, not the 19th of May.

4 MR. NICHOLLS: Correct. Thank you.

5 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.

6 MR. NICHOLLS:

7 Q. You said that Haradin Bala moved his family to Bajice. How did

8 he move them there?

9 A. In Baince, not Bajice. He moved his family to Baince. This is a

10 village situated between Nekovce and Sedlare, or Shale.

11 Q. Sorry, I'm not very good with the pronunciations. But how did he

12 move them there was the question.

13 A. I wasn't with him. I heard that Haradin moved his family. And

14 when you're asking me about his car, I mentioned yesterday that I saw him

15 in August 1998 in Novoselle and he had a Lada vehicle. Whether this Lada

16 was his or belonged to his friends, this I don't know.

17 Q. All right. You said yesterday that Fatmir Limaj rarely came to

18 Lapusnik and when he came he came to fight. Do you remember saying that?

19 The question is just: Do you remember saying that.

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. Now, you met with the Defence before coming here to testify.

22 Correct? And there's nothing wrong with that. I just want to know

23 whether you met with the Defence before you testified.

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. And you tried to give them some sense of what you were going to

1 testify to. Correct? You told them your story as completely and

2 accurately as you could.

3 A. This is correct. What I remember and know, I have the honour to

4 say that before this Honoured Trial Chamber.

5 Q. Thank you. Now, they gave us a summary of what you are expected

6 to testify to and I just want to read you part of it.

7 "The witness will testify that he has seen the accused Fatmir

8 Limaj on 9 May in Lapusnik. After the fighting, the accused Fatmir Limaj

9 left to return in the company of Kumanova twice when the fighting

10 continued."

11 Now, that's an entirely correct statement, isn't it, of when you

12 saw Fatmir Limaj in Lapusnik between May and July 1998?

13 A. I said that I had seen him seven or eight times. On 9th of May I

14 talked with Fatmir Limaj after the Serb forces withdrew. But I didn't

15 know him as Fatmir. However, I heard soldiers who were there calling him

16 Daja. I didn't see him with Kumanova on the 9th of May. I don't

17 remember seeing Kumanova. There were many soldiers there, but I don't

18 remember seeing him. I saw Kumanova on the 29th of May at Lapusnik.

19 Q. Well, what you told the Defence is that you saw Fatmir Limaj

20 three times. Right? On the 9th of May and then on two more occasions.

21 A. I'm telling you that maybe I have said that. Maybe the

22 translation was not correct, but what I said was that I saw him more than

23 three times, seven or eight times. As I explained yesterday, on

24 Saturdays and Sundays, when international organisations operating in

25 Kosova at that time were on holidays, the Serb forces took advantage of

1 this and attacked us on the weekends. This is what I said. I don't

2 remember saying that I've seen him three times. I remember saying that

3 I've seen him seven or eight times and I always saw him at positions and

4 in my house.

5 Q. And the main fighting, as you've said, was on the 9th of May,

6 29th of May, and 26th of July. That's three times, isn't it?

7 A. That's correct.

8 Q. Now, did you hear about an oath ceremony in June?

9 A. Yes. I don't remember the date but I know very well.

10 Q. That was in Bali Vojvoda's compound?

11 A. Yes, that's correct.

12 Q. Who told you about it?

13 A. I was present there.

14 Q. And you saw Fatmir Limaj there giving a speech then?

15 A. Yes, I saw him. It wasn't a speech but he read the text of the

16 oath. This lasted for 15 or 20 minutes and then we dispersed. Those who

17 were on duty went back to their duties, to their positions; and those who

18 were not on duty, they went back to the houses where they were resting.

19 Fatmir went to his own way.

20 Q. Okay.

21 MR. NICHOLLS: One moment, Your Honour.

22 [Prosecution counsel confer]

23 MR. NICHOLLS:

24 Q. That place, Bali Vojvoda 's compound where the oath ceremony took

25 place is across the road from Gzim Gashi's compound, correct? Not

1 directly across but across the street.

2 A. Yes, that's correct.

3 Q. And -- I forgot to ask you, did you have a pseudonym May, June,

4 July?

5 A. No.

6 Q. Now, you know there's another compound directly across the street

7 from Gzim Gashi's compound. Right?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. Directly across from the kitchen where you ate every day?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. In June and July, you saw soldiers, KLA soldiers, going in and

12 out of that compound, didn't you?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. And this is the compound next to Bali Vojvoda's?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. You know that that compound was used as a prison by the KLA

17 before the 26th of July when Lapusnik fell?

18 A. I heard about this only after the arrest of my friends, about

19 this group of houses. When I saw KFOR forces, which surrounded the

20 entire neighbourhood, I asked in the neighbourhood what was going on, and

21 that's where I found out that that house was supposed to have served as a

22 prison. Secondly, I would like to tell this Court that I have filmed my

23 house, which served as a KLA warehouse. I have filmed Ferat Sopi's

24 house. I have filmed the sheltering place in my house and the KLA

25 Gulinov that was seized. The Serb forces filmed all this and I wonder

1 why they didn't film the house of my neighbour and those alleged traces.

2 Q. When exactly was your house a warehouse, used as a warehouse?

3 A. In my house that I marked yesterday with number 1. I have

4 brought pictures with me; the Defence lawyers have them. I brought

5 pictures of my house, how it was burned after the war. You can see

6 clearly the sheltering place --

7 Q. Stop. My question is: When was your house used as a KLA

8 warehouse? When?

9 A. As I said, from 9th of May until the 26th, everything, food

10 supplies, everything remained behind. My house was burned five or six

11 days later. Other houses in Lapusnik were not burned on the 25th or 26th

12 of July. Only the outpatient clinic. The houses of Ferat Sopi and Afrim

13 Sopi. The other houses were not burned. The other houses were burned

14 after 20 days.

15 Q. You've answered my question about when. You knew yourself during

16 the summer of 1998 when you were eating at Gzim Gashi's kitchen that

17 there was a prison across the road. Did you ever go into that compound?

18 A. No.

19 Q. You've answered the question. You know that Haradin Bala was a

20 guard at that prison?

21 A. No, I don't know.

22 Q. You saw him coming to pick up food at Gzim Gashi's compound. Did

23 you think he was picking it up for soldiers or for prisoners? What did

24 he tell you?

25 A. Who? Who are you referring to? Haradin?

1 Q. Haradin Bala picking up food at Gzim Gashi's compound, did he

2 tell you it was for soldiers or prisoners or what? At Gzim Gashi's

3 kitchen.

4 A. This is not correct because Haradin Bala came and had his meals

5 together with other comrades and then went to his duty for the time he

6 was in Lapusnik. I didn't see Haradin Bala bringing food to someone

7 else.

8 Q. Okay. So your testimony is you ate with him in the kitchen in

9 Gzim Gashi's compound but you never saw him bringing food for other

10 people? Right?

11 A. No, I never saw him bringing food for other people.

12 Q. I'm not even going to talk about the Serb prisoners, but you know

13 there were Albanian men kept in that prison in atrocious conditions?

14 A. No, I don't know. As I said earlier, I heard about this only

15 after the arrest of my friends. And you cannot find a person at Lapusnik

16 who knows or who will tell you that there was a prison at Lapusnik

17 because it was difficult on the first front line, and we couldn't endure

18 them there ourselves, and -- let alone take prisoners. I never saw or

19 heard for such a prison until these men were arrested.

20 Q. Well, I'll agree with you that there's nobody in Lapusnik who

21 will tell us that there was a prison there. And I'll put it to you that

22 you know men were there, you know they were chained to the walls, you

23 know they were beaten, you know they were murdered. You didn't like it,

24 perhaps, but you couldn't do anything about it.

25 A. Listen, I didn't come here to lie. I came here and took the oath

1 before this Trial Chamber to tell the truth and nothing but the truth, to

2 tell you what I know. If you allow me, I will continue.

3 Q. I think you've answered, and I think you just can't tell the

4 truth about crimes committed in Lapusnik by people you consider sacred

5 and holy --

6 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Nicholls, it's not appropriate for you to put

7 your view of the witness to the witness.

8 MR. NICHOLLS: Correct.

9 Q. You can't tell the truth here about crimes committed by people

10 you consider sacred and holy?

11 MR. NICHOLLS: I have no further questions.

12 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.

13 Mr. Mansfield.

14 MR. MANSFIELD: Your Honour, just one matter that's arisen this

15 afternoon. He indicated that he'd taken photographs, and I think you

16 have them in batch 1. May I just check. You should have photocopies of

17 it -- sorry, it may be the wrong batch number -- sorry, batch 2, batch 2.

18 And if I may just show this bundle of photographs to the witness, please.

19 JUDGE PARKER: How does this arise, Mr. Mansfield?

20 MR. MANSFIELD: Well, he's asked -- he's been asked about

21 photographs that he took. We have them --

22 JUDGE PARKER: No, he hasn't been asked. He volunteered that he

23 had.

24 MR. MANSFIELD: Well, we have them. I'm not concerned -- I

25 didn't -- haven't introduced them so far --

1 JUDGE PARKER: That's the point I'm getting at. They came up not

2 in response to a question and they were not pursued in any way.

3 MR. MANSFIELD: Well, I'm perfectly happy not to pursue it --

4 JUDGE PARKER: If you want to re-open you can approach it that

5 way.

6 MR. MANSFIELD: No, no, I don't. Then I have no other questions.

7 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you very much.

8 Mr. Sopi, thank you very much. That concludes the questions that

9 are to be put to you. So you are now free to leave and return to your

10 home and other affairs. The court officer will show you out.

11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.

12 [The witness withdrew]

13 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Mansfield.

14 MR. MANSFIELD: Yes, if I may. The next witness hopefully again

15 is outside the door. Dr. Bajram Rexhepi, please.

16 JUDGE PARKER: I'm getting worried about it what you keep outside

17 the door, Mr. Mansfield.

18 MR. MANSFIELD: He should be there. It depends on what door you

19 mean. He should be there.

20 JUDGE PARKER: I don't want to mean you overlooked, Mr.

21 Guy-Smith, but I take it from what you were appearing that you had no

22 thought of re-examination of the witness.

23 MR. GUY-SMITH: I did not. I just wanted to make sure I was

24 communicating with the Chamber because at an early point my head was in

25 some papers and you had to call my name. So I want to make sure we're

1 working with each other.

2 JUDGE PARKER: We tend to get your signals.

3 MR. GUY-SMITH: Thank you very much.

4 [The witness entered court]

5 JUDGE PARKER: Good afternoon. Would you please take the card

6 that's offered to you and read the affirmation.

7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will

8 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

9 JUDGE PARKER: Please sit down.

10 Yes, Mr. Mansfield.

11 WITNESS: BAJRAM REXHEPI

12 [Witness answered through interpreter]

13 Examined by Mr. Mansfield:

14 Q. Good afternoon, Dr. Bajram Rexhepi. I represent Fatmir Limaj,

15 who sits behind me, as you know. May I just remind you that we need to

16 speak slowly for the interpreters, and so a pause is sometimes required

17 to allow the interpreter to finish what they have to say. I'd kindly ask

18 if you'd do the same.

19 Now, the first question I put in leading form because I think

20 there's no issue: By profession you are in fact a medical doctor. Is

21 that right?

22 A. Yes. I am a medical doctor, general surgery department.

23 Q. And are you currently a member of parliament in Kosovo?

24 A. Yes, I'm a member of Kosova parliament of the second political

25 group, according to the votes, and that is the Kosova Democratic Party.

1 Q. Between March of 2002 and December 2004, were you prime minister

2 of Kosovo?

3 A. Yes. To be more precise, from 4th of March, 2002, until 2nd of

4 December, 2004. A little bit less than four years -- than three years,

5 correction.

6 Q. During that time, did you know Fatmir Limaj?

7 A. Yes. I came to know Mr. Fatmir Limaj sometime in August 1999 and

8 mostly in September 1999 when we travelled to the United States for a

9 conference. And later on, during party activities and activities at the

10 parliament. And he was a close collaborator of mine.

11 Q. I ask you about the visit to the United States in September 1999.

12 What was that about?

13 A. The purpose of this visit was for some current leaders of Kosova

14 of the majority Albanian community and the Serbian community and other

15 minorities to go to a joint conference in order to establish human

16 relations between us and create conditions for joint future. To my

17 knowledge, at that time the Serbian community was not ready to

18 participate and they participated during the second conference in early

19 house [as interpreted] when we actually had representatives of the

20 Serbian ethnic community.

21 Q. And can I ask you who you met at this conference, yourself and

22 Fatmir Limaj?

23 A. We went together at this conference with Fatmir Limaj and with

24 others. The conference was organised by the peace institution of the

25 United States. We spent there several days. We came forward with our

1 proposals regarding the direction that Kosova should take in the future

2 and regarding the best ways of democratisation for Kosova. I think that

3 was a very important conference which resulted in fruitful conclusions.

4 Q. Was the conference attended by any representatives of the United

5 States government or the United Nations?

6 A. There were representatives of the American State Department, and

7 as I mentioned earlier representatives of the peace institute of the

8 United States and representatives of different associations. There were

9 also representatives, to my knowledge, of the UNMIK mission in Kosova,

10 but I don't remember their names. At that time, as far as I remember, it

11 was Jan Kickert and several other councillors of Mr. Kushner.

12 Q. I want to take you back to Kosovo from matters international and

13 ask you generally what Fatmir Limaj's role was in the post-war years.

14 A. As I said earlier, at the beginning of August or beginning of

15 September, I have known Fatmir Limaj. We were members of the same

16 political party. Initially it was called the Party of Democratic

17 Prosperity and later the name changed into the Democratic Party of

18 Kosova. At that time I was appointed chairman of the Mitrovice

19 municipality. And now and again we had contacts on a central level.

20 Fatmir Limaj was a young leader with a vision. He was very open, very

21 transparent, very close to us. And why not? He was dear to most of the

22 citizens of Kosova, not only to the members of the political party he

23 belonged, but in general. He was well-beloved and willing to help in

24 every respect we needed.

25 Q. Now, could you please elaborate on what you understood his vision

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 was.

2 A. His vision was that after bloody war in Kosova, a war where all

3 of us participated, myself too as a surgeon [realtime transcript read in

4 error: "searcher"] on account of our common ideal we should create a

5 calm environment where all the citizens of Kosova would be able to lead a

6 better life to democratise the life in Kosova and make it work in line

7 with the other states of Europe.

8 As to a longer-term vision, in addition to the independence of

9 Kosova, which was our common goal, we would gradually on the basis of the

10 implementation of several criteria over a longer-term period we become

11 part of the European Union. These were our objectives.

12 And we were all devoted to nondiscrimination of other

13 communities, as we were in the past, but to contribute for a free life

14 for all the citizens of Kosova and to provide to them a better

15 perspective. This is more or less in general about his vision because I

16 could elaborate it more if you want.

17 Q. Just before we move on there's a slight error. In line 25, page

18 19, "myself too as a searcher" I think it should read "surgeon." So if

19 that could be --

20 A. Yes, surgeon.

21 Q. Now, the question I want to ask you on the back of your answer is

22 how Fatmir Limaj set about the task of realising the vision, putting it

23 into effect.

24 A. As far as I know, initially he was a member of a provisional

25 council which was formed by the special envoy of the general secretary

1 [as interpreted], where leaders of various parties held meetings. But

2 our objective to realise this vision was through party activities;

3 through elections, which followed later; through respect for law; through

4 respect for internationals and in real terms with the UN mission in

5 Kosova; and through other international representatives where everyone --

6 every citizen of Kosova be free to express his views, his religion, his

7 culture views, to enjoy all rights and for the coming generations not to

8 be traumatised by the war in the Balkans, as the case had been until

9 then. Mr. Fatmir Limaj was held in high esteem by the main leaders of

10 the Kosova Democratic Party, and he was secretary for international

11 relations. After the first parliamentary elections, he was the leader of

12 the parliamentary group of the Democratic Party of Kosova, and he was

13 very cooperative and very tolerant and friendly with all his comrades,

14 not only with the political parties of the Albanian majority but of the

15 other communities, including the Serb community.

16 If you allow me, Your Honours, I'd like to say that this man had

17 the courage and the bravery since the very first days after the war to

18 extend his hand to the representatives of the Serb community, unlike some

19 other politicians who were rather hesitant at that time to do the same.

20 So I have always admired him for his courage and his readiness to do that

21 after all what happened in Kosova, to find the strength and work toward

22 reconciliation.

23 Q. In the context of that answer, is it right - again, I think

24 there's no issue about this - that in 2003 following the arrest of Fatmir

25 Limaj, representatives of all the ethnic minority groups signed a letter

1 to this Tribunal indicating their support for Fatmir Limaj in the work

2 that he's done in relation to those matters you've just mentioned, namely

3 the work towards a multi-cultural society?

4 A. Yes. Mr. Fatmir Limaj is missing to the political life in Kosova

5 and to parliament. The minority communities have lost a powerful

6 supporter in the fight for their rights in Kosova in general, in

7 parliament in particular. They have -- all the communities, non-Serb

8 communities, have, including the Turks, the Bosnians, the Egyptians, the

9 Romas, Ashkalis, have signed a letter of support for Fatmir Limaj. And

10 if you allow me, I'd like to give a detail that in the few contacts we

11 had with the Serb communities, they too supported him privately. But it

12 was because of the Serbian policy that they couldn't openly voice their

13 support for such a frank man, as they themselves admitted; something

14 which we understand.

15 Q. Now, I want to -- well, first I give you an opportunity. Is

16 there anything else you want to say about Fatmir Limaj in the post-war

17 period? Because I want to now turn to the day of his arrest.

18 A. Yes. I may say that we have been connected by a common activity,

19 working in the same political entity in the Democratic Party of Kosova.

20 For a short time, I too was a member of parliament; then I was elected in

21 prime minister. Then I want to say with full sincerity without any

22 demagoguery that he was one of the best collaborators, a man willing to

23 help whenever he was called for, a man who loves life, a man who was

24 willing to work for the future of Kosova, a just man, a man who might

25 have maintained different positions but a man who is willing to accept

1 alternatives, to accept arguments. Personally I have to say that he was

2 a very beloved man for me. Like him, there are other members in the

3 Democratic Party where I am -- at here. I could unhesitatingly declare

4 that he is a man who has deserved my respect, whom I have always

5 appreciated. He is -- and his readiness. He has always been a humane

6 person.

7 Q. Just before I move to the arrest, looking at Kosovo at the

8 moment, at the present, in what ways do you think he could make a

9 constructive contribution right now, were he to be able to?

10 A. I don't know how well-informed you are of the current

11 developments in Kosova. After the second parliamentary election, when in

12 our parliament we have the ruling party and the opposition, this is the

13 first time for us to have that. We really miss Mr. Limaj's presence

14 because often we have arguments in our parliament even when we shouldn't

15 do that. And when we had Fatmir Limaj, he was a man who could -- who

16 knew how to talk, even with the political adversaries, and be close to

17 the representatives of the other communities. So such a man, as I said,

18 we miss and we can feel the outcomes of not having the presence of such

19 man when we are criticised sometimes, for the fierce opposition existing

20 between the ruling party and the minority party. If Mr. Limaj would be

21 in parliament, such a situation wouldn't be so tense; the frictions would

22 be less severe.

23 Q. I want to ask you about a particular day and the events leading

24 up to that particular day in 2003 when Fatmir Limaj was arrested. The

25 day itself was the 18th of February in that year. Do you remember that

1 day?

2 A. Yes, I do remember that day. It was a day of real despair for

3 myself when I heard that Mr. Fatmir Limaj was accused by the Tribunal in

4 The Hague. I personally was in my office as prime minister. I was busy

5 with my meetings and it was about 4.00 in the afternoon that I received a

6 call by Mr. Limaj informing me that he had heard from Reuters news

7 agency, from a reporter called Shaban Buza that he was charged by the

8 ICTY. At that time Mr. Limaj was on vacation in Slovenia, if I'm not

9 wrong, near Kranjska Gora. I too was invited to go with him, but because

10 of my numerous obligations I was unable to go with him.

11 So we asked for a meeting with the representative of the General

12 Secretary, Mr. Steiner, and with KFOR, General Fabio Mini to inform them

13 that once Mr. Limaj was informed of the indictment he's willing to

14 surrender voluntarily to the ICTY. But he wanted to come to Kosova first

15 to greet his family and then and according to the procedures he might

16 voluntarily surrender to the ICTY. As a prime minister of Kosova, but as

17 a friend of Fatmir Limaj as well, I contacted Mr. Steiner even though he

18 was very busy and then after half an hour we met -- actually met.

19 Together with me was a former minister of public information, Mr. Jakup

20 Krasniqi, and Ramadan Avdiu, my first political advisor. We informed him

21 of our phone conversation with Mr. Limaj. Mr. Steiner expressed his

22 readiness to -- to provide a special plane. If you allow me to explain

23 this. He has a plane at his disposal, a UN plane, that he go to Slovenia

24 on the 19th of February in the morning, fetch Mr. Fatmir Limaj, and bring

25 him to Kosova and then to accompany him while he was meeting with his

1 family and then to surrender him.

2 During the conversation with Mr. Steiner, he said he was fully

3 willing to do that because he too respected Mr. Limaj and he thought that

4 if Fatmir Limaj were allowed to come as a normal passenger, maybe the

5 Slovenian authorities would have arrested him. So while we discussed the

6 technical aspects of Mr. Limaj's return to Kosova, it was about 6.00 I

7 think in the evening when we were informed that the Slovenian police or

8 the security service had gone to the place where Fatmir Limaj was resting

9 and told him why they were there and he voluntarily surrendered. So we

10 had to give up our procedures since he had already surrendered to the

11 Slovenian police.

12 Q. Now, just one or two questions arising from that. I think it

13 follows that you knew that Fatmir Limaj was going on a holiday before he

14 went. Is that right?

15 A. Yes. Fatmir Limaj was on holiday together with Mr. Hashim Thaqi,

16 the PDK chairman. And as I said earlier, before going on this holiday

17 they invited me, too, to join them for four or five or maximum a week.

18 But because of my engagements, I was unable to go with them. So they

19 went together skiing and we had no idea that he would be one of the

20 accused.

21 Q. Did you know when he was going on the holiday?

22 A. I don't remember the exact date, but I think it was three or four

23 days before the 18th, when they were on this vacation in Kranjska Gora.

24 Because of our busy schedule, we didn't have much contact as to how they

25 were doing there.

1 Q. I'm sorry to be precise. Did you know exactly where they were

2 going before they went?

3 A. If I understand, you're right, Your Honour. They set out to

4 leave for Slovenia to go skiing. This is my information.

5 Q. Did you know the place in Slovenia?

6 A. I was there before myself. And from sports activities going on

7 there, Kranjska Gora is the place, if they were exactly there. I know

8 more or less where that place is. But I didn't go on a vacation myself

9 there.

10 Q. You mentioned a little earlier that you requested a meeting with

11 General Fabio Mini who was the general in charge of KFOR. So far as you

12 know, did he also know that Fatmir Limaj had left the country and gone on

13 holiday?

14 A. I wouldn't like to speculate and answer instead of Fabio Mini,

15 but I'll refer to the previous arrest of three members of the KLA a day

16 earlier. I think that Mr. Fabio Mini must have had information even

17 though maybe it might be interpreted as speculation. Because together

18 with Mr. Mini we didn't discuss this. I wanted to ask this general to

19 enable the return of Fatmir Limaj, but Mr. Steiner, the special envoy,

20 asked me to meet only with him because he said he was responsible for the

21 peacekeeping mission in Kosova and if the need be, he would call the

22 general, Fabio Mini. So I would suppose that he knew. But maybe. As I

23 said, this is my only supposition. It may not be true.

24 Q. Now, when the -- a phone call came through from Fatmir Limaj, did

25 he tell you where he was at that time? Or if you can't remember, say so.

1 A. I don't remember the details, but they told me they were in a

2 hotel at a skiing place. And if I am not mistaken, since I was very busy

3 with my engagements, it was in the vicinity of Kranjska Gora, but it may

4 be as well elsewhere. I can't insist, because a long time has passed

5 since then and maybe I have forgotten some details.

6 Q. The meeting you had with Mr. Steiner, the representative of the

7 SRSG, where was that meeting?

8 A. This meeting was in the office of the SRSG, whom in the future

9 I'll refer to as SRSG. Present were myself, former minister Jakup

10 Krasniqi, and former advisor Avdiu.

11 Q. Now, during that meeting, did you tell the SRSG where Fatmir

12 Limaj was?

13 A. Yes. I told him that Mr. Fatmir Limaj is in Slovenia skiing on a

14 vacation. But as to the exact location, I didn't have much time to

15 communicate because I was talking with Mr. Steiner but it was my first

16 advisor who was more informed of the technical details which we informed

17 -- reported to SRSG. But during that conversation, as I said earlier, he

18 was willing to go and fetch Mr. Limaj as Ljubijana airport and bring him

19 to Kosova to meet his family.

20 Q. Now, finally this: At the time of his arrest, were you aware

21 that Fatmir Limaj communicated an address to the citizens of Kosovo about

22 the circumstances in which he was being arrested and how they should

23 regard this matter?

24 A. Yes. When we contacted him, when we heard that the Prosecutor

25 had made public the indictment in Podgorica and that he had got this

1 information from a reporter of Reuters agency, and then later he had made

2 to statement to this reporter in which Mr. Fatmir Limaj informed the

3 citizens of Kosova of his arrest -- initially of his readiness to

4 surrender voluntarily and then of the following arrest. And in addition

5 to that statement, he appealed to the citizens of Kosova to be calm, to

6 respect the ICTY, and that he was innocent, and that his innocence -- he

7 will prove his innocence before the Court. And that it was in the

8 interests of Kosova for the citizens to be responsible, maintain a calm

9 stand, not cause violence or riots but respect all the actions of the

10 ICTY because no individual is more worthy than the future of Kosova.

11 These were more or less the words Mr. Fatmir Limaj used in that

12 statement. That was an important statement which affected -- which

13 accounted for lack of demonstrations, use of violence, and instability in

14 Kosova. Myself as former prime minister and the citizens at large were

15 not prepared for such an act; therefore, Mr. Fatmir Limaj's appeal, which

16 I heard afterward broadcast by Kosova radio television, played a positive

17 impact on Kosova citizens being calm and accepting this painful event in

18 a dignified matter.

19 Q. To round that off, I think it's right to say that the arrests on

20 this occasion were the first arrests of any Albanians vis-a-vis the ICTY?

21 A. If you allow me, Your Honours, I'd like to inform you that we had

22 received information about the arrests of three members of the KLA, the

23 two accused and by mistake Agim Murtezi, but Fatmir Limaj's arrest was

24 the first arrest as a senior politician. The arrest was still confusing.

25 We didn't know why the three persons arrested were arrested until a later

1 time.

2 Q. Thank you.

3 MR. MANSFIELD: Your Honour, I see the time. In fact it may be

4 appropriate -- I don't have any other questions.

5 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.

6 Mr. Guy-Smith.

7 MR. GUY-SMITH: No questions.

8 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Topolski.

9 Mr. Whiting.

10 MR. WHITING: I have to questions. Thank you, Your Honour.

11 JUDGE PARKER: Well, sir, I'm --

12 [Albanian on English channel]

13 JUDGE PARKER: Are you receiving a translation? There seems to

14 be a confusion of translation channels at that point.

15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

16 JUDGE PARKER: I was indicating that there seems to be no

17 question about your evidence so that we must thank you for your

18 attendance and your assistance and indicate that you're now free to

19 return to Kosovo. Thank you.

20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.

21 JUDGE PARKER: And we will adjourn now and resume at 4.00.

22 --- Recess taken at 3.39 p.m.

23 [The witness withdrew]

24 --- On resuming at 4.07 p.m.

25 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Mansfield.

1 MR. MANSFIELD: Yes, thank you. I'm grateful. I'm asked for a

2 moment just to address Your Honours about a particular subject matter

3 which arose yesterday. And it concerns, I'm afraid, the rather thorny

4 topic of disclosure. And I appreciate today that the Prosecution have

5 filed a response to our motion concerning the disclosure of exculpatory

6 material. However, this matter, in our submission, is somewhat more

7 fundamental even than that. And I appreciate that you may be in the

8 imminent future delivering a decision in relation to that motion and

9 response. So this is really a footnote to that but raising a further

10 dimension.

11 If you could be handed - we've had copies made - a statement made

12 by a member of the British armed services named Christopher Clark. There

13 should be one for each of you in front of you now.

14 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, we have it.

15 MR. MANSFIELD: You will see that that statement was taken over a

16 number of days in 2001 and therefore has been in existence since then and

17 plainly known to the Prosecution. You will see from the number of pages

18 that it is in fact a detailed statement, and you will also see by merely

19 looking at the first page that he's a deeply experienced member of the

20 British armed services in terms of the various tasks that he's qualified

21 to undertake and has undertaken over 16 years with the British Army. And

22 you will see on that page that he was seconded to the KVM, Kosovo

23 Verification Mission, in October 1998.

24 The rest of the statement deals with his knowledge of and

25 contacts with, to some extent the Serb regime - he mentions it on page

1 3 - but also with, in particular, the KLA to such an extent that members

2 of his team were deputed to effectively live with the KLA in order to

3 perform their task. So it's a statement which has intimate information

4 and opinion as well about the KLA in 1998. Without going into -- into

5 that detail, we would submit that this statement was plainly relevant

6 from the beginning to these proceedings as a whole. We learnt about it

7 for the first time yesterday afternoon. And it was immediately obvious

8 to all of us that it was relevant.

9 Perhaps I don't need to expound on why it's relevant, but there

10 are two respects in which it is. One, to a very general broad point

11 flagged in our pre-trial brief concerning armed conflict and the

12 jurisdictional aspect of these proceedings. But it is also relevant to

13 the potential liability, certainly of the defendant that I represent

14 vis-a-vis the command structure said to exist within the KLA and

15 therefore his responsibility within that, possibly, for offences alleged

16 on this indictment. Therefore, on those two fronts alone, this statement

17 should have been disclosed whether or not the Prosecution were intending

18 to rely upon it.

19 We're not entirely clear why it wasn't disclosed at an early

20 stage when it was first seen because even if at the stage it was first

21 seen it may not have been perceived to be relevant to a topic, for

22 example, on armed conflict that may or may not arise because there were

23 no pre-trial briefs served at that time. It must have been clear it was

24 likely to be reasonably brought up during these proceedings, even not --

25 if not clearly delineated by then, at that earlier stage. But in any

1 event, so far as the command structure itself and any liability arising

2 under it, it must have been clear that that was something of considerable

3 importance from the beginning.

4 And in fact, the statement actually indicates that there are

5 three key people in the KLA, and the three key people, in fact one of

6 them is the next witness. The other two, one of whom you've heard this

7 week, the other during the Prosecution case. So those three key people

8 are indicated to be people without whom decisions and operations did not

9 take place. So there can't have been any doubt from the beginning that

10 this statement was relevant.

11 Now, either the system of disclosure is substantially and

12 seriously defective for this to have arisen at this very late stage --

13 and may I say, just as I may take a slight detour at this stage to

14 indicate to Your Honours why I am raising it now. We are nearing the end

15 of Mr. Limaj's case, and you may be gratified to learn that it will be

16 this week. We have substantially reduced, with the knowledge of the

17 Prosecution and notice to the Prosecution, the number of witnesses we

18 were intending to call. There are now just two live witnesses remaining;

19 one who is now here this afternoon and one who we've brought forward from

20 next week but the earliest he can be here is Friday. He is, if I may put

21 it, a character witness; he is very short. So it will not in any way

22 impinge upon the schedule for Friday.

23 So therefore, rather than wait until the end of our case, I raise

24 it now that the system of disclosure here is seriously defective. And

25 whilst one can understand on occasions that with the vast amount of

1 material, things may be forgotten or overlooked or even deemed to be not

2 relevant, none of those reservations can apply to this statement. And

3 plainly, even if it had got overlooked prior to the beginning of the case

4 when the pre-trial briefs had already been lodged, the system should have

5 an ability to review - certainly in other jurisdictions called rolling

6 review - to review material as the case develops. Plainly, that did not

7 happen here because if it had it would have been disclosed before -- well

8 before Christmas of last year, and of course would have been available to

9 us at the time that I cross-examined Crosland and that Mr. Harvey

10 cross-examined Coo; and, for that matter, of course for the briefing and

11 eventual evidence of the Defence witness, Mr. Churcher, who will now have

12 to be asked about this matter. And if he has further observations we may

13 ask for permission for a supplemental statement from him.

14 So it's come all in the wrong order. And I'm not standing here

15 to make, I hope, a fair and reasonable criticism, but because we are

16 concerned for the future. We do not wish a situation to arise in which

17 in a week's time or two weeks' time, as gradually we get towards the

18 final brief stage, we have more material. You will recall in fact just

19 at the end of the Prosecution case we had the statement from Mr. Thaqi

20 served upon us. Well, at that stage, it was being said, it had been

21 overlooked; and that no doubt will be a matter within the motion already

22 filed. However, it demonstrates, in my submission, that there's

23 something - sometimes wrongly put - wrong in the state of Denmark, but I

24 hesitate to use particular phrases from Shakespeare. But there is in

25 fact something seriously wrong with that which is going on within this

1 state, that is the state of the Prosecution.

2 We would ask at this stage not only for the measures that are

3 contained in our motion but that with immediate effect somebody within

4 the Prosecution team immediately does a proper and thorough review of

5 material again in case there is yet more of this substance to be

6 revealed. And as I say, at the moment there is just time to deal with

7 it; but in fact, in fairness to these defendants, this is material we

8 should have had laid before us at the beginning.

9 So I hope I have put it clearly, but that is what we are asking:

10 an immediate review. And we are saying that this is not only unfortunate

11 but unfair that it's come at this time. But as with all the other things

12 in this case, we are prepared to, as it were, pick it up and run with it,

13 and we will. But as you may imagine, we are deeply concerned about what

14 else there may be within the portals of the Prosecution beyond that same

15 door.

16 JUDGE PARKER: The door again. Do I understand that you seek

17 nothing specific concerning this statement or this witness?

18 MR. MANSFIELD: I should have added -- Your Honour is quite

19 right. In fact, the Prosecution have been kind enough to indicate --

20 because we obviously want to call him if he can be found. They're

21 prepared to allow this document to be admitted under 92 bis. So I will

22 be asking for it to be tendered under that particular regulation. So

23 that's the position so far -- this is material you will be seeing in any

24 event.

25 JUDGE PARKER: Very well.

1 MR. TOPOLSKI: Your Honour, can I support those submissions by

2 Mr. Mansfield, make it clear in doing so beyond that which he's asked for

3 in relation to Clark, I seek no ruling but to add to it in two respects.

4 Firstly, to confirm that matters are moving on at a pace. I understand

5 from my learned friends Mr. Guy-Smith and Mr. Harvey that they anticipate

6 starting and concluding the case of Mr. Bala next week. It may well be

7 that my case will start at the end of next week. And looking at the

8 timetable that we are actively discussing between my team and my lay

9 client, that is not a case that is going to last perhaps anything like

10 the length that was predicted at the close of the Prosecution's case or

11 even by us while Mr. Mansfield's case was and is ongoing.

12 Therefore, these matters are urgent. We are drafting, and Mr.

13 Whiting and his team will have from us tonight, a letter on behalf of our

14 client requesting disclosure of all material in the possession of the OTP

15 that is or might be deployed to be used in cross-examination of Defence

16 witnesses called on behalf of Musliu. May I, as it were, support the

17 theme of Mr. Mansfield's submission simply by a few lines from May on

18 international criminal evidence at paragraph 5.25, at page 151. Forgive

19 me, time has not permitted a photocopy. I was not aware Mr. Mansfield

20 was going to make the submission he made until I literally walked into

21 court.

22 But it simply says this: "The Prosecution cannot hold back

23 evidence that goes to the heart of the case as a matter of tactics in

24 order to use it in cross-examination of the accused." And to that word I

25 respectfully add and/or any witness called by the accused.

1 "This was emphasised in Krstic where the Prosecution confronted

2 General Krstic with an intercept of a conversation between himself and

3 another Bosnian Serb during which the accused used a pejorative term to

4 describe Bosnian Muslims and was alleged to say 'kill them all.' The

5 Trial Chamber found Prosecution made a tactical decision to use this

6 intercept during cross-examination rather than during its case in chief

7 to 'explosive' effect, and since it went to a fundamental part of the

8 Prosecution's case, namely specific intent of a genocide case, it was not

9 admissible in rebuttal."

10 I simply pause to reflect upon that part of the cross-examination

11 of Mr. Selimi there was also about matters explosive and whether it could

12 be properly said that prior notice at least of the possession of that

13 material in the hands of Prosecutor was appropriate to be disclosed; I

14 understand it was not. So, Your Honour, in those respects, in that

15 regard and for these reasons, I support and slightly develop my learned

16 friend's submissions just made.

17 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you. Mr. -- oh, Mr. Guy-Smith, were you

18 holding your fire until this time, were you?

19 MR. GUY-SMITH: I have -- I join in the remarks made by my

20 colleagues. I'm somewhat troubled at the stage that we're in at this

21 time. I trust - and I use the word as a hope - that that information

22 that may exist at this time within the Prosecution's possession, that

23 they intend on using with regard to cross-examination of any of the

24 witnesses that we will be tendering on behalf of Mr. Bala, we are made

25 aware of in the manner that Mr. Topolski has just raised.

1 I also do request the remedy because I think it's a remedy that

2 we seek as opposed to a comment of what's going on. I do request the

3 remedy that at this point someone at the office goes through the

4 information that they have and makes very, very, very sure that we've got

5 all that we should have. And that the -- and that the -- the notion here

6 is not one of I think penury, but rather duty with regard to the kinds of

7 information that should be furnished an accused in any proceedings and

8 certainly in proceedings such as these.

9 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.

10 Mr. Whiting.

11 MR. WHITING: Your Honour, with respect to this statement I don't

12 completely share Mr. Mansfield's characterisation of the relevance of

13 this statement; however, having said that, I do not dispute in any way

14 that it should have -- that it should have been disclosed. It was not

15 disclosed. And on behalf of the Prosecutor, I take responsibility for

16 that. It was -- it was overlooked and I would submit that this -- this

17 -- even in an -- in conjunction with the various other matters that were

18 raised in the motion that was filed by the Defence last week and that we

19 have responded to today, do not warrant the kind of remedy that is being

20 sought by the Defence. In this particular instance, we have agreed to

21 what I think is an adequate remedy, and that is to put this statement in

22 92 bis. If the -- and in fact we have already started to try to locate

23 this person so that the 92 bis procedure can be done.

24 If there were other remedies sought such as recall of witnesses

25 or further submissions that were alluded to, I'm sure that's also

1 something that can be done and the Prosecution would be quite open to,

2 depending on the details.

3 The -- I'm not going to go through our detailed response that we

4 filed today; however, I'll just anticipate that the -- it's the

5 Prosecution's position that the Prosecution has put into place with the

6 knowledge of the Defence a very detailed and thorough process of review

7 which has captured thousands of pages of materials which have been

8 disclosed to the Defence. There have been a few instances - and I

9 underline a few instances - where the process has not worked; that

10 happens. With a case of this magnitude, with the volume of documents in

11 the possession of the Prosecution, with the developments of issues as

12 they've gone through the trial, those things happen. It's regrettable;

13 it happens. They -- I would submit that every time it's happened it's

14 been remedied and -- including this very last time. However, those few

15 instances where this has occurred -- and I would submit in -- it's

16 actually quite a remarkable record given the circumstances. Those few

17 instances simply do not warrant the kind of enormous, broad remedy that

18 is being sought by the Defence, which would, frankly speaking, require

19 the trial to stop for quite a period if the Prosecution were to undertake

20 to re-review all of the material in its possession. But those matters are

21 more completely addressed in the Prosecution's response.

22 With respect to the second issue which was raised by Mr. Topolski

23 and joined by Mr. Bala, I have not received the letter, I have not fully

24 thought out the Prosecution's position on the request; however, I do know

25 that the case that Mr. Topolski cited to, the Krstic case. What is the

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 known as the "kill them all" tape is not applicable in this case. It's

2 not the -- the issue in that case was whether, as Mr. Topolski mentioned

3 as he discussed it, the issue was -- as I understand it, I could be

4 wrong, but as I understand it in that case is whether the tape could then

5 come into evidence; it's not whether it could be used on

6 cross-examination.

7 The other -- the other thing was that that tape - and I think

8 this is discussed in the opinion - is a -- it's obviously that it was of

9 a wholly -- it was a tape of the accused himself and it was a wholly

10 different category to anything that we are talking about here about

11 documents or other things concerning Defence witnesses.

12 I think the Court on this issue was quite clear about what the

13 Rules are, and in fact today I disclosed to Mr. Mansfield two documents

14 that I may use in the cross-examination of this next witness, who has yet

15 to testify. One of those was -- had already been disclosed to the

16 Defence under the ordinary disclosure procedures. I disclosed a

17 translation. And the other document is not directly relevant to this

18 case; it's concerns a different time period, but it may arise in

19 cross-examination. I disclosed that as well.

20 So those are -- that's all I have to say.

21 JUDGE PARKER: Before you sit, Mr. Whiting, a little more,

22 please, on how this document came to light. I take it you accept that

23 it's been in the possession of the Office of the Prosecutor since 2001.

24 MR. WHITING: That's correct, Your Honour. It came to light most

25 recently actually in a review that I was doing - it came to my attention

1 because it was caught in a -- in a -- in an ISU search, ISU standing for

2 information support unit. This is more completely explained in our

3 response - for this next witness and it came up that way because this

4 next witness is mentioned in the document.

5 It should have been captured earlier. There are other names in

6 there where it should have been captured. I can't say why it wasn't.

7 That's how it most recently came to my attention. I have seen this

8 statement before but read it a long time ago, either before this case was

9 even indicted or at the very beginning and have simply forgotten about

10 it. But when this issue -- when the issue in -- that's addressed in the

11 statement became -- became an issue in this case, which I would submit

12 was when the Defence filed their pre-trial brief, at that time, this --

13 this statement certainly was never in my mind. I never thought about it.

14 And it only came to my attention the other day -- I believe it was

15 yesterday or the day before yesterday. And I immediately, upon seeing

16 the statement, disclosed it to the Defence.

17 JUDGE PARKER: Do I understand from that that you have in fact

18 been running or have completed running searches directed to the names of

19 all people who are not only your witnesses but the potential witnesses

20 for the Defence in this case through the system that you have?

21 MR. WHITING: When we got the names of the potential Defence

22 witnesses, we -- as the Court is aware, there were approximately 60

23 names. It's impractical to have ISU searches run for all 60 names. So

24 we had to make a decision on doing it in stages, which we have been

25 doing, trying to anticipate -- when we come to know that witnesses,

1 Defence witnesses were going to come to be called, we would run -- we

2 would run the names.

3 It takes some time for the search to be run and then the review

4 of the search, given the pace and the timing of the -- these events, a

5 review of the searches has tended to occur only days before -- and in

6 some cases the morning of a witness testifying.

7 So to more directly -- to more -- to absolutely clearly answer

8 the Court's question, we have run searches on some but not all of the

9 Defence witnesses. We have reviewed the searches on some but not all of

10 the Defence witnesses.

11 JUDGE PARKER: So there is a possibility that even in that review

12 of the Prosecution's material, there might be revealed some additional

13 document or documents?

14 MR. WHITING: It shouldn't be the case, but anything is possible

15 because of course these documents should be caught by other reviews,

16 other searches that have been done or reviews that have been done. The

17 process is an overlapping searching process. So documents come up again

18 and again in reviews, though that doesn't always happen and it can happen

19 that a document is overlooked. So it's not likely that that will

20 happening; it is possible that that will happen.

21 JUDGE PARKER: I take it you are searching under names. Are you

22 searching on any other basis, any subject basis?

23 MR. WHITING: Again, this is laid out in some more detail in our

24 response that we filed today, but we searched under names and we searched

25 also under certain places that were particularly pertinent. For example,

1 Lapusnik; that was searched a long time ago and that was reviewed. It

2 should be said that the -- a list of all the search criteria, all the

3 searches we were going to do, that list was provided very early on to the

4 Defence maybe in -- in July of 2003. And the Defence were invited to

5 provide any additional search names that they thought would be

6 appropriate; none were provided. As a practical matter, the name

7 searches are -- tend to be of witnesses or, obviously, the accused.

8 Those tend to be the searches that are done for this kind of a review.

9 JUDGE PARKER: So do you have a facility to search by subject

10 matter?

11 MR. WHITING: Well, for example, if you searched by -- for

12 example, if you search by "General Staff," the problem is you would get

13 approximately 2 million documents because there's -- "General Staff"

14 appears so many different contexts. So the problem with subject matter

15 is defining it narrowly enough so that you come up with a meaningful

16 number of documents to be able to review. Certainly, I haven't fully

17 thought it through, but certainly if there are particular subject matters

18 which can be searched in a helpful way, that's certainly something that

19 could be done.

20 JUDGE PARKER: Now, it appears that there will be a significant

21 reduction in the number of Defence witnesses to be called. If you were

22 provided the names of those who are to be called, would it be feasible in

23 the next few days for those to be run again and for them to be -- the

24 resulting information to be reviewed?

25 MR. WHITING: Well, the answer is yes, though the devil's in the

1 details. For example, if we got the -- today's Wednesday. If we got the

2 list today, we could submit it immediately -- I assume we could -- we

3 would have it back tomorrow morning? Mr. Black is the -- our local

4 expert on these issues. It takes a day or two to complete the searches

5 and for them to come back. The material that comes back can range from a

6 little packet that's less than an inch thick to several binders of

7 materials. Those -- those can be reviewed with relative speed.

8 Now, of course we have already with respect to the Musliu

9 witnesses, we've already one some of those searches because of course

10 some of the -- when we received the names of the alibi witnesses we ran

11 those searches already. So it's possible that we have done some or even

12 all of them. So that's why I say the devil's in the details. It's

13 certainly feasible; it may take more or less time depending on when we

14 get it and how many witnesses.

15 JUDGE PARKER: On a different topic, Mr. Whiting, you did

16 indicate that you had provided to Mr. Mansfield today documents that you

17 would be putting to his next witness, if I understood you correctly.

18 MR. WHITING: That I may put to the next witness, correct.

19 JUDGE PARKER: Yes.

20 MR. WHITING: Yes, Your Honour.

21 JUDGE PARKER: Is that a course of conduct that you will now be

22 following for all witnesses of all accused?

23 MR. WHITING: Well, we were going to be guided by the Prosecution

24 -- by the Court's guidance on this issue that was provided -- I can't

25 remember when if it was yesterday or the day before, that that is if it's

1 been -- if it's already been disclosed, then there's not a burden on the

2 Prosecution to flag-up the document. The reason I provided these

3 documents today is, number one, the -- with respect to the first document

4 which had already been disclosed, it was just a translation and I thought

5 in fairness they should have a -- the translation that we had. That's

6 been our practice; whenever we translate any document, we provide that.

7 And secondly, the other document, to my knowledge, had not been

8 disclosed. Frankly speaking, I didn't even check because I can't imagine

9 that it was disclosed. I can't see any reason why it would have been

10 disclosed. So that to me seemed it was proper to then disclose it.

11 JUDGE THELIN: Mr. Whiting, without going into your response

12 which we have just received, I've skimmed through it and listened to both

13 sides. What's not clear to me, at least - it may be clear to others - is

14 the difference between the ISU and what is available generally, not only

15 to counsel but to everyone, through the other electronic system you

16 described with the acronym EDS, which stands for electronic disclosure

17 system.

18 I take it that you're not meaning the fact that counsel could

19 avail themselves of that opportunity would have made the Prosecution

20 discharge its disclosure obligation? That's the first question. Is that

21 what you're saying?

22 MR. WHITING: No. No, no.

23 JUDGE THELIN: Fine. Let's go to the other one then.

24 What's the difference as far as scope between the ISU and the

25 EDS?

1 MR. WHITING: The difference is that the ISU searches all

2 collections within the possession of the Prosecution. The EDS is a

3 subset of that group. The EDS contains -- the EDS has two -- to get into

4 the details of this, the EDS has two different parts to it; the first is

5 is the general collection, the second is the case-specific collection.

6 The general collection contains I think literally millions of pages of

7 documents which tend to be documents that are disclosed -- where there's

8 no security concern, there's no restriction, they can be disclosed to

9 anybody. They're searchable by all Defence counsel on all teams and

10 they're searchable by name.

11 The case-specific part of the EDS is only accessible by the

12 Defence counsel in this case, and that contains documents which are --

13 which only pertain to this case. It -- those are -- what's contained in

14 there is what we have disclosed otherwise. So the case-specific

15 disclosures occur, are given in hard copy, on CD, and then are put in the

16 EDS so that they can be searched in the EDS.

17 To -- those two parts of the EDS together, however, form a subset

18 - a large subset, but nonetheless a subset - of what is searched by the

19 ISU.

20 JUDGE THELIN: Thank you for clarifying that. Thank you.

21 JUDGE PARKER: Anything further, Mr. Mansfield?

22 MR. MANSFIELD: Yes, if I may.

23 I think what has been said this afternoon raises a really rather

24 serious issue, not just for this particular case in this particular part

25 of the Tribunal but for all cases being heard in the Tribunal at the

1 moment. Now, as the song goes, I may be old-fashioned, however the

2 system of disclosure that's been described electronically is plainly a

3 failure.

4 What was interesting was the - and I'm going to call it an

5 old-fashioned word, perhaps not a computer-friendly word - what are the

6 triggers that have to be pulled in order to get the information that's

7 necessary? The idea that this recent statement is only triggered at this

8 late stage by a search for names is a nonsense; of course there are names

9 in here and if triggering names means anything, then this statement

10 should have been triggered about -- well, I don't want to overestimate

11 it, but given the number of names in here that are relevant to this case,

12 on many occasions before now, one being obviously Jakup Krasniqi, who

13 gave evidence many weeks ago now.

14 But of course, we say in a sensible system of disclosure in the

15 old days where one had bits of paper and card, you'd have topics. So,

16 for example -- I don't know whether there are these topics within this

17 electronic system. So another way of approaching this is not by looking

18 for names, but it might be by looking for the word "KLA." It might be by

19 looking for the word "zone." It might be by looking for the word

20 "Pastrik." It might be by looking for the word "weapons." All of which

21 have been discussed. They're details. The most obviously word is "armed

22 conflict." If it's not been filed under "armed conflict," the question

23 is why hasn't it been filed under "armed conflict" in the first place?

24 I don't want to go too far down this road, but I think Your

25 Honours will see where I'm going here. It is of course a humanly-driven

1 system; it depends on the quality of the people operating it. It depends

2 on the quality of the information that's being put into it in the first

3 place and how it's being logged so it can go retrieved. And we say, of

4 course, this bears upon what has been described as the satisfaction of

5 Prosecution obligations by the EDS, because all these need say is well -

6 and I'm afraid I'm going to use a pejorative term; they don't put it this

7 way - we've dumped it in the general collection. That's precisely what

8 happened with the Selimi document. We had no idea it was there, and even

9 when we did know it might be there, the route to it in the general

10 collection, that is millions of documents, was particularly circuitous

11 and took time even when we knew the route to actually draw up this video.

12 So we say one has to stand back and say whether the electronic

13 system does satisfactorily cope with the obligations placed upon the

14 Prosecution to disclose, we say it doesn't, it places an enormous burden

15 on the Defence in order to find out without notice. What used to happen

16 was a Prosecutor would have a list of all the relevant documents for a

17 particular case and would serve upon a defendant in another jurisdiction

18 all the documents relied on and all the documents not relied on by

19 heading, so that if you wanted one of them, you knew how to get it and

20 where it was.

21 We're a long way from that. We now have a situation in which

22 there is what might be called a universal computerised ether in which a

23 large amount of material is floating around and we are expected somehow

24 or other to have electronic antennae which will find it. I think you

25 will see this is not satisfactory and we say that in particular this

1 statement that has come through now should have been revealed on many

2 occasions before last week and it reveals substantially where things

3 going wrong, here in this case and in many other cases, because I do

4 believe this is a current complaint in the other Tribunals.

5 Now, it may be that it will take a little time to remedy it at

6 this moment. What Your Honours may have consider is whether that should

7 be weighed against the risks of going ahead without this proper check or

8 measure being taken and the risk thereafter of vastly inflated costs,

9 should there have to be, and none of us want it and none of us are

10 suggesting that it will be the necessary outcome, but the risk of a

11 re-trial because of material that has been found later.

12 We say now is the time to act, whatever the cost may be of

13 getting this system right for benefit of all the cases currently being

14 tried, such that we can be sure that the Prosecution know precisely what

15 they've got in relation to this case. And they are not dependent -- and

16 I would submit that the proper description of the present system is

17 random and arbitrary; it is a matter of luck as to whether we get the

18 right materials at the right time.

19 Now, may I add just one -- I wasn't going to raise it, but I

20 don't wish to confuse the main issue. But since a related issue has been

21 raised, that is of documents to be disclosed prior to a witness as

22 opposed to a defendant giving evidence and opposed to documents to be

23 admitted as part of the Prosecution case. Now, I accept that my learned

24 friend has given me today some documents in relation to the next witness,

25 and we're very grateful and I make no complaint about that. But I do

1 make a complaint, I'm afraid, about the materials used, now they've been

2 revealed, to cross-examine Mr. Selimi. In fact - and I make no bones

3 about it - that cross-examination certainly insofar as I've got the

4 materials was quite improper. There should never have been questions put

5 to Mr. Selimi about waving a pistol at British troops, given what the

6 basis is. And you may recall I said I would be grateful if there was a

7 KFOR report on this. Well, so far there isn't a KFOR report. The basis

8 of the questions come from a Serb newsletter in which there are highly

9 derogatory remarks - one's not surprised about this - about UCK and

10 members or ex-members of the UCK, so that the provenance of the material

11 used to cross-examine was highly suspect. And the same report indicates

12 that KFOR had denied reports that Mr. Selimi had been arrested.

13 Now, this, we say, is serious. What counsel could possibly put

14 forward material to a witness coming from this source with these

15 reservations? The only other document comes from the Milwaukee Journal

16 or Sentinel which is a fax, no doubt, given the dates probably derived

17 from the Serb news report, however it may be termed - and doesn't add

18 anything to the other one. So effectively the Prosecution has absolutely

19 no official information when they put that particular allegation. And we

20 say this is reprehensible. And if they're going to put that, even though

21 they may not need to disclose it to me - that's another issue - in

22 advance, we've already touched on that, I don't develop it. I do say,

23 however, before putting material they must be sure that it has a reliable

24 basis and you don't just put something to see whether the witness reacts

25 to it because here, as we know, he said in the end if anything like this

1 happened he would have been shot dead. So it was a complete nonsense in

2 the first place. So I'm sorry to say that there has to be a much more

3 careful analysis of what they do have and its disclosure and the

4 reliability of what they're going to use in cross-examination.

5 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you, Mr. Mansfield.

6 You'll realise, Mr. Mansfield, in respect of your last submission

7 that material having been put to the witness and having received no

8 acceptance, it's got nowhere in terms of weight or advancement.

9 MR. MANSFIELD: I do.

10 JUDGE PARKER: The three of us are not quite a raw jury.

11 MR. MANSFIELD: No, no, I appreciate that.

12 JUDGE PARKER: Yes.

13 [Trial Chamber confers]

14 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Mansfield, was there any suggestion for wider

15 searching made on behalf of your client when the Prosecution indicated

16 the searches it would undertake electronically, we understand, in July

17 2003 before the trial commenced?

18 MR. MANSFIELD: May I have one moment?

19 JUDGE PARKER: And other counsel might prepare for the similar

20 question.

21 [Defence counsel confer]

22 MR. MANSFIELD: Well, Your Honour, the short answer is no, and

23 the reason is that the terms within which disclosure was said to be being

24 made were obviously terms which should have brought forth the material

25 that is necessary. Our real point is that the system backing up that

1 does not seem to do that.

2 JUDGE PARKER: Anything to add, Mr. Guy-Smith?

3 MR. GUY-SMITH: Before my tenure, I believe that the answer is

4 no. After my tenure, there was specific requests for information in very

5 specific areas but not in the sense of an expansive search. But I am

6 mindful of one thing which I think was raised by you, Judge Thelin, which

7 is that before we commenced this trial we had the opportunity to have

8 what is known as an EDS training session, which I attended and I learned

9 a couple of things apart from the frustration of being an electronic

10 system, and I have been with computers for some period of time.

11 We're not using parallel systems, we're not using the same system

12 with regard to the information that's contained. And we were informed at

13 the time of our training that the retrieval rate of information, even

14 assuming all other things being equal, that the retrieval rate of

15 information within that system, we should rely on a 70 per cent retrieval

16 rate no matter how you put the searches together.

17 I've spent a fair number of hours, I think, being as creative as

18 I possibly could in terms of getting information out of the system. It

19 is a system that is -- has fits and starts to it. It has many, many

20 difficulties, and one of the things that Mr. Mansfield said before is we

21 would take the ball and run with it is something we have done willingly

22 throughout these proceedings, but there are some fundamental problems

23 within the system.

24 There clearly also is a fundamental problem on the other side of

25 the bar, which is the particular information which is the subject matter

1 of this submission. The Clark information, is information that in

2 another matter came to some other Prosecution teams' awareness some time

3 ago, over a month ago. So over a month ago in another case at this

4 Tribunal, that particular document was revealed. So there's a problem

5 within the Prosecutor's office in terms of how they're working with the

6 information they've got.

7 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Topolski.

8 MR. TOPOLSKI: I have nothing to add. Thank you.

9 MR. WHITING: Your Honour, I'm sorry, just a very specific point

10 that -- well, actually two specific points that have been raised. The

11 first is that Mr. Guy-Smith alluded to specific requests that have been

12 made by him for materials. I think he'll agree that those requests were

13 promptly and completely responded to in a cooperative manner.

14 Secondly, with respect to the EDS, I will say that we did a

15 search for the name of Rexhep Selimi on the EDS, the general collection,

16 and it came up that -- the videotape that was at issue was document

17 number 6. That came up. So I'm not sure what the problem is in finding

18 things on the EDS, but we found it with no difficulty.

19 MR. GUY-SMITH: If I might to make the record clear, because I

20 meant -- I know you don't like to play tennis. But to make the record

21 clear absolutely every time I've made a specific request they've attended

22 to it I guess as well they could.

23 What I was referring to are two specific areas which occurred

24 well before the trial commenced. Those two specific areas dealt with any

25 promises - I'll do it in a generic sense - any promises or inducements

1 with regard to any of the witnesses whatsoever, and any and all

2 information concerning the gentleman that was ultimately allowed to leave

3 this Tribunal because he was the wrong man, Mr. Murtezi. Those are the

4 two specific areas in which I had asked for information and received --

5 received some but not all information, and as a matter of fact the

6 Court's even made a ruling on one of those issues.

7 So to be perfectly clear, with regard to any place that we

8 haven't had a dispute, they've been absolutely forthcoming to the extent

9 they are able, and perhaps that is a lot of what the problem is now: it's

10 to the extent they are able. I think one of the matters we have raised

11 is the issue of this being a systemic failure, which I think is probably

12 a pretty serious moment at this time. There is a systemic failure.

13 JUDGE PARKER: The Chamber will retire for a short while.

14 --- Break taken at 5.02 p.m.

15 --- On resuming at 5.20 p.m.

16 JUDGE PARKER: The Chamber would make it clear at the outset that

17 we are not at the moment giving a decision in respect of the motion which

18 has been filed and in respect of which a reply, written submission reply,

19 was received only today. There has been no time to consider the full

20 merit of what is in those.

21 The issue that has prompted this submission this afternoon is the

22 disclosure to the Defence of a statement made in some -- clearly some

23 other matter by an officer, a noncommissioned officer of the British army

24 in 2001 to the Office of the Prosecutor. It contains material relevant

25 to issues which have come to be the centre of some attention in this case

1 concerning the organisation of the KLA and less directly to the question

2 of armed conflict. It is a statement which can be seen today to be

3 clearly of potential relevance so far as the Chamber has been able to

4 absorb its contents in the few moments that we have had to see it.

5 We readily accept, therefore, that it ought to have been

6 disclosed in the ordinary course of disclosure; it was not.

7 That type of failure to make disclosure is something that can

8 have a variety of explanations. In this case, Mr. Whiting has indicated

9 how it occurred. It was a document which he says he was aware of either

10 before the commencement of this case or at about its beginning, put it

11 aside, and did not then avert to it personally at any later time until in

12 recent days.

13 The failure for him to have appreciated its potential

14 significance even if he saw it at the early stages of preparation for the

15 trial is something that may be understood. The fact that more recent

16 searches failed to throw up the document again is one which has led to

17 this problem. That document on a number of bases contains material that

18 ought to have indicated it had a potential relevance to this trial and

19 therefore a document that should have been identified electronically,

20 reviewed physically, and had that occurred in more recent times it seems

21 inevitable that its potential relevance would have been appreciated.

22 So for some reason, the electronic search system did not throw up the

23 document in the course of what we are told would have been searches by

24 name at various times.

25 In this particular case in this particular trial, that one

1 document is something which to the satisfaction of counsel is being dealt

2 with by means which will enable the Tribunal to have that statement as

3 evidence without it being subjected to further cross-examination by the

4 Prosecution. So it will be a satisfactory means, it seems, of overcoming

5 that particular deficiency.

6 Now, based upon that, the Defence seek some sweeping remedies.

7 It is suggested that because of that failure and omission there should

8 now be a major revision of the disclosure undertaken by the Prosecution.

9 What is not advanced in the submissions is why this one failure, even if

10 coupled with one or two matters that have been mentioned earlier --

11 MR. GUY-SMITH: Excuse me, I've just been alerted to the fact

12 that my client cannot understand the interpreter.

13 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you, Mr. Guy-Smith. We'll try and see what

14 the problem is.

15 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

16 JUDGE PARKER: The difficulty seems to be that one of the accused

17 is having some difficulty following the Albanian translation that is

18 being provided. I think in the circumstances I will continue and if he

19 is unclear at the end about any material issue, that can be taken up by

20 Mr. Guy-Smith with him and clarification, if I can ask you to assist, can

21 be given in discussion with your client. It seems there is an

22 interpretation. He's following at least some of it --

23 MR. GUY-SMITH: If I might, with the Chamber's permission,

24 Gentian Zyberi is here. He was doing some translation work for us. I

25 know you've seen him for some period of time in the courtroom. If he

1 could stand at the ready, perhaps, with Mr. Isak Musliu, Mr. Bala, and

2 Mr. Fatmir Limaj if some issue comes up, and he could be of immediate

3 assistance. I think that might be a way of expediting the proceeding.

4 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you for that, Mr. Guy-Smith. Certainly.

5 I think I was at the point of saying that what is not advanced in

6 the submissions is why the failure on this and perhaps one or two other

7 occasions, first of all, justifies the conclusion that there is some

8 fundamental failing in the system that threatens the propriety of the

9 trial; and secondly, what it is suggested could be done at this point to

10 overcome it. The problem with any attempt to overcome it is that the

11 whole system is dependent upon electronic storage and retrieval. The

12 volume of material is very substantial. The range of subject matter is

13 quite substantial. The electronic system was put in with the full

14 awareness of the Defence Counsel Association and with its full support as

15 a way of improving what had been the previous manual systems, and of

16 ensuring that there was available to the Defence a wider range of

17 material than what was merely thought to be the case-specific relevant

18 material. That system has been generally applauded, the new system. It

19 is under constant revision and improvement, as there are both technical

20 and other problems. I've been shown a letter in the last few moments

21 from the Association of Defence Counsel proposing some areas where

22 improvement would be welcome, none of them touching on the matter now

23 raised.

24 No attempt at this point to have the Prosecution or some other

25 party go through the material to ensure that there has been adequate and

1 proper disclosure is going to overcome any fundamental problem in the

2 system if, indeed, there is one such as has produced the difficulty in

3 this case because the attempt at reviewing what has been done would, on

4 the face of it, be met with the same technical problem, if there is one,

5 that has occurred in this case.

6 Therefore, we are in a situation such as can occur in any case,

7 even a small case, and whether it is a case where disclosure has been

8 aided electronically or is being conducted manually. And when one looks

9 at that situation as we presently have it, we see at the moment no basis

10 upon which either we could be satisfied that there is any significant

11 problem or that there are practical steps available which might overcome

12 it for the purposes of this trial.

13 What we do propose is that with respect to the Defence witnesses

14 which are to come, the Prosecution undertake ISU searches to the extent

15 that that has not been done already and that it does so in respect of all

16 witnesses which the Defence now indicates it is proposing to call; that

17 those searches be reviewed to determine when any -- whether any further

18 disclosure is necessary and that be undertaken with every possible

19 expedition.

20 With respect to the second matter raised, that is by Mr. Topolski

21 in cross-examination, as has been substantially indicated, if preparation

22 for cross-examination by the Prosecution throws up a document not already

23 disclosed, it should be disclosed forthwith before the witness is called.

24 Otherwise, apart from the present practice mentioned by Mr. Whiting which

25 causes him to disclose a limited range of material, for instance, a fresh

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 translation, the Chamber would propose to make no further order. But it

2 would indicate that should lack of notice lead to some significant

3 difficulty for the Defence which called the witness, there may be reason

4 then to delay re-examination to allow the time necessary to overcome that

5 difficulty and overcoming, by that means what would have been the effect

6 of earlier notice before the witness gave evidence.

7 That is so in respect of witnesses for the Defence and also for

8 accused. But in respect of accused reference has been made to the

9 decision in Krstic and that is relevant to the Prosecution's approach as

10 well. Tactical holding back for maximum effect of what is, in truth, a

11 material part of the Prosecution case against the accused will meet the

12 sort of difficulty that it met in Krstic.

13 Mr. Mansfield also raised the question of the propriety of

14 certain questions put to the Witness Selimi. We certainly don't propose

15 at this moment to undertake any inquiry into that. In terms of the

16 effect of it, I've already indicated before we retired that it was of, if

17 I can put it directly, zero effect as far as the Chamber is concerned.

18 The material was not substantiated and put into evidence; it was denied.

19 It remains in that situation.

20 Now, whether there was or was not any adequate basis for the

21 putting of those questions is a matter which we would require a motion

22 and adequate supporting material to consider. We do not have any of the

23 material at the moment. It may be known to the Defence by now; we do not

24 have it, so we will not muddy those waters any further at the moment.

25 That is what the Chamber would propose at present in respect of

1 the matter. Further consideration must be given to it when we have an

2 opportunity to consider the written submissions and the motion, which we

3 will do as soon as practical.

4 We have now reached the stage where we must adjourn because of

5 the tapes. So the witness will have to remain outside Mr. Mansfield's

6 door until after the break.

7 --- Recess taken at 5.43 p.m.

8 --- On resuming at 6.07 p.m.

9 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Mansfield.

10 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

11 MR. MANSFIELD: The name is Bislim Zyrapi, please.

12 [The witness entered court]

13 JUDGE PARKER: Good afternoon, Mr. Zyrapi. I'm sorry you had to

14 wait then; we were attending to some legal arguments. If you would

15 please read the affirmation aloud.

16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will

17 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

18 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you. Please sit down.

19 Mr. Mansfield.

20 WITNESS: BISLIM ZYRAPI

21 [Witness answered through interpreter]

22 Examined by Mr. Mansfield:

23 Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Zyrapi. I'm over here and I represent Fatmir

24 Limaj, who sits behind me. I want to ask you some questions about the

25 KLA and your role in it. But first, is it right that you were born in

1 1962?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. And where were you born?

4 A. I was born in the village of Studenqan, Suhareke municipality.

5 Q. Before asking you a little bit before your own background, is

6 your current occupation a director of a department in the Ministry of

7 Public Services concerned with dealing with emergency services?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. And how long have you held that position?

10 A. I have worked with this department since the year 2000.

11 Q. Now, going back in time, once you had left school did you attend

12 a military academy in Sarajevo?

13 A. After I completed primary school, I enrolled at the military

14 secondary school in Sarajevo and later on for the military academy in

15 Sarajevo.

16 Q. And during which years did you attend the secondary school of a

17 military academy and the military academy itself?

18 A. I went to the secondary military academy from 1977 to 1981, while

19 the military academy from 1987 to 1989.

20 Q. And then I want to ask you a little later, did you also after

21 that serve with the Bosnian army?

22 A. I first served at the former Yugoslav army and when the war broke

23 out in Bosnia in 1992 I served with the Bosnian army.

24 Q. And what rank did you reach at that time?

25 A. The former Yugoslav army I was a sergeant and with the Bosnian

1 army I reached the rank of colonel.

2 Q. Now, I want to move on in time. Did there come a stage at which

3 you were approached about the possibility of joining the KLA?

4 A. Yes, in November or December of 1997 I met with Fehmi Lladrovci,

5 martyr to the nation; he was together with Xhemajl Fetahu [phoen] who at

6 that time discussed the KLA. Later on in March 1998 and the events with

7 the Jashari family, I went to Tirana from Holland and together with other

8 comrades who were there we prepared to enter Kosova.

9 Q. Just a couple of questions on that. First of all, the meeting

10 that you had in November/December, where did that take place?

11 A. One of the meetings was held in Germany while the second in

12 Holland at the place where I was residing.

13 Q. And the second question is this: How long had you been residing

14 in Holland?

15 A. I lived in Holland from January 1995 until March 1998.

16 Q. And do you have a wife and family who were also living in Holland

17 at that time?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. Do you recall now when it was that you actually returned to

20 Kosovo and entered Kosovo?

21 A. We entered Kosova in the end of May, 29th of May is the date when

22 I entered Kosova.

23 Q. It's a very precise date to remember. Can you indicate how it is

24 you remember that date?

25 THE INTERPRETER: If the witness could speak closer to the

1 microphone, please.

2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I remember this date because on the

3 27th of May the funeral of martyr for Afrim Thaqi took place. He was

4 killed by the Serbian forces. We arrived in Kosova two days after his

5 funeral, that is on the 29th of May.

6 MR. MANSFIELD:

7 Q. And who was the "we"? Who were the people you were in company

8 of?

9 A. At that time when we entered Kosova, I was in the company of

10 Hashim Thaqi, Adem Grabovci, Kadri Veseli, and six colleagues of mine who

11 entered Kosova together with me and some soldiers as well who had

12 prepared themselves to enter Kosova.

13 Q. Once you arrived, was there a particular task that you undertook?

14 A. Having arrived in Kosova, the General Staff assigned me the duty

15 of the officer for the development and personnelisation of the KLA.

16 Q. And for how long did you do that?

17 A. I did this task from June to mid-July.

18 Q. I would like you, if you would, to describe the situation on the

19 ground with the KLA in those initial months after your arrival, namely

20 June and July.

21 A. When I arrived in the end of May/beginning of June in Kosova, we

22 at first arrived at Rahovec area, namely some villages of this

23 municipality in which units were organised. We stayed there for five

24 days in order to familiarise ourselves with the situation. At that time

25 we were organised in groups and villages were mostly organised by

1 themselves. The organisation was more or less the same in every

2 territory, and with the request of the General Staff we spent five days

3 in this territory and helped the organisation of this territory from

4 military point of view. This territory as well as other territories did

5 not have a unified command structure. We went to the operational

6 directorate in order to re-organise the structure and unify the command

7 in the territory of the zones which at that time had many self-organised

8 units in the villages.

9 Q. Now, plainly you had experience of how a regular, traditional

10 army was organised. Is that right?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. And you've mentioned some features there. Can you just describe

13 mainly what the differences were between a regular, traditional army and

14 its organisation and what you found with the KLA in Kosovo.

15 A. A traditional army organised in a traditional way, its

16 organisation begins from profession training of leaders from lower ranks

17 going up to higher ranks, and the soldiers also in those respective units

18 are prepared starting from squads and going up to the level of brigades.

19 An army which has a command with all professional military

20 characteristics required for a traditional army has trained and schooled

21 people militarily; however, the KLA was an army based on

22 self-organisation. At that time it had the central staff as it was

23 called at that time. It was a small staff, not profession one, not

24 prepared for proper command.

25 There were also units who had no military experience and most of

1 them, as I said, were organised from the villages and lacked military

2 experience.

3 Q. What about the weaponry? Again, I'm dealing with the one period

4 after you've just arrived, namely June and July.

5 A. At that time when I arrived, the weapons at these units used were

6 light weapons starting from pistols to automatic rifles, A-47 [as

7 interpreted], semi-automatic rifles. Mostly these weapons were old

8 weapons dating back from the Second World War, light machine-guns, 6. --

9 correction, 7.62. And what I could see at that time, there was some

10 heavy machine-guns but very few. There were anti-tank weapons of --

11 known as 150-millimetres one.

12 At that time when I arrived, these are the weapons that I saw in

13 use in the zones where KLA was active.

14 Q. Now, you mentioned a little earlier in an answer -- well, two

15 things I just want to pick up but perhaps the most recent one. There

16 were anti-tank weapons. What were the anti-tank weapons that you can

17 remember and how many, roughly speaking?

18 A. I mentioned earlier the anti-tank weapons that were used. I

19 don't remember the name -- the number, how many there were, but there was

20 such in every zone where the KLA was active.

21 Q. Now, the other matter that you mentioned a bit earlier was the --

22 you used the word "zones." In June and July, were there any zones in

23 existence?

24 A. At the time of my arrival, there were two active zones where

25 combat was going on and which had organised units. At that time, it was

1 Drenica zone, which was in the phase of development, and the Dukagjini

2 plane zone, which was also active in military actions and in its

3 development.

4 Q. Now, I'm just going to concentrate on those two for the moment.

5 Were the -- those two zones developed in the same way or were they being

6 developed differently, at different stages, and so on? Can you just

7 describe what was happening.

8 A. Yes. These two zones, as I said, were in the phase of

9 development; they were not fully developed. They had reached the level

10 of organised units in villages and were moving towards the unification of

11 the command of the Drenica zone. Gradually these units had started their

12 structuring in military ways, like units and companies, and they were all

13 directly linked to the command of the zone. Later on, the development of

14 the command continued in the next period.

15 Q. And can you just indicate what the next period was from the point

16 of view of months? Which part of 1998 are we dealing with for the next

17 period?

18 A. They continued into the next period, and in August of 1998

19 brigades emerged. It was easier to form brigades in Drenica zone because

20 the territories had been designated, and the development of these

21 brigades continued because in July, August, September we suffered many

22 offensives which caused an impediment to us to continue with the

23 establishment of other zones.

24 Q. Well, that brings me to ask you about a zone we've heard about,

25 namely Pastrik zone. What can you tell us about that and its

1 development?

2 A. When I arrived in June, this zone was not developed as zone.

3 They were self-organised units, local staffs such as the local staff in

4 Malisheve of not very high military organisation level. This zone began

5 to be structured in mid-June. I don't know exactly the date, but I know

6 that during my visits to this zone in this time I came across many

7 self-organised units and units that were not unified in the command.

8 This zone was not active at that time. In June, the preparations for the

9 zone began and of course in June and July we couldn't reach the highest

10 level of organisation of this zone. As I said, there were many Serb

11 offensives in June and July. The restructuring, however, continued to

12 the next months but it did not reach the desirable level, as was the case

13 with other zones as well.

14 Q. When did it reach the desired level?

15 A. The level of brigade or zone was not reached until the end of the

16 war, but in those parts when this was achieved at a lesser level, it was

17 in October or November. You could speak here of a small unification of

18 command, of the military structure emerging, and then it continued in

19 January and February and with the beginning of the NATO bombing campaign.

20 The zones were consolidated and organised in military zones.

21 Q. I want to turn from that topic, if I may, to Fatmir Limaj. Can

22 you recall now when after your arrival in Kosovo you first met him?

23 A. I don't remember the date, but I know that I saw him in June. I

24 don't know the exact dates but I remember having the opportunity to meet

25 him on two or three occasions. One of these occasions was in Klecka when

1 -- where I was sent by the operational directorate which was at that time

2 led by Rexhep Selimi in order to assist them with the organisation of the

3 unit in Klecka and with the task to show them how and help them. There

4 was a house between Klecka and Divjake that was being prepared for the

5 general -- or at that time central staff, because it was moving. So I

6 went there in order to help them to secure a house that would provide

7 security and safety for members of the General Staff.

8 Q. When you met him and on the other occasions, you said it was two

9 or three, what was your understanding then of his area of responsibility?

10 A. As I mentioned, in the capacity of the officer for development

11 and personnelisation following the instructions of the General Staff, I

12 went to the place where Fatmir was based, at that time in Klecke, in the

13 Berisa Mountains, and from the operational directorate as a unit that

14 would be ready to intervene when necessary along the position lines in

15 Berisa Mountains.

16 Q. Did his responsibility extend beyond the unit itself in Klecka?

17 A. At that time when I was there, no.

18 Q. As far as you could see, was there any reason you were given to

19 consider that he was responsible for Lapusnik?

20 A. At that time during my visits, not only Lapusnik, I visited other

21 front lines, I did not have such knowledge and neither I was told that

22 Fatmir was a person in charge of Lapusnik. When I visited Lapusnik, the

23 commander of the Lapusnik unit introduced himself to me at that time with

24 the pseudonym Voglushi. His name is Ymer Alushani.

25 Q. Now just going back a stage, you mentioned one occasion where you

1 met him in - that is Fatmir Limaj - in Klecka. Do you remember the other

2 occasions that you met him or not?

3 A. I met him on another occasion when the members of the staff

4 together with journalists were preparing a propaganda for the KLA. We

5 were together with members of the central staff and myself and my

6 colleague Agim Qelaj as officers prepared the units, showed them how to

7 line up and report and salute, the way that the KLA was developing at

8 that time.

9 Q. Were there any other occasions that you remember now that you can

10 tell us about?

11 A. There could be another occasion when I paid a short visit, but a

12 longer visit to stay with him, no, I didn't. It could be that I met him

13 on another occasion but not for a long time.

14 Q. Yes. Thank you. Would you wait there, please.

15 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.

16 Mr. Guy-Smith.

17 MR. GUY-SMITH: No questions.

18 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Topolski.

19 MR. TOPOLSKI: Your Honour, there's a matter that I would wish to

20 ask this witness about, bearing in mind discussions I've had with Mr.

21 Whiting and matters that have been raised I think before you before

22 regarding the appropriate ambit of cross-examination on behalf of a

23 co-defendant. I wonder if out of an abundance of caution I might raise

24 the matter in the absence of the witness for a moment or two before

25 proceeding.

1 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Zyrapi, would you please just wait outside for

2 a few moments; there's another legal issue being raised. Thank you.

3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

4 [The witness stands down]

5 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, Mr. Topolski.

6 MR. TOPOLSKI: Forgive me while I isolate the passage I want to

7 deal with. At page 66, line 16 through to 18, the witness has just said:

8 "When I visited Lapusnik, the commander of the Lapusnik unit introduced

9 himself to me at that time with the pseudonym Voglushi. His name was

10 Ymer Alushani."

11 If the witness meant precisely what the witness said, the answer

12 supposes that there was a commander at Lapusnik. It is not my client's

13 case that there was an overall commander at Lapusnik, be it Ymer

14 Alushani, otherwise Voglushi, or subsequently Isak Musliu, otherwise

15 Qerqizi; that at its highest and at its best Mr. Musliu's case is and

16 always has been that he was a commander, there being no overall

17 commander, a commander specifically of course of units that comprised

18 eventually Celiku 3.

19 Consequently, on the face of it there is an issue between my lay

20 client's case and the evidence given by this witness called by a

21 co-defendant and a matter, therefore, that seems to me on the face of it

22 in order to do proper justice to my client's case to put to him what my

23 instructions are upon such organisation, and I use the term very loosely,

24 as there was in Lapusnik at the time, for this witness to be given an

25 opportunity of dealing with it. As I understand Mr. Whiting's position,

1 he may well object to that.

2 JUDGE PARKER: We will find out.

3 MR. TOPOLSKI: We will. And I can hardly wait.

4 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Whiting.

5 MR. WHITING: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Topolski.

6 JUDGE PARKER: You're speechless and have nothing to add; is that

7 it, Mr. Whiting?

8 MR. WHITING: Momentarily speechless. I didn't expect the issue

9 to arise in this posture and it's a little bit -- in this posture it's a

10 little bit subtle.

11 MR. TOPOLSKI: Thank you.

12 MR. WHITING: And it's --

13 JUDGE PARKER: It's quite simple, really. There is, it's said, a

14 distinction between the evidence of this witness on one confined topic

15 and the case of the accused represented by Mr. Topolski on that topic.

16 And the question is: Should Mr. Topolski put to the witness the case of

17 his client?

18 MR. WHITING: If the issue is put that way, I have no objection

19 with that occurring to the extent --

20 JUDGE PARKER: If it was put the way I framed the other day, it

21 may be put slightly differently, that there is an issue dividing the case

22 represented by Mr. Topolski from that of Mr. Mansfield. And it's not

23 some minor side issue; it is one that is quite central.

24 MR. WHITING: I agree. As it's put that way, I agree. There I

25 have no objection. Leading is fine, and that's not a problem. The

1 reason I said it was subtle is I think the answer is ambiguous and

2 therefore I don't think the record is -- as far as there being a record

3 for a split between the two parties is very well-founded. I think there

4 is -- I think there is a reading -- it could be read either way. And

5 therefore, to the extent the evidence develops, there may be a shift, a

6 rather rapid shift one way or the other, and it may be apparent quite

7 quickly that there isn't such a division, in which case I may have an

8 objection to further leading questions.

9 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you for that, Mr. Whiting.

10 Mr. Topolski, you certainly are in the position where you may

11 properly put your client's case. You will be conscious that more weight

12 is likely to be attached if you explored the issue in a non-leading way,

13 at least initially, to see exactly how far you are apart from the --

14 MR. TOPOLSKI: I'm not sure I remember how to ask non-leading

15 questions but --

16 JUDGE PARKER: You've done very well lately. We've seen you

17 improving greatly, Mr. Topolski. We have confidence in you.

18 MR. TOPOLSKI: May I have that in writing?

19 JUDGE PARKER: Are you happy at that point for the witness to be

20 returned?

21 MR. TOPOLSKI: I am, yes.

22 JUDGE PARKER: If you could get the witness.

23 [The witness entered court]

24 Cross-examined by Mr. Topolski:

25 Q. Mr. Zyrapi, my name is Mr. Topolski. I represent Isak Musliu.

1 I'm sorry you had to leave us temporarily while we discussed a matter of

2 law.

3 First of all, Mr. Zyrapi, do you know Isak Musliu?

4 A. I know Isak but not very well.

5 Q. Did you meet him during the war?

6 A. Yes. There were occasions when I met him during the war.

7 Q. Can you help us as to what stage the war was when you met Isak

8 Musliu?

9 A. At that time with his pseudonym, Qerqizi, not as Isak. I

10 remember seeing him during August while the restructuring of the zone in

11 Berisa Mountains was going on, and then I saw him in Nerodime zone in

12 1999.

13 Q. As far as restructuring is concerned, Mr. Zyrapi, were you aware

14 of the creation of brigades?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. And on your evidence, sir, when do you say brigades were formed

17 or began to be formed?

18 A. The brigades began to be formed in August 1998, and this process

19 continued in September, October, and November. There were efforts to

20 develop these brigades. They reached a medium level. However, taking

21 into consideration all the fighting that was going on in August and in

22 September and then in March, the units did not reach a full military

23 organisation of the brigade.

24 Q. Were you aware then or did you become aware later of any position

25 that Isak Musliu, Qerqizi as he was known, obtained in the brigades?

1 A. I don't know what his position was in the brigade because there

2 were many brigades and I could only know the commanders of the brigades

3 and occasionally a deputy, but not all of them.

4 Q. The 121st Brigade, were you aware of the identity of the

5 commander of that brigade?

6 A. In August 1998, the commander of the 121 Brigade was Fatmir

7 Limaj.

8 Q. Did the 121st Brigade at that time have any deputy commanders?

9 A. These formations had their deputy commanders.

10 Q. Were you aware of the identity of any deputy commander that may

11 have been appointed of the 121st Brigade in or about August of 1998?

12 A. I don't remember because the development of the zones was not

13 going on only in Pastrik but in other zones as well. Therefore, there

14 were many deputy commanders and I couldn't possibly remember all of them.

15 Q. Well, let's go back together then for a moment, Mr. Zyrapi, in

16 time at least to a period before August 1998. And to assist you, I'm

17 dealing, for the purpose of my question, with a period between May and

18 July of 1998. Lapusnik, was Lapusnik a village that you personally

19 visited?

20 A. I have visited the front line in this village.

21 Q. May I ask you, Mr. Zyrapi, can you help the Tribunal how many

22 times in this period I'm asking you about, that is to say May to July of

23 1998, how many times did you visit the front line in Lapusnik, can you

24 recall?

25 A. To my recollection, twice, mostly three times.

1 Q. On your visits to Lapusnik, were they visits that were, as it

2 were, announced or unannounced? Did you let people know you were coming

3 or did you just turn up?

4 A. The visits to the front lines were organised upon requests of the

5 relevant units in order for us to help them in their structuring along

6 the front lines. It is possible that a visit was made just while passing

7 by because you would pass through Lapusnik when you went from Drenica

8 zone to another.

9 Q. You spoke a little while ago in answer to Mr. Mansfield's

10 questions of a visit to Lapusnik that involved you meeting a particular

11 person, Mr. Zyrapi. Now, do you remember telling us about that a few

12 minutes ago?

13 A. Yes. Yes.

14 Q. The person you mentioned a few moments ago apparently introduced

15 himself to you as Voglushi. Is that right?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. Do you know his real name now? Do you know his real name?

18 A. Yes, Ymer Alushani.

19 Q. Did you know his real name then?

20 A. No.

21 Q. It may be entirely my fault, Mr. Zyrapi, and it's really why so

22 you understand, sir, why I'm asking you these questions. When you were

23 answering those questions a little while ago, you referred to Voglushi as

24 "the commander of Lapusnik unit." Do you remember saying that to us a

25 few minutes ago?

1 A. Yes, I remember. And on both occasions that I went there, he

2 introduced himself as the commander of the Lapusnik unit.

3 Q. Mr. Zyrapi, was there but one unit in Lapusnik or more than one

4 unit in Lapusnik in the period May to July 1998?

5 A. When I visited Lapusnik, as a village it is divided in two parts

6 by the main road Peja-Pristina. On the right side was the Lapusnik unit

7 led by Ymer Alushani, at least during my visits there; and on the left

8 side was the unit which included another unit of another part of

9 Lapusnik, of a unit from Negrovce. The commander of this unit was Ferat

10 Shala.

11 Q. Was this village and its units part of your own areas of

12 responsibility at this time, Mr. Zyrapi?

13 A. At that time it wasn't my area of responsibility because I didn't

14 have responsibility in June and July. And later, they would become area

15 of responsibility of the Pastrik zone.

16 Q. I wouldn't want to appear to be critical, Mr. Zyrapi, but if I

17 were to suggest to you that it may be the case that you are not entirely

18 familiar with the detail regarding the presence and organisation of the

19 KLA in Lapusnik between May and June and July of 1998, would you agree or

20 disagree with that as a proposition?

21 A. At that time my visits were very short with every unit. And as

22 to how they were organised, I don't have a full knowledge, not only for

23 that particular area but for other areas as well.

24 Q. Well, thank you for the frankness of that answer; it just leads

25 on to two more questions, if I may. Are you aware that as we understand

1 all the evidence in this case there were a number of units in Lapusnik

2 bearing different names in the period May to July 1998. Are you aware of

3 that?

4 A. As for different names, yes, they existed, not only in Lapusnik

5 area but in other areas as well. Mostly units used these names during

6 intercommunication through the system that they used at that time.

7 Q. Mr. Zyrapi, would the answer that you gave Mr. Mansfield

8 regarding Voglushi being the commander of Lapusnik, would you wish that

9 answer to be understood as meaning that there was only but one person in

10 overall command of Lapusnik in the period May to July 1998?

11 A. At that time when I visited, this was the case. There was

12 Voglushi. Alongside with him was his deputy with a pseudonym Mesuesi.

13 He was a former JNA officer. I remember this because during my visits

14 they introduced themselves.

15 As to whether there were others in later developments, I don't

16 know that and I'm not in a position to verify that.

17 Q. If there had been other persons at that time in charge of,

18 leading, controlling other smaller units within Lapusnik, you would not

19 necessarily know who they were, Mr. Zyrapi. Would that be both fair and

20 accurate?

21 A. For that period, yes.

22 Q. Well, I suggest, you see, that the man you subsequently learned

23 to be Qerqizi, Isak Musliu, fell precisely into that category of people.

24 So that you understand, sir, that's why I've been asking you these

25 questions. Do you follow? You wouldn't know.

1 A. Yes, I'm following you.

2 MR. TOPOLSKI: Well, Your Honour, I hope without too many leading

3 questions, that's all I ask this witness.

4 JUDGE PARKER: I almost interrupted to say that you had a free

5 hand at one point, but you seemed to take enough of it to get by well.

6 It will be necessary I think for us to break now, assuming you

7 may have a few questions, Mr. Whiting.

8 MR. WHITING: I will have a few, yes.

9 JUDGE PARKER: Yes.

10 We've reached the hour when we must finish for the night and we

11 will resume tomorrow at 2.15, so if we could ask you to return then.

12 Thank you, Mr. Zyrapi.

13 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.00 p.m.,

14 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 2nd day of

15 June, 2005, at 2.15 p.m.

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25