1 Monday, 4 July 2005
2 [Motion Hearing]
3 [Open session]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.04 a.m.
5 [The accused entered court]
6 JUDGE AGIUS: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Mr. Registrar,
7 could you call the case, please.
8 THE REGISTRAR: Yes. Thank you, Your Honour.
9 Case IT-04-82-PT, the Prosecutor versus Ljube Boskoski and Johan
11 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Boskoski, can you follow the proceedings in a
12 language that you can understand?
13 THE INTERPRETER: Could you please repeat.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. The Trial Chamber would like to know from you
15 whether you are following the proceedings in a language that you can
16 understand. In other words, whether you are receiving interpretation in
17 your own language.
18 Make sure that the channel is the right one because otherwise,
19 they wouldn't be receiving interpretation.
20 THE ACCUSED BOSKOSKI: [Interpretation] It is all right. I can
22 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, but that doesn't answer my question. I want
23 also a confirmation that you are receiving interpretation in your
25 THE ACCUSED BOSKOSKI: [Interpretation] Yes, I can receive the
1 interpretation in Macedonian language.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. I thank you.
3 Mr. Tarculovski, same question to you. The Trial Chamber would
4 like to know if you are receiving interpretation in your own language.
5 THE ACCUSED TARCULOVSKI: [Interpretation] Yes, I do receive.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you. Can we have appearances now.
7 Appearances for the Prosecution, Mr. Scott.
8 MR. SCOTT: Good morning, Mr. President and Your Honours. Kenneth
9 Scott for the Office of the Prosecutor. I am joined this morning by
10 Mr. Bill Smith, trial attorney, and our case manager Mr. Hasan Younis.
11 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you and good morning to you. Appearances
12 for Mr. Boskoski.
13 MR. GODZO: Mr. President, Dragan Godzo, assisted by Kiril Waite.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you and good morning to you. Appearances
15 for Mr. Tarculovski. Microphone, please.
16 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Good morning. Antonio
17 Apostolski, attorney. I'm representing the accused Johan Tarculovski.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you and good morning to you too. I notice
19 -- or at least, I have been informed but I also see presence in the
20 courtroom of representation from the government of the former Yugoslavia
21 of Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. Could you please identify yourselves
22 for the record. Any one of you may take the floor.
23 MS. MLADENOVSKA-GJORGJIVESKA: [Interpretation] Your Honour,
24 representative of the government of the Republic of Macedonia is the
25 Minister of Justice, myself, Meri Mladenovska-Gjorgjiveska. Thank you.
1 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you, madam, and welcome to this Tribunal. I
2 also want to make sure that you are receiving interpretation in your own
3 language, and that -- for that purpose I just draw your attention that if
4 at any moment in the course of the proceedings there are problems with the
5 interpretation that you are receiving in one way or another, please draw
6 our attention straight away so that we will rectify it.
7 Yes. But I do notice, Minister, that you are accompanied also by
8 two other persons. Could I also have the names of the two persons that
9 are accompanying you, for the record, please.
10 MS. MLADENOVSKA-GJORGJIVESKA: [Interpretation] Your Honour,
11 members of the delegation are Biljana Micevska-Josifovska, advisor for
12 international cooperation within the cabinet of the minister of justice,
13 and Mr. Todor Mirovski, first secretary in the embassy of the Republic of
14 Macedonia in The Hague, Kingdom of the Netherlands.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you. So this is a special hearing that we
16 have decided to convene, having read -- having gone through the documents
17 pertaining to the motion for provisional release, two different motions,
18 and it's a hearing that we have convened to deal with some of the
19 outstanding matters arising out of the motions and the relative responses.
20 For the record, I only need to mention that Mr. -- accused Tarculovski
21 filed his motion for provisional release on the 20th of May of this year,
22 while Mr. Boskoski filed his on the 25th of May. Then the Prosecution
23 filed responses on the 2nd and on the 7th of June respectively. Then
24 subsequent to that, the Trial Chamber granted leave to the Defence to file
25 -- to both accused to file their respective reply, which they both did on
1 the 27th of June. After that, having gone through the documents, as I
2 said, we came to the conclusion that it would be -- it would serve the
3 purposes of justice better if we had -- if we gave a hearing.
4 Today's oral submissions need not be very long. We are not going
5 to ask you to repeat most of the submissions that we have already, and in
6 any case, each party, and that includes you, Honourable Minister, will
7 have a maximum of 15 minutes to address the Trial Chamber. Of course,
8 there will be a right to a short reply afterwards.
9 One other thing that I wanted to ensure before we proceed any
10 further is that there is no representation from Croatia, from the
11 government of Croatia, at least that I have been informed of, and I would
12 like a confirmation on that from the registrar. There is no
13 representation. No formal representation.
14 THE REGISTRAR: Yes. Thank you, Your Honour. I've been informed
15 by telephone by the consulate yesterday that the Croatian delegation --
16 that the Republic of Croatia will not be represented at this hearing.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. I thank you. So that goes on the record
18 as well. And I would start with Defence counsel for Mr. Boskoski. I'll
19 give you the floor, sir. Please restrict your submissions to a very brief
20 resume of the grounds upon which you are seeking the provisional release
21 of your client and the various issues that seem to be in contention
22 between you and the Prosecution. Also, particularly in relation to why
23 you seek -- why you seek the provisional release of your client to the
24 former republic -- Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia while there are
25 proceedings pending against your client in Croatia.
1 All right. You have the floor, and you have 15 minutes at the
3 MR. GODZO: [Interpretation] Mr. President and Honourable Judges,
4 among all the issues that have been presented in the filings, I will
5 select some of them to present the case for provisional release of
6 Mr. Boskoski clearly and briefly in five headings.
7 The first point I'd like to make concerns the character of the
8 accused and his cooperation with the Prosecution and the Tribunal. Legal
9 circumstances, unfortunately, did not allow Mr. Boskoski to express his
10 comprehensible respect to the Tribunal and to demonstrate his commitment
11 to international rule of law and to -- with his voluntary surrender.
12 Regrettably, at the time the indictment has been communicated to him, the
13 accused was in Pula Detention Unit, waiting for another case.
14 Being indicted before this Tribunal, Mr. Boskoski did not in any
15 way or shape legally confront his transferring to The Hague. On his
16 initial appearance, he has without any time delay entered a plea and
17 kindly asked the Trial Chamber for immediate possible commencement of the
19 To support the Defence's claim that the accused is a trustworthy
20 person, that if released he will appear for trial, we have submitted some
21 recommendations concerning that he is a man of trust issued by relevant
22 Macedonian politicians. In their personal statements, they have referred
23 to the character of the accused, his peaceful solutions to political
24 problems, his democratic attitude with political parties, and his
25 cooperation with the Prosecution and the Tribunal. Their joint conclusion
1 leave no doubt that the accused will pose no danger to any victims or
2 witnesses and will appear for trial. And maybe the best description of
3 his personality was given by former Macedonian Minister of Foreign
4 Affairs, Mr. Slobodan Cashulev, attached to the reply which I'd like to
5 quote in brief.
6 "Ljube Boskoski is a God-fearing, church-going person, an honest
7 and highly ethical man, a loving father and a loyal friend. He is, as God
8 is my witness, a human being with capital H anyone would pray to have on
9 his side in times of need."
10 The second very important issue I want to reveal are the -- is the
11 test of proportionality. Mr. Boskoski's charged with three counts under
12 Article 3 of the Statute, violations of law and customs of war, for
13 failure to punish. He is not charged as a direct perpetrator of a single
14 offence but instead he is indirectly involved in this case. Having in
15 mind that this Tribunal deals only with serious charges, the Defence
16 would, however, like to note that the charges against the accused are at
17 the lower bottom end of the scale.
18 In this case, a long period of detention of the accused is not a
19 suitable and necessary measure, and moreover, the jurisprudence of both
20 the Tribunal and the European Court of Human Rights has emphasised that
21 gravity of the charges cannot by itself serve to justify a long period of
22 pre-trial detention on remand.
23 The third heading in my submissions concerns the crucial question
24 whether the accused, if released, will appear for trial. His background
25 as a relevant Macedonian politician and his personal and family honour
1 leave him no other option than to appear before this Tribunal whenever
2 ordered to do so to face the charges. He is absolutely convinced in his
3 innocence, and he has full respect to the honourable members of the
4 Chamber. Released or not, it is a matter of his personal interest to face
5 the charges, to stand before the Trial Chamber, and to prove his innocence
6 in this case in his family name and on behalf of Republic of Macedonia
7 whose minister he was during the events in question.
8 Mr. President, Your Honours, let me briefly make an analysis of
9 his statement. He expresses his utmost readiness to participate in the
10 proceedings. He has offered his whole personal assets as a bail bond. He
11 has indicated that he will abide by whatever restriction the Court may
12 impose to him. He has agreed to freeze his political career until the
13 termination of the case. And at the end of this heading, I'd like to
14 underline his intention to continue his political career after the trial.
15 To do so, it would be vital for his career first to face the charges and
16 to appear at the trial before this Tribunal. Therefore, the submissions
17 as mentioned above indicate no fear for the Trial Chamber that he might
19 Mr. President, that brings me to the fourth heading, which is
20 addressed to witnesses' intimidation. First of all, there is no
21 indication for the accused as a violent person at all, and he has no
22 criminal record. From the time he was indicted and especially from the
23 moment the supporting material has been disclosed to the Defence, there
24 has been no single interference done with any witnesses or victims. Four
25 years after the event has gone and there has not been a history of a
1 single indication of threatening of witnesses in Macedonia. Moreover, the
2 accused has not been charged as a direct perpetrator but he's charged upon
3 superior responsibility doctrine for failure to punish, Article 7(3) of
4 the Statute. He has no intention to interfere with witnesses or victims
5 since that cannot improve his case at all. And vice versa; the
6 Prosecution's case against him could not be in any way interfered by
7 witnesses' intimidation since it is not primarily based on their
8 testimonies but instead on documents.
9 If released, and he prefers to be released in Macedonia, the
10 accused has given the Trial Chamber personal guarantees, inter alia, for
11 not attending any personal contacts with witnesses and victims and for not
12 -- and for not visiting the village of Ljuboten, which, by the way, he
13 has never in his life visited before.
14 At the other hand, may I generalise concerns about witnesses'
15 safety or confidence don't justify refusing provisional release. An
16 existing danger needs to be identified. There has to be clear threat to
17 the safety of witnesses which is linked to specific acts or conduct by the
18 accused. That was the approach of this Tribunal in the Haradinaj case,
19 Prlic, Cermak and Markac, Stanisic, Milutinovic and Delic case.
20 In this case, the Prosecutor has failed to point to any act or
21 conduct or statement of the accused which represent any threat to actual
22 or potential witnesses in this case. At the end of this hearing, the
23 Defence would like to underwrite that in Republic of Macedonia there is no
24 previous history of witnesses' intimidation at all.
25 The fifth and very important issue are the guarantees. It would
1 be pretty fair to conclude that the entire political scene in Macedonia
2 has provided recommendation for Mr. Boskoski that he would appear for
3 trial when ordered to do so. Parliament majority has issued the official
4 government guarantee, and the opposition parliamentary party -- party
5 leaders have generally expressed their support by written statements
6 attached to the reply.
7 Mr. President, in this courtroom Macedonian minister for justice
8 has personally attended to this hearing to support the guarantees and to
9 present the attitude of Republic of Macedonia regarding this Tribunal.
10 Macedonian government has with absolute efficiency so far clearly
11 demonstrated its commitment to international rule of law and to the
12 supremacy of the Tribunal over its institutions, and has acted
13 accordingly. Therefore, we can conclude nothing else than to admit that
14 Republic of Macedonia has been successfully cooperative with the Tribunal
15 so its guarantees can be trusted.
16 And finally to conclude, as the Trial Chamber has noted in
17 previous cases, the time assessment is a relevant factor when determining
18 upon question for provisional release. On traditional -- on the initial
19 appearance, the accused Mr. Boskoski could not be promised a speedy trial.
20 The expectation of a speedy trial is not a visible option for him. Since
21 the trial in this case is unlikely to begin even next year, the length of
22 a pre-trial detention presents an additional heavy burden on the accused
23 as a measure disproportional to the level of the charges and may represent
24 violations of Article 5 and 6 of the European Convention of Human Rights.
25 Therefore, having in mind all the relevant material, the Defence
1 would once again like to underwrite that this is a clear case for
2 provisional release. Presented material leaves no doubt that if released
3 the accused will certainly appear for trial when ordered to do so, and he
4 will pose no danger to victims and witnesses at all. Therefore, we ask
5 the Trial Chamber to grant the motion primarily in Macedonia, because the
6 Macedonia is the crime scene of the event and Ljube Boskoski is Macedonian
7 politician. Furthermore, he would have no objections if he could be
8 released in Croatia as well. He is ready to face all the charges, even
9 the charges in the Rashtanski Lozja case, which, by the way, is Macedonian
10 case, and there is a legal [Realtime transcript read in error "little"]
11 possibility that Macedonian government can restore its jurisdiction to
12 that case to be tried before Macedonian courts.
13 Mr. President, Your Honours, those were the submissions I'd like
14 to make.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you. And, Mr. Scott, would you prefer to
16 answer now or shall we proceed with receiving submissions from
17 Mr. Apostolski?
18 MR. GODZO: In the record there is a little mistake, I think. I
19 didn't say there is a little possibility, I said there is a legal
21 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. Okay. All right. Okay. Okay. All
22 right. Okay.
23 Mr. Scott, shall we proceed with the submissions of Mr. Apostolski
24 or would you like to reply to the submissions we've just heard now?
25 MR. SCOTT: Your Honour, may it please the Court, Mr. Smith will
1 be handling the argument this morning, and I think it's his preference --
2 it would be our preference to respond individually.
3 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. So, Mr. Smith, what I suggest then, if
4 you are going to respond to the submissions that we've heard from counsel
5 for Mr. Boskoski, I think it's the case of giving the floor first to the
6 Honourable Minister of Macedonia to make -- to present her submissions
7 with regard to guarantees in particular, because then of course you can
8 address that aspect immediately, in other words, rather than having it
9 postponed to later.
10 MR. SMITH: I'm in Your Honour's hands. I'm happy to do it either
11 way, but I think it might be --
12 JUDGE AGIUS: No, no, it's up to you. If you feel more
13 comfortable dealing with the two cases one by one, then of course that's
14 how it will be done, but I don't think it makes sense to do -- to proceed
15 with your reply before we have heard the Honourable Minister.
16 MR. SMITH: Thank you, Your Honour.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: So, Madam Minister, you have the floor, please.
18 MS. MLADENOVSKA-GJORGJIVESKA: [Interpretation] Your Honour, in my
19 capacity as the representative of the government of the Republic of
20 Macedonia, I wish to state before you that if the accused Mr. Ljube
21 Boskoski and Mr. Johan Tarculovski are provisionally released, and if they
22 reside in the Republic of Macedonia, the government of the Republic of
23 Macedonia guarantees that it will undertake all measures and activities to
24 ensure their presence at all summons issued by the Trial Chamber at all
25 trial and pre-trial hearings. Expecting the -- from the distinguished
1 Trial Chamber of The Hague Tribunal to be understanding and to permit the
2 guarantee -- accept the guarantee of the Republic of Macedonia for
3 provisional release of Ljube Boskoski and Johan Tarculovski, the
4 government of the Republic of Macedonia guarantees, pursuant to Rule 65
5 testimony Rules of Procedure and Evidence of this Tribunal, that it will
6 fulfil the following conditions: The accused will appear at the trial if
7 they are provisionally released, and they won't pose any threat for no
8 victim, witness, or any other person.
9 Aware of the significance and the need of existence of such body
10 within the international community, the government of the Republic of
11 Macedonia reiterates the political will for full cooperation with this
12 Tribunal. The Republic of Macedonia joins the many states which have thus
13 far supported the Tribunal in acting upon all cases that fall within the
14 competence of this Court dealing with persons who perpetrated criminal
15 offences subject to establishing the criminal responsibility before the
17 Your Honour, the government of the Republic of Macedonia stresses
18 that the accused before The Hague Tribunal, Mr. Ljube Boskoski and
19 Mr. Johan Tarculovski, before this Court have the right to full legal aid
20 in the course of the entire procedure until the final verdict is brought.
21 Over the past period of time, the successful cooperation with the
22 Tribunal has been evident with the Republic of Macedonia, and we believe
23 it will continue in the forthcoming period. The state institutions in the
24 Republic of Macedonia over the past period of time have continuously and
25 timely acted upon all motions regarding the cases within the competence of
1 the Tribunal, and for this assistance and information in relation of which
2 assistance and information have been requested from the Republic of
3 Macedonia. The competent institutions in the Republic of Macedonia with
4 the highest degree of professionality has cooperated with the
5 representatives of the International Court in relation to all cases in
6 which the Tribunal has expressed interest. This practice, I have to
7 stress, is a political orientation of the government of the Republic of
8 Macedonia and remains valid over the forthcoming period.
9 Your Honour, the government of the Republic of Macedonia assures
10 the Tribunal that it has legislation and other measures and activities
11 that it can undertake. Dealing in terms of legislation, I would mention
12 the law on criminal procedure, the law on internal affairs, and we also
13 have numerous secondary legislation items as well as other mechanisms and
14 measures which allow her to act and undertake activities in accordance
15 with the motions and orders of the Trial Chamber in order to secure
16 permanent presence at the territory of the Republic of Macedonia of the
17 accused, and by this provide the accessibility and the appearance before
18 the International Court at any time upon a motion from the Trial Chamber,
19 and also prevent any interference with the witnesses in the procedure.
20 On the basis of the constitution of the Republic of Macedonia, the
21 government guarantees the accused protection of life, personal safety, and
22 protection of their property. We reiterate our decision to respect the
23 conditions for provisional release for each of the accused prescribed by
24 the Trial Chamber, and upon its motion, to undertake activities if the
25 accused violate any of the conditions. The state bodies in the Republic
1 of Macedonia have the capacity, have legal mechanisms and capability to
2 fully respect the decision issued by the Trial Chamber of The Hague
3 Tribunal in relation to the guarantee that the Republic of Macedonia has
5 A priority for the government of the Republic of Macedonia is to
6 successfully continue our cooperation with The Hague Tribunal. These two
7 cases are not and cannot be a reason for the cooperation, successful
8 cooperation and the good relations between the government of the Republic
9 of Macedonia and the Hague Tribunal to be disrupted. It means that the
10 government of the Republic of Macedonia will not permit and will prevent a
11 potential violation of the order and will immediately inform the Trial
12 Chamber if the persons infringe the provisions from the order of the Trial
14 I am presenting the position of the government, that it will
15 respond and act positively upon any order of the Trial Chamber in relation
16 to these two cases.
17 The government of the Republic of Macedonia, after potential
18 handing over of the persons, assures the Court that it possesses
19 legislation in the Republic of Macedonia which is applicable at the entire
20 territory of the state and at all times and for any citizen and that it
21 has the capacity and capability to undertake all legal measures which
22 provide for acting upon the motion of the Trial Chamber. With this, we
23 present the position that neither persons subject to the guarantee nor
24 other citizens, no other persons, cannot perpetrate an offence which won't
25 be sanctioned, and for this The Hague Tribunal has been informed timely.
1 I am now discussing the cases of the two accused.
2 As it is known, the Republic of Macedonia has no law for
3 cooperation with The Hague Tribunal, but that in any moment in the current
4 cooperation with the Hague Tribunal has -- the non-existence of a law was
5 not an obstacle for action. On the contrary, with all the activities that
6 the -- the governmental bodies had in Macedonia, they presented their
7 preparedness to act, sending all the cases that were asked by the Republic
8 of Macedonia, submitting all the information to which -- which -- for
9 which an answer was asked from us. This means that the successful
10 cooperation it is -- it is our interest to continue in the future in a
11 manner that has been taking place so far.
12 The Republic of Macedonia, with the acts chargeable under The
13 Hague Tribunal, is -- has been faced for the first time after the 2001
14 conflict and in the acting with these cases we have no big experience.
15 Out of those reasons I would like to assure you that it is our interest to
16 act in accordance to all the requests and orders that will be issued by
17 the Trial Chamber to the institutions in Macedonia. This is our interest.
18 That will continue. Since the cooperation with The Hague Tribunal, as I
19 previously said, is a priority with the government, at the moment we are
20 in the process of Euro integration, in the process of reforms significant
21 for our country, and it is our interest that all these activities in the
22 process of the reforms and cooperation with The Hague Tribunal to continue
23 also in the future.
24 In the Macedonian public, the image of the International Criminal
25 Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia established with the Resolution 827 of
1 25th of May, 1993, is a positive one and is based upon the assurance that
2 this Tribunal makes just judgements.
3 Your Honour, accepting of the guarantees of the government of the
4 Republic of Macedonia for provisional release of the accused Mr. Ljube
5 Boskoski and Mr. Johan Tarculovski can contribute to the strengthening of
6 the dignity of this Tribunal before the Macedonian public as a just body.
7 I thank you for the opportunity to present my guarantee.
8 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you, Minister.
9 So I think you have the floor now. And then, Mr. Apostolski, you
10 will have the floor and we can conclude.
12 MR. SMITH: Thank you, Your Honours. At the outset I believe I
13 have 15 minutes but I might take a few extra minutes in relation to
14 Mr. Boskoski because there are some common issues that would apply for
15 Mr. Tarculovski as well.
16 Your Honour, Mr. Boskoski's application is strongly opposed by the
17 Prosecution. As Your Honour is well aware, it is for the Defence to prove
18 on the balance of probabilities that he will appear for trial, the accused
19 will appear for trial, and will not interfere or present a danger to
20 victim witnesses or any other person.
21 In relation to the first matter, will Mr. Boskoski appear for
22 trial, I note at the outset that in relation to the Prosecution's response
23 to the Defence motion for provisional release, the Prosecution raised the
24 issue of Mr. Boskoski's non-attendance before the Macedonian courts in
25 relation to the other matter which he is in custody in Croatia for. In
1 fact, what happened last year, Mr. Boskoski fled from Macedonia once he
2 discovered that he was indicted and subject to legal proceedings in the
3 Macedonian courts.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment. Let me interrupt you here. This is
5 strongly contested by Mr. Boskoski in his reply. He said that he left
6 Macedonia regularly in a legal way to proceed to Croatia where he was then
7 held, detained, and et cetera. But you're using the word "fled." He's
8 contesting that as a fact. And if you are in a position to address it
9 further, considering his reply, then please do. Otherwise, of course I
10 will give you back the floor later to address this issue, which is
11 important. All right?
12 MR. SMITH: Thank you, Your Honour. That is correct, Mr. Boskoski
13 does have dual citizenship and can either live in Croatia or Macedonia.
14 However, the Prosecution submits from some evidence that we put before you
15 shortly that the reason for Mr. Boskoski fleeing Macedonia in early last
16 year, in 2004, was because of the legal proceedings instigated against him
17 by the Macedonian courts.
18 Your Honours, in the Prosecution response you would see -- of the
19 7th of June, you would see a request where the Prosecution has asked the
20 Macedonian government for a number of pieces of information relating to
21 this provisional release hearing. At the time that the Prosecution filed
22 their response, a reply had not been -- had not been received, but
23 recently a reply has been received from the Macedonian government, and in
24 fact the documents that relate to that reply I think have been distributed
25 to you in the last few minutes.
1 The documents have been provided to the Defence yesterday, and
2 what the documents do is highlight whether or not Mr. Boskoski in the
3 past, in relation to the other case that he's on trial for in Croatia,
4 whether in fact he attempted to avoid the judicial proceedings there.
5 If Your Honours would be mind to look at tab 6 of those documents,
6 and perhaps if people could -- if the Court could press the "computer
7 evidence" button on their screens in Sanction, and I have a summary
8 translation of one of the documents that's been provided by the Macedonian
10 JUDGE AGIUS: I think the Honourable Minister and her team needs
11 maybe some assistance to make sure that -- they do have. You do have the
12 screen the text in Macedonian and in English?
13 MS. MLADENOVSKA-GJORGJIVESKA: [Interpretation] Yes, everything is
14 all right. Thank you. Everything is all right. Thank you. Everything
15 is all right.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: And the accused himself. Mr. Boskoski, can you see
17 this on your screen, Mr. Boskoski?
18 THE ACCUSED BOSKOSKI: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.
19 JUDGE AGIUS: And, counsel, Mr. Godzo?
20 MR. GODZO: [Interpretation] Yes, at the moment.
21 JUDGE AGIUS: All right, then we can proceed.
22 MR. SMITH: Your Honour, this --
23 THE INTERPRETER: We have now lost the signal in the booth. We
24 don't have it on our screens any longer.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: We don't either, so we need -- we need either to
1 press "computer evidence" again, I think.
2 MR. SMITH: We have it on one computer here, Your Honour, but not
3 on the other.
4 Perhaps, Your Honour, if I briefly summarised the content of the
5 document and ...
6 JUDGE AGIUS: What's happening here? Yes. We have it now.
7 MR. SMITH: Thank you, Your Honours. This is just a summary
8 translation and a more complete one will follow today. However, this
9 document best illustrates what Mr. Boskoski's actions were in relation to
10 the judicial proceedings that were issued against him last year.
11 As Your Honours are aware from the papers, Mr. Boskoski is on
12 trial in Croatia for the involvement in the killing of seven illegal
13 immigrants in Macedonia on the 2nd of March, 2002. He and four others,
14 three of them from the Ministry of Interior, are alleged to have executed
15 these men for political gain, and that's the process against Mr. Boskoski
16 at the moment in Croatia.
17 These charges were first raised against Mr. Boskoski on the 30th
18 of April, 2004. As you can see in paragraph 2, the main Prosecution
19 office, on the basis of -- the criminal charges were raised against
20 Mr. Boskoski on the basis of a request from the Prosecution office. On
21 that date, a request for investigation on the 30th of April was delivered
22 to the investigative judge in Skopje who is working on the case with the
23 four other accused. On that same date, the committee, the parliamentary
24 committee for the mandate and immunity matters in the Macedonian Assembly
25 relating to immunity for the question of immunity for members of
1 parliament agreed that the decision to continue the privilege of immunity
2 against Mr. Boskoski would no longer exist and immunity was removed.
3 On that same day, a summons was served on Mr. Boskoski to report
4 to an investigative judge on the 1st of May, 2004, for those murder
5 charges. The summons was received by Mr. Boskoski's lawyer, Mr. Stavre
6 Dzikov, in the Hotel Ambassador in Skopje where Mr. Boskoski was holding a
7 press conference on the very issue of whether or not his immunity should
8 be lifted from prosecution. On the 1st of May, when Mr. Boskoski was due
9 to appear at the investigating judge's office by law, the three lawyers
10 appeared but not Mr. Boskoski. They told the investigative judge that
11 Mr. Boskoski was not going to appear because of a procedural irregularity
12 in the lifting of the accused's immunity.
13 As Boskoski did not appear on that date, the investigative judge
14 -- and I think there's a mistake there, it says the 30th of April, it
15 must in fact be the 1st of May -- brought a decision to bring him by
16 force, to issue an arrest warrant.
17 At paragraph 8, on the 4th of May, 2004, regional and
18 international arrest warrants were issued against Mr. Boskoski.
19 According to the investigative judge in relation to the interview
20 conducted by the investigative judge subsequently in Croatia last year,
21 Mr. Boskoski stated that he left to that -- on the 1st of May, 2004. Your
22 Honours, but you'll note in the Defence motion that Mr. Boskoski states to
23 this Court that he left Macedonia on the 30th of April, 2004, which is the
24 same date that he received the summons to attend the following day.
25 The -- the Macedonian authorities were asked this particular
1 question: Whether or not Mr. Boskoski was obliged to present himself to
2 the court or police authorities on the basis of the summons and the
3 investigation, and the investigative judge said no, he was not obliged to
4 report to the police or the courts, however, he was obliged to appear
5 before the investigative judge on the 1st of May because he received a
6 summons as an accused, he was also informed why he had been summonsed, he
7 was informed of his rights and consequences of his failure to appear
8 before the investigating judge.
9 Your Honour, the Prosecution submits that those facts clearly show
10 that Mr. Boskoski left Macedonia to avoid Prosecution for those particular
11 crimes. Obviously it would be more difficult for Mr. Boskoski to be
12 prosecuted for those crimes outside the jurisdiction of Macedonia.
13 Your Honour, this is also supported by the attachment to the
14 Prosecution's motion on the 7th of June, 2005.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: Incidentally, while you are still on the -- before
16 you are leaving this document, the top of the page, the so-called summary
17 translation, first line reads Document Reference, second line, number
18 504/05 dated 28 April, 1005. So that is another mistake that there is on
19 this document. I mean, in the meantime, another thousand years have
21 MR. SMITH: Thank you, Your Honour. We apologise for that and a
22 complete, accurate version --
23 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Let's go to tab 7 now because I think that's
24 what you're referring to.
25 MR. SMITH: Thank you, Your Honours. If we go to -- not tab 7 for
1 the new bundle but this is in relation to the annex D to the Prosecutor's
2 response on the 7th of June, but we actually have it on the screen now,
3 Your Honours.
4 This is Mr. Boskoski's response to the investigative Judge in
5 Croatia, where he was subsequently arrested, stating that -- he explained
6 -- he explained to the judge he left Macedonia after he received
7 information from police officers about an order they had received to take
8 him to the border between Macedonia and Serbia and liquidate him. Namely,
9 the mandate and the immunity commission lifted his immunity, and after
10 that he left the republic urgently.
11 That's an admission by Mr. Boskoski to the investigative judge in
12 Croatia that he was aware that judicial proceedings were issued against
13 him, and he discovered that fact obviously by the summons that he received
14 or his lawyers received on the 30th of April, but also through police
15 officers. And it's clear that Mr. Boskoski was not -- was not liquidated
16 at the border but was assisted by the police to leave -- by certain
17 police, to leave the country.
18 The Prosecution's submission would be that if it was the case that
19 Mr. Boskoski was in serious threat of his life, that would have been put
20 forward in the Defence motion. However, we ask Your Honours not to accept
21 that to be -- to be a fact.
22 And, Your Honour, this again is further supported by another
23 admission by Mr. Boskoski that he intended to escape prosecution in
24 Macedonia by interview that was conducted with the SBS Dateline
25 programme. It is an Australian current affairs programme which was
1 conducted which Mr. Boskoski whilst he was at large in Croatia last year.
2 And this is an attachment, Annex G, to the motion of the 7th of June, the
3 response to the Defence motion on the 7th of June. And you'll see it on
4 Sanction now. He's being interviewed about the Rashtanski Lozja case.
5 And he states: "They knew they had to apply pressure by taking away my
6 immunity. They concocted a trial so that I'd escaped across the border so
7 that I'd either be caught or eliminated at the border. I received
8 information about their plans and those who were supposed to do this to
9 me, and they let me go, and illegally --" he's quite aware that it was not
10 legal to leave -- "and illegally took me across the border, the
11 Macedonia-Serbian border, and I came... secretly into Croatia. I haven't
12 escaped, I'm still in Macedonia ..."
13 In fact, he was in Croatia at the time.
14 Your Honour, the Prosecution would ask that you accept that it's
15 not credible that Mr. Boskoski's life was at stake when he left Macedonia.
16 We ask you to accept that he left Macedonia to avoid prosecution in
17 those matters. And we ask you to accept that there's a high likelihood
18 that if Mr. Boskoski is released, provisionally released from these
19 proceedings, there's a high likelihood that he would do exactly the same
20 thing again, as Mr. Boskoski now is not just facing one set of charges in
21 this court but two sets, one in the Croatian courts, which it's submitted
22 gives him twice the motive to flee like he did in the first instance.
23 Mr. Boskoski remained at large for about four months in -- in
24 Macedonia -- in Croatia, and he was subsequently arrested by the Croatian
25 authorities in August last year. So not only did he flee, he actively
1 stayed away from the Prosecution in Macedonia when he was legally obliged.
2 He knew that there were regional and international warrants out against
3 him and an obligation to answer the charges, he did not. He was in
4 blatant disregard of those court orders.
5 As far as his general incentive to flee should he be provisionally
6 released, the charges in Croatia are serious, of course, and that is one
7 incentive that was incentive for him to flee before. Also, I think the
8 Defence slightly minimised the seriousness of the charges that he appears
9 before you -- that he appears for here today. He's charged with failing
10 to punish subordinates for -- for the killing of seven civilians in
11 Ljuboten village, the destruction of a number of houses, and also the
12 cruel treatment of up to a hundred Ljuboten residents. The Prosecution
13 submits that a -- unlike the Defence's submission that no prison sentence
14 would flow from that, that certainly a substantial prison sentence would
15 flow from that.
16 As far as whether he would be a danger to victim witnesses or
17 other people, placing him back into the same community where the victims
18 and witnesses in fact live back in Macedonia inevitably increases the
19 opportunity for the accused to have influence over Prosecution witnesses.
20 In a lot of cases before the Tribunal, many of the accused are
21 provisionally released to areas in which the victims and witnesses do not
22 live. The problem in Macedonia is exacerbated by the fact that the
23 victims and witnesses live in the same area as the accused. As the
24 accused has received extensive disclosure in these matters, obviously the
25 identity of victims and witnesses are known.
1 If the allegations in the Rashtanski Lozja case are correct,
2 obviously Mr. Boskoski has the inclination to act illegally and we would
3 submit that it would support the possibility that he may interfere with
4 victims and witnesses.
5 I think his ability to -- to influence the legal process can be
6 seen in the fact that police assisted him to leave -- on Mr. Boskoski's
7 account, police assisted him to leave Macedonia and enter Croatia, knowing
8 that proceedings were being issued against him.
9 And I ask Your Honours to take note of the confidential Annex A,
10 confidential Annex part A, Annex A to the witness protection motion of the
11 Prosecution filed on the 27th of April relating to the significant support
12 that Mr. Boskoski, and for that matter Mr. Tarculovski, has in Macedonia.
13 As far as the length of time to trial, it's clear that the longer
14 the time between the -- the longer of the detention before the trial date
15 may favour provisional release rather than a shorter time period. There
16 are indications, Your Honour - I'm not sure whether you are aware - there
17 are indications that this trial may in fact go to trial at an earlier time
18 than is envisaged by the Defence. There are a number large cases
19 scheduled to commence but this case, I believe, is maybe one of the first
20 cases to fill in if one of those cases can't proceed.
21 If -- if that is true, that the trial date is shorter rather than
22 longer, bearing in mind the -- Mr. Boskoski's prior conduct in avoiding
23 the Prosecution for the Rashtanski Lozja case, it's the Prosecution's
24 submission that it would be not -- not a -- not a beneficial decision to
25 -- to allow that risk to occur for a short period of time if the trial is
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 in fact going to commence.
2 In relation to the guarantees, Your Honours, as far as the
3 Croatian government is concerned in relation to this case, the Prosecution
4 believe that the Croatian government have acted in good faith in relation
5 to this case.
6 As far as the Croatian government's or the Croatian court's view
7 of the matter, their view is and has been for the last seven months, since
8 Mr. Boskoski's been in custody before being transferred to the Tribunal,
9 that he is a flight risk. It was their view that if he was released or on
10 provisional release, he would -- he would leave Croatia, which is why the
11 detention order was in place. However, the president of the court
12 believes that risk is no longer there but the state prosecution office in
13 -- the state attorney's office in Croatia have said that they would be
14 applying for his detention if he is released back from this Tribunal.
15 As far as the Macedonian government guarantees are concerned, Your
16 Honours, the Prosecution believe that the Macedonian government have been
17 acting in good faith in relation to this investigation and others. The
18 relationship has been good at a political and executive level.
19 Functionaries within the Macedonian government have been very cooperative.
20 Obviously, the difficulty exists in the political and executive level to
21 be able to control what actually happens on the ground. Clearly in
22 relation to the fleeing of Mr. Boskoski from Macedonia to Croatia last
23 year, on Mr. Boskoski's own admissions some police from the Macedonian
24 government assisted him, and obviously all it needs to be is a few and the
25 guarantees cannot be -- cannot be delivered. But as far as the good faith
1 of the Macedonian government, the Prosecution has no contention with that.
2 One matter that perhaps we should raise is that Mr. Boskoski, as
3 the ex-minister of interior in Macedonia and his want to continue
4 political life there, has significant power and influence in Macedonian
5 society, and we ask Your Honours to accept that it's slightly more
6 difficult for a government to execute arrest of a powerful individual and
7 figure -- figure rather than someone that has less of a significant
8 position in -- in government. This point was raised in the Mrksic
9 decision on appeal against refusal to grant provisional release in October
11 In relation to Mr. Boskoski, Your Honour, and Mr. Tarculovski I
12 will be shorter, we have no further submissions.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you. Mr. Apostolski -- or, rather, before
14 -- I'll give you the floor to respond to any of the points that have just
15 been made, particularly to what I invited you to address earlier on, and
16 this very last area that has been covered by counsel for the Prosecution,
17 and my question to you is the following: That if your client's prior
18 statements that we have seen on the monitor are correct, and in other
19 words, if it is true that the way that the -- his government, his own
20 government, was acting and his regard was sort of a persecution which
21 involved also a risk to his own life, and we're talking of a relatively
22 short time ago, not much, long time ago, I assume they're still the same
23 government, why would he want to return to Macedonia out -- out of all
25 MR. GODZO: I will --
1 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. And Judge Eser, who is the Pre-Trial Judge in
2 this case, would also like to add another question of his own.
3 JUDGE ESER: We have heard that Mr. Boskoski is citizen both of
4 Macedonia and of Croatia, and we got a guarantee from the side from
5 Macedonia. We had some declarations from Croatia, from the judiciary, but
6 no -- so far no guarantee from the Croatian government. Could you perhaps
7 also address this point, in particular also the question what would -- if
8 Boskoski, Mr. Boskoski, would -- would be released to Macedonia, what
9 would be the impact on the criminal proceeding which is going on in
11 MR. GODZO: I will come to that, Mr. President, Your Honours.
12 Concerning first question about being -- about his leaving
13 Macedonia and reasons to do so, I will explain shortly.
14 Ljube Boskoski is a member of the parliament. He is now and he
15 was in the April and May 2004 as well. He is member of the oppositional
16 political party in the government -- in the parliament, and there have
17 been some old animosities between him and one member of the government,
18 which was -- who was participating the government in the April and May
19 2004. Therefore, Ljube Boskoski was not intending to be subject of
20 political prosecution against him. He was afraid that lot of evidence
21 would be fabricated against him, and there is a real danger for him not to
22 face a fair trial in Macedonia. Therefore, he legally leave Macedonia
23 using his diplomatic passport. He legally entered Croatia. He reported
24 to the Croatian authorities. He stay in liberty in Croatia for four
25 months, having day-to-day contact with Croatian authorities regarding
1 issues of Rashtanski Lozja case, and he voluntarily surrendered to
2 Croatian authorities in relating to his charges of Rashtanski Lozja case.
3 The point is, when he left Macedonia there has no -- there has not
4 been indictment against him, there has not been court decision for
5 detaining him. And it is not true that the summary has been given to him
6 at all. At the moment he left Macedonia, he was a free man, having some
7 fear for his life because he has been informed by the relevant -- relevant
8 members of the security that his life might be in danger.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment. Let's make -- get this clear. At the
10 time he left Macedonia, legally or illegally, I don't want to get into
11 that, was he a minister at that time or was he then already in opposition?
12 MR. GODZO: Ljube was in opposition at the time.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: At the time, so the person with whom he was in
14 conflict, I assume, the other person was then a minister.
15 MR. GODZO: Minister.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: Are you talking about the minister of the interior?
17 MR. GODZO: Yes, of course, Your Honour.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: Is that minister still there now and does he still
19 occupy the office of minister of the interior?
20 MR. GODZO: I was just coming to that point.
21 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay.
22 MR. GODZO: In November 2004 --
23 JUDGE AGIUS: Great minds think alike.
24 MR. GODZO: In the November 2004, the whole Macedonian government
25 resigned. After the resignment of the government, Mr. Ljube Boskoski,
1 from the Pula Detention Unit, has immediately filed a written request,
2 three written requests to Pula court authorities to be transferred to
3 Macedonia since there has been significant changes in the fairness of the
4 procedure. Since there has been some -- some -- there has been new
5 personal government orchestra. Therefore, he asked to be transferred to
6 Macedonia. It is the greatest argument that he never really wanted to
7 escape facing charges. The point is he wanted to be sure that he would
8 face fair trial in Macedonia. That is the case in -- for Ljube Boskoski.
9 And the question of -- the second question was about -- please can
10 you --
11 JUDGE ESER: My question was you so far have only dealt with the
12 situation in Macedonia.
13 MR. GODZO: Yes.
14 JUDGE ESER: What is the reaction by the Croatian judiciary?
15 Because you know we have heard that Mr. Boskoski's also prosecuted in
16 Croatia, and so far we do not have some sort of government guarantee from
17 the side of Croatia.
18 MR. GODZO: Yes. Yes, Your Honour. We do not have written
19 guarantees from Croatian authorities, but instead, in the Prosecution's
20 response in Confidential Annex C, paragraph 7, Croatian authorities have
21 stated that Republic of Croatia does not intend to stipulate a provisional
22 release of the indictee from the supervision of Croatian authorities in
23 order to finish the proceeding in Rashtanski Lozja case as the Republic of
24 Croatia respects the presidency of the ICTY and has no objection for the
25 proceedings to continue after the proceedings before this Tribunal.
1 And in 7(B), they -- they leave an option that if Court, by the
2 way decides Mr. Ljube Boskoski to be provisionally released in Croatia,
3 that he would act accordingly as they did in the cases of other indictees
4 that were provisionally released in Croatia since that Republic of Croatia
5 has long history of dealing with this such situations.
6 So that would be my address.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you. I now give the floor to Mr. Apostolski
8 on behalf of accused Tarculovski.
9 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Your Honour, respected colleague
10 Prosecutor, the motion for a provisional release has been filed on the
11 submission of the evaluation of the real possibilities and uncontested
12 facts. We believe that our case is strong, real, and justified.
13 As the Defence declared in the motion for provisional release, the
14 accused fulfils the conditions required by the Rules of Procedure and
15 Evidence of the Tribunal. The accused guarantees to be accessible for the
16 trial and would not pose a danger for any victims, witnesses, or other
18 Regarding the issue of the seriousness of the criminal charges
19 that he is charged for, that the accused Tarculovski is charged, we want
20 to stress that for more serious acts against humanity, serious violations
21 of the Geneva Conventions in the cases the Prosecutor versus Haradinaj and
22 allies, the Prosecutor versus Milutinovic and allies, the Prosecutor
23 against Prlic and others, they were released. They were provisionally
25 As the Court knows, the accused Johan Tarculovski has never
1 refused to cooperate with the Tribunal. By the mistake of the authorities
2 of the Republic of Macedonia, he has unfortunately been arrested and
3 detained without being previously notified or given a chance to
4 voluntarily surrender to the Tribunal. It is a fact that Johan has never
5 received a summons or in any way notified that against him an indictment
6 has been placed. The manner of his arrest we --
7 JUDGE AGIUS: Let me interrupt you here for a moment, because I
8 recall, in preparing for today's sitting, I recall reading somewhere a
9 statement by the Prosecution that your client knew of the existence of an
10 indictment against him quite some time -- quite some time ago, and he let
11 practically years pass before he even again reacted to the approaches that
12 the Office of the Prosecutor was trying to make in his regard. So I would
13 like you to address that, because I remember reading it somewhere. So
14 it's not a question of -- of all of a sudden as if this fell from Heaven
15 and hit him on his head and suddenly he found himself here and now he is
16 complaining that he was never given a chance to voluntarily surrender. It
17 seems to me from what I have read, if what I have read is correct, of
18 course, because then that stands to be seen, that he knew from quite some
19 time ago that he was not only a suspect but also an indicted person, and
20 he decided for reasons of his own, which may be good or may be bad, to try
21 and avoid finding himself here. I'm not suggesting that he tried to
22 escape or anything of this sort, but he just reacted passively at a
23 certain point in time. And that is something that I think you need to
24 address, or at least that we would like to hear some submissions about.
25 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] I wanted in the continuation of
1 my presentation to address this question.
2 The accused Johan Tarculovski has been informed by telephone and
3 called to appear for an interview. The telephone information, according
4 to Macedonian law, is not a valid summons for hearing. The only valid
5 manner to call someone for interview is by written summons which should be
6 personally delivered to the person. I want to address -- I'm addressing
7 the procedure when he was called for an interview. And after the
8 indictment has been raised, he couldn't even assume that there is an
9 indictment against him. So neither the accused nor -- he was not --
10 neither able nor aware that an indictment has been filed against him
11 before the Tribunal in The Hague.
12 By the way, the accused accepts full cooperation with the Court
13 Tribunal, including being interviewed by the Prosecution in accordance
14 with Article 63, 42 and 43 of the Rules.
15 Was my explanation sufficient?
16 JUDGE AGIUS: If that is your explanation, we are not going to
17 tell you whether it's sufficient or not. I mean, that's your explanation.
18 We'll tell you when we hand down our decision. So -- and you also have to
19 hear what the Prosecution has to say on that point.
20 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] The Republic of Macedonia
21 guarantees that if Johan is provisionally released, he will be at the
22 disposal to the Tribunal. As all said by our minister of justice, the
23 Macedonian government in the past has practically showed that it
24 cooperates with The Hague Tribunal even though there is no law for
25 cooperation with the Tribunal. Macedonia created conditions for
1 unobstructed work of the Tribunal and has given at their disposal all the
2 classified and secure documents to the Office of the Prosecutor by the
3 state. Also, by the request of the Prosecutor, interviews were held with
4 top intelligence structures and even some witnesses were arrested who
5 avoided to face the Tribunal.
6 The cooperation with the Tribunal is a top priority of the
7 Macedonian government, which has established a Commission for Cooperation
8 consisting of the top ministers, including the minister of justice, the
9 minister of interior, and the minister of foreign affairs.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: You don't need to address that much, because
11 basically it's conceded by the Prosecution. In other words, it supersedes
12 any other statement by the Prosecution that we may have received in the
13 written documentation, written pleadings pertaining to this issue. So
14 there is no reason why we should even waste --
15 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] I just wanted to address this
16 issue with one question -- with one sentence. Your Honour, the accused is
17 not connected to any case of influencing witnesses or has ever tried to
18 contact any of the victims from the intensive terrorist attacks from 2001
19 until the day of his arrest.
20 Johan Tarculovski has never been prosecuted criminally. Neither
21 there is a proceeding against him at the moment. For these facts we have
22 provided evidence to the Court, records from the criminal evidence,
23 criminal records of Johan Tarculovski held -- kept within the Ministry of
24 Interior as well as an affidavit of the competent courts in the Republic
25 of Macedonia.
1 In Macedonia, unlike the other countries of former Yugoslavia,
2 there is no single case of intimidation of witnesses, so the courts should
3 not fear that if the accused Johan Tarculovski is provisionally released
4 will intimidate witnesses or in any other way influence on them. His
5 clean past is a further confirmation of this fact.
6 Furthermore that on 19th of May, 2005, the Macedonian parliament
7 has adopted a law for protection of witnesses which regulates the
8 procedure and the conditions of providing protection and assistance to the
9 witnesses, justice collaborators, victims who are appearing as witnesses.
10 After the intensive terrorist attacks of 2001, Johan Tarculovski
11 got happily married and got his first daughter, Melani. Prior to his
12 detention, he lived a happy life. He enjoyed the first days of the life
13 of his daughter. Since his daughter turns 20 days, Johan was arrested and
14 has not seen his daughter since then.
15 I ask the Court to take into consideration the fact that the
16 chances for the commencing of the trial, according to the estimate of the
17 Defence, is difficult to happen before 2007. Even if the Prosecution
18 allocates all the resources needed to expedite the pre-trial filings, the
19 Defence would need considerable amount of time to prepare for the trial.
20 We ask the Courts to have into consideration the -- that all persons are
21 equal before the International Tribunal and that accused should be
22 presumed innocent until proven guilty, which is in accordance to the
23 provision of the Tribunal's Statute.
24 With the permission of the Courts, we submitted a written
25 statement by Johan Tarculovski in which he guarantees that if
1 provisionally released he would appear for trial and would not pose a
2 danger for the victims, witnesses, and the other persons. We respect --
3 we ask the Court to grant the motion for provisional release of the
4 accused Johan Tarculovski.
5 I thank you.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you, Mr. Apostolski.
7 Madam Minister, would you like to add anything to what you have
8 previously stated in relation to accused Tarculovski or would you just
10 MS. MLADENOVSKA-GJORGJIVESKA: [Interpretation] I could only add a
11 few sentences.
12 Your Honours, I wish to amend my statement briefly only with
13 issues that I spoke about previously. Actually, the Republic of Macedonia
14 really at this moment many reform processes are under way, and these
15 reform processes are mostly concentrated in the police and in the justice
16 system bodies, the reforms of the justice system. I wish to stress
17 certain figures relevant for the work of the police from the beginning of
18 this year onwards. It has been acted upon 513 warrants issued in the
19 Republic of Macedonia, and these persons have been arrested after the
20 warrants were issued. Observed is a percentage of decrease of crime rate
21 in the overall territory in the state, and that percentage is between 18
22 and 43 per cent in various parts of the territory of the Republic of
23 Macedonia. It should be noted that the crime rate has significantly
24 decreased in the crisis regions from the conflict of 2001, and in the
25 region of Tetovo, for instance, has decreased by some 40 per cent. This
1 percentage of reduction of the crime rate also goes along with the fact
2 that the process of discovering of the perpetrators of crime, also of the
3 most serious crimes, for instance, from the beginning of the year until
4 the end of June of 2005, in the Republic of Macedonia a total of 22
5 murders have been committed and only one of these cases has not been
6 clarified. Regarding the others, the perpetrators have been discovered
7 and proceedings against them have been initiated. Thank you.
8 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you, Honourable Minister.
9 Let me check something.
10 What's the position if at all that certain Ljube Bosk -- sorry,
11 not -- Ljubco Georgievski holds at present within VMRO? Ljubco. He was
12 former Prime Minister.
13 MR. GODZO: Ljubco Georgievski was former Prime Minister of
14 Macedonia until 2002.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: And what is he now?
16 MR. GODZO: He's Member of Parliament now.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: Of which party?
18 MR. GODZO: [Interpretation] VMRO People's Party.
19 JUDGE AGIUS: Is it the same party which your client belongs to or
20 is part of?
21 MR. GODZO: Mr. President, there has been -- the VMRO Party has
22 been recently split in two and I do not know exactly which part of it
23 is --
24 JUDGE AGIUS: But is it the party in government or not? No, it's
1 MR. GODZO: -- opposition
2 JUDGE AGIUS: It's in the opposition. Okay. Yes. I think we can
3 safely go back to the Prosecution now for final address on the submissions
4 by Mr. Apostolski, and then you will have the opportunity to reply if you
5 need to, Mr. Apostolski. Go ahead.
6 MR. SMITH: Thank you, Your Honour. Just a couple of brief points
7 in the beginning. It is a significant one to raise again, namely the
8 possible start date of the trial. Indications, quite real indications
9 have been given to us that this trial may be listed for next year, and
10 obviously that's a significant factor in weighing up the issue of
11 provisional release.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: This may or may not and -- I've been here for four
13 years now, and I would rather prefer to hear something more concrete and
14 more reliable than may or may -- it's very easy to tell someone, you know,
15 that --
16 MR. SMITH: I understand your doubt, Your Honour. I've been here
17 for a while too.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: -- your case may come up. It depends. So at the
19 present moment, if there is no clear indication that this case is
20 scheduled to start in 2006, we cannot assume that it will start or that it
21 will even probably start in 2006. So that's the position.
22 MR. SMITH: In relation to my friend's submission about there's
23 been no case of witness interference in Macedonia, in the Rashtanski Lozja
24 case, which is the case which obviously Mr. Boskoski is being tried for in
25 Croatia, the four accused have been acquitted in Macedonia and the
1 Prosecution are appealing that case right at the moment on the basis that
2 the verdict was assessed as a series of failures and it's not
3 comprehensive and contradictory, so that's in the process at the moment.
4 The -- from Annex F, which is a newspaper report from a number of
5 newspapers in Macedonia to the Prosecution motion of the 7th of June, in
6 the last paragraph Your Honours will see that, according to the
7 Prosecution, the withdrawal of the main witness's statements in the main
8 hearing took place due to the pressure and threats from the indictees'
9 families and the audience in the court. So it's just a -- it seems to
10 present itself in stark contrast to what's been put forward by my friend.
11 As far as Mr. Tarculovski's ability or likelihood to attend at
12 trial, I think it's clear that the -- the Defence admit or the accused
13 admits that he was contacted by the Prosecution last year in order to be
14 interviewed, and because a summons wasn't given to him he failed to
16 I would like to thank my friend for allowing me to put in a set of
17 facts which relate to the attempts that the Prosecution office has made in
18 the last year to try and contact Mr. Tarculovski before he was arrested in
19 March this year to appear for interview in Macedonia.
20 What Your Honours have before you, I think it's been distributed
21 and perhaps I'll mark it as number 9, is a request for assistance to the
22 Macedonian government to serve summonses on a number of individuals who
23 were unable to be served despite the best efforts of the Prosecution and
24 the Ministry of Interior and Ministry of Justice.
25 In that --
1 JUDGE ESER: Could you --
2 MR. SMITH: It's a single document, Your Honour. It's reference
3 number BS/T07/M --
4 JUDGE AGIUS: In fact I have made myself a note here before we
5 rise today that you need to tender these two documents formally because
6 they haven't been tendered as yet.
7 MR. SMITH: Thank you, Your Honour. I'll do that.
8 JUDGE AGIUS: So we need to have them on the record, yeah.
9 MR. SMITH: In that request for assistance, the Prosecution lay
10 down the basis for asking further attempts to be made by the Macedonian
11 government to try and find Mr. Tarculovski. Consistent with what my
12 friend has said, from -- on the second page you see the attempts that were
13 made in June and early July to try and contact Mr. Tarculovski. They were
14 quite intensive attempts for at least a ten to 15-day period. Summonses
15 were unable to be served on him. The registered address of
16 Mr. Tarculovski was not the address that he lived at. That made the
17 initial serving the summons difficult. And in fact, the Macedonian
18 authorities, the Ministry of Interior, did not know where Mr. Tarculovski
19 in fact resided. This led to a number of contacts with Mr. Tarculovski
20 through some confidential informants, and you'll see from the facts stated
21 in this document that two different sources contacted Mr. Tarculovski and
22 conveyed the message that the Prosecution investigators planned to
23 interview him and he decided not to -- not to attend. And one of the
24 messages came back that Mr. Tarculovski would not attend until he received
25 a summons. The difficulty obviously arose, the fact that Mr. Tarculovski
1 would not say where in fact he lived.
2 After a number of attempts were made to locate him, the phone
3 number of Mr. Tarculovski was provided. He was spoken to by an
4 investigator. He said that he would attend, and that -- two days later,
5 and he didn't do so. Then in July, you can see that the mobile phone was
6 then sold to another person, and that other person didn't -- the SIM card,
7 and that other person wasn't able to say where Mr. Tarculovski was.
8 The Prosecution would submit that the selling of the -- or the
9 giving away of the SIM card right at the time when the Prosecution were
10 intensively trying to contact Mr. Tarculovski is certainly some act of --
11 act of avoidance of cooperating with the Tribunal.
12 This -- this avoidance of speaking to Prosecution investigators
13 led to Mr. Tarculovski's arrest in October 2004, arrest for interview, and
14 also led to his subsequent arrest in March. The Prosecution did not feel
15 it was appropriate to summons him after the act of avoidance in the past.
16 As far as Mr. Tarculovski's incentive to flee, his prior
17 behaviour, the Prosecution submits, shows that. Also the charges that
18 Mr. Tarculovski are facing are very serious. He has been alleged by the
19 Prosecution to be the main instigator in the killings of seven people, the
20 destruction of a large number of properties in a village, and the cruel
21 treatment of ten people from that village. He was the leader, on the
22 Prosecution's allegations, of the group that committed the ground attack
23 on Ljuboten village, which was largely against a civilian population.
24 If Mr. Tarculovski is found guilty of these offences, the
25 Prosecution's submission would be that the prison sentence would be quite
2 As far as -- obviously the Defence have raised in their motions
3 that he has no means to flee. It's clear from the documents that his
4 family is receiving substantial funding, and he also has vehicles, et
5 cetera, in which to do so if it was his -- if that was his position.
6 As far as whether he poses a danger to victims, witnesses, or
7 other people, the fact of his involvement in the Ljuboten event, the
8 Prosecution would submit he is a violent individual. The Prosecution
9 initially thought that the accused had a prior criminal record for a
10 violence offence but it appears it wasn't a criminal record but a
11 misdemeanour proceedings which has -- his slate has been wiped clean.
12 The difficulty again arises that if Mr. Tarculovski is released,
13 he will be placed back -- right back into the community of where the
14 victims and witnesses in fact live, and that in itself, Your Honours, the
15 Prosecution submit, poses a danger to victims. It creates possibilities
16 for intimidation to occur, and I'd like to refer Your Honours to the
17 decision of Delalic on the 24th of October, 1996, in the decision on the
18 motion for provisional release filed by the accused Hazim Delic. "The
19 Court held that relevant to this determination is the fact the accused
20 wishes upon his release, in return -- to return to the location where the
21 alleged crimes took place. For instance, a mere presence of an accused
22 convicted for murder in the vicinity of victims and witnesses may have a
23 substantial impact on them and on their willingness to cooperate with the
24 International Tribunal."
25 That may be the case -- that may be more of a case to -- to not
1 grant provisional release than, say, for other accused who are sent back
2 to other areas.
3 And, Your Honours, the Prosecution ask Your Honours to take note
4 of the witness -- the security situation in Macedonia in relation to the
5 annex for the Prosecution's motion for protection measures for victims and
7 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you, sir. And it is precisely to this last
8 intelligence report that we have -- that is of some concern to us that I'm
9 going to address the two parties now, and I will ask for reaction from the
10 Defence counsel in particular to what I'm going to say.
11 Intelligence report that we have, Mr. Godzo, in relation to your
12 client speak of a demonstration which occurred on the 18th of March of
13 this year in the town of Tetovo. This was allegedly a demonstration held
14 to -- in favour of your client but in protest to the missing person issue
15 that, as you know about, and also and his support in relation to the
16 Rashtanski Lozja case.
17 It is reported to us that the family of your client participated
18 in this demonstration, and it is also reported to us that during this
19 demonstration anti-ICTY posters were shown, and the ICTY indictment was
20 actually also mentioned. Then there was -- that was on the 18th of March.
21 On the 22nd of March, then, there seems to have been another
22 demonstration, this time in support of your client but also in support of
23 accused Tarculovski, and incidentally, this was held, out of all places,
24 right in front of the Supreme Court building in Skopje.
25 It is reported to us that afterwards this -- first of all, that
1 this consisted of about 1.500 demonstrators, some of whom then continued
2 their march towards the parliament building. The information that we have
3 is that this was not a spontaneous demonstration at all but that it had
4 all the givings, all the markings of an organised demonstration, with
5 demonstrators being pulled, brought over from outside Skopje. There were
6 banners. And we are also told that ultimately this was a peaceful
8 But we are also told, and this is particularly more relevant to
9 your client, Mr. Apostolski, than to Mr. Boskoski, that in this peaceful
10 demonstration of the 22nd of March, 2005, in Skopje, so-called football
11 fans from a committee participated during the demonstration. We are told
12 that your client was head of this formation in the past. The information
13 that we have is that formation has been described as violent in the past,
14 and we are also informed that during the demonstration calls for weapons
15 and ammunition were heard in support of your client.
16 With regard to your client Mr. Boskoski, and in relation to this
17 22nd March demonstration in Skopje, we are informed that a substantial
18 part of the supporters, demonstrators supporting -- showing support for
19 your client came from the so-called Lions formation, better described to
20 us as an ex-special police formation composed of police reservists and
21 founded by your client way back in 2001 and affiliated to him. We are
22 also told that this was disbanded, this formation was disbanded by the
23 Ministry of Interior after your client resigned, and the reason for the
24 disbanding of -- disbandment of this formation was because of the severe
25 and serious incidents that this unit was supposed to be involved in.
1 I don't think I need to say any more. What I have said is
2 self-explanatory and justifies on a prima facie basis, of course, the
3 concerns that we have in relation to both applications for provisional
4 release, because notwithstanding the certainty that the Trial Chamber has
5 on the guarantees offered by the government of the former Yugoslav
6 Republic of Macedonia, we still have to deal with these problems.
7 So I now give you the floor, then you. And I also want a
8 confirmation from the Prosecution whether the information that we have is
9 correct or not, because ultimately, I mean, you may have checked yourself
10 and come to a different conclusion, and whether these are of concern to
11 you as well because no one has mentioned.
13 MR. GODZO: Thank you, Mr. President. I will address to the Trial
14 Chamber referring your questions. Addressing the meeting in Tetovo on
15 18th of March, as I have heard.
16 Well, that meeting was not organised by any organisation to
17 support any political idea. It was spontaneous meeting of the citizens of
18 village of Celopek, which is the village where Mr. Boskoski was born. It
19 is near Tetovo. The meeting held place in the Tetovo main square, and it
20 was not as -- there were not so many participants in the meeting because
21 it is not a big village. The village of Celopek is a small village. But
22 mostly in the centre of Tetovo it is a great possibility that many --
23 there were many spectators, many usual pedestrians in the street.
24 The point is that Mr. Ljube Boskoski has nothing to do in
25 organising any protest against this Tribunal. He has shown by now his --
1 the great respect for this Tribunal, and his commitment for the
2 international rule of law is very huge. During the time he was minister
3 of interior in Republic of Macedonia, he has personally started the
4 cooperation with this Tribunal regarding possible -- possible incidents
5 and possible charges that occurred during the events in 2001. Therefore,
6 meeting in Tetovo in 18th of March, by my opinion and his opinion, I
7 think, has nothing to do with him. He has not any part taken in the
8 organisation of that meeting.
9 And the other issue is meeting in Skopje on 22nd of March before
10 the Supreme Court. Even less my opinion is that meeting before the
11 Supreme Court was not addressed to these proceedings. Either it was not
12 addressed to Ljube Boskoski's support. I do not have the information
13 about the both of the meetings. Officially I have never received such
14 information. But as a Macedonian citizen, as a part of my knowledge, the
15 meeting before the Supreme Court of Skopje, it was mainly addressed to the
16 Rashtanski Lozja case. It was -- yes. It is different case.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: The point that I was trying to make is that these
18 two instances, these two demonstrations, albeit that your clients were not
19 directly involved in the organisation - I'm not suggesting that they were
20 - but the fact that these two demonstrations took place, if they indeed
21 did take place, is indicative that they still enjoy quite a support in the
22 Republic of Macedonia. So -- and support by certain quarters,
23 particularly in regard to your client, this Lions unit that has been
24 disbanded precisely because of its past. So this is what I need you to
1 MR. GODZO: I will address now, Mr. President. Well, the point is
2 that since my assignment in this case, I am aware that it is -- all the --
3 all the issues regarding this case have been monitored by this Tribunal,
4 but I have never ever -- I can never recall to any demonstration which has
5 been organised since I have been assigned. There has been no other public
6 demonstrations against this -- this Tribunal. Not at all, Mr. President.
7 Never in Macedonia. Macedonian people strongly believe in the justice of
8 this Tribunal and international rule of law. So there is not any need to
9 demonstrate against the institution in which they believe.
10 And the Lions --
11 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Godzo, let's not confuse issues. I am more
12 aware than you may think that I am that the former Republic of Macedonia
13 was amongst the first ex-Yugoslav republics to be admitted, together with
14 Slovenia, in the Council of Europe, to have a judge, a friend of mine in
15 the European Court of Human Rights, representation in the International
16 Association of Judges. So the question of the democracy and guarantees
17 from the political -- from the political set-up in Macedonia is not -- is
18 not an issue. It's the question we don't doubt for a moment whether
19 Macedonia believes in the rule of law. Of course it does. Otherwise, it
20 wouldn't be respected the way it is amongst the Committee of Nations. So
21 that's not -- not an issue.
22 The question is not whether in Macedonia there has been any kind
23 of governmentally or politically organised demonstrations against the
24 ICTY. That's not an issue. But I am, together with my two Judges,
25 colleagues, we are told from intelligence gathering that we receive that
1 in the 18th March demonstration in Tetovo, the place where you -- near
2 where your client was born, in this what you describe as a spontaneous
3 demonstration --
4 MR. GODZO: Yes, yes, meeting.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: -- they had spontaneous posters against the
6 Tribunal, and I have learnt from my political past that spontaneous
7 placards and spontaneous posters do not fall from Heaven. They are made
8 available beforehand. So what is spontaneous does not really remain
9 spontaneous. Spontaneous is the idea, maybe, but what follows up is not
11 So is -- do you have anything else to tell us in relation to these
12 two points?
13 MR. GODZO: Not at all, Your Honour. Fine.
14 THE ACCUSED BOSKOSKI: [Interpretation] Sorry, I was not able to
15 hear these --
16 MR. GODZO: -- express what he was trying to say.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. We have a system here where there is a
18 distance between counsel and client, and if you need to consult with your
19 client, please --
20 MR. GODZO: I know what his point.
21 JUDGE AGIUS: But I haven't received interpretation. I don't know
22 what he said. Is it something that the Tribunal needs to hear or is it
23 something that --
24 MR. GODZO: Yes, shortly, Mr. President.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
1 MR. GODZO: My client wants to address to the Court and to say
2 that the Lions unit was not formed by him. It was formed by Macedonian
3 government. It's legal -- in a legal and proper way. And they were also
4 disband after the end of the crisis in a proper and legal way. That was
5 just what he was trying to say.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. Okay. If your client feels that he
7 needs to add something over and above what you have said, then he's free
8 to do so. Usually the practice is you speak on his behalf, but if -- I
9 want to make it clear that if he wants to add anything, he's -- you are
10 free to consult with him, he is free to consult with you, and if he wants
11 the floor, we will give him the floor.
12 MR. GODZO: Thank you, Your Honour. He would like to say
13 something briefly.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. Yes, Mr. Boskoski.
15 MR. GODZO: Whenever you -- we allow him.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Mr. Boskoski, we are not forcing you to say
17 anything. You have a right to remain silent during all these proceedings,
18 but if you wish to say something, we will give you the floor. And I also
19 wish to make it clear that since you have got this right of silence, if
20 you decide to say something, whatever you say will be put on record and,
21 if necessary, will be used later on in the proceedings. So it's up to you
22 whether to proceed or not.
23 THE ACCUSED BOSKOSKI: [Interpretation] Distinguished President, I
24 did not have any intention to speak, Your Honour, but several -- several
25 issues raised here have forced me to speak a bit and reiterate once again
1 that the only minister of interior who since 2001, since the beginning of
2 the conflict and the crisis in the Republic of Macedonia, has publicly
3 through the Macedonian media and in cooperation with The Hague Tribunal
4 confirmed that fully believes this high legal institution, the
5 participants of which are we as well, the small but significant and
6 important to the Republic of Macedonia, and the Republic of Macedonia
7 being a member of the United Nations, at no moment has Ljube Boskoski as a
8 politician, as a person, as a father of three minor children, and
9 primarily as a person very fond of Republic of Macedonia and very fond of
10 state of law, legal institutions, at no moment has he thought that his
11 credibility, the credibility of his state, of its Euro-Atlantic
12 orientations, of its reform processes are put into question by the fact of
13 him leaving the Republic of Macedonia or, God forbid, flee from the
14 Republic of Macedonia.
15 I believe highly in this Court. I also believe in the Republic of
16 Macedonia. I believe in the justice system. I am a legalist, and -- or a
17 lawyer, and nobody can make me believe the opposite.
18 Your Honour, there are different truths there but there aren't --
19 there is one universal truth and that God exists, and I believe in God. I
20 believe that He is on my side, not since I'm Ljube Boskoski but because I
21 speak the truth.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: I am informed that we need a technical break. I
23 think we have only got a few minutes left before we rise, but I understand
24 that the technical break is needed now. Am I right? Yes. So how much
25 time? All right. It's just changing of tapes, I suppose. All right.
1 We'll wait.
2 The sitting is suspended now, and I think we can all remain here,
3 and when we are informed that the tapes are changed, then we can proceed
4 and conclude.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: So I'm informed that we can continue. I can assure
6 everyone that this sitting will be over in a few minutes. That's -- and
7 then we can conclude. So, yes, Mr. Apostolski.
8 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Briefly, I would like to reply to
9 the presentation by the distinguished Prosecutor.
10 In the evidence that the Prosecutor's office has submitted to me
11 regarding the indictment, there are statements by the accused Johan
12 Tarculovski. So from it can be seen that at any invitation by the
13 Ministry of Interior of the Republic of Macedonia that has informed him by
14 a summons to appear for a hearing or an interview, Mr. Tarculovski has
15 responded. But information received through other persons, these are
16 inadmissible and illegal ways pursuant to the legislation of the Republic
17 of Macedonia. The only way in which a person can be summoned is by a
18 written summons which can be duly received personally by the accused or
19 the indicted.
20 This is the only reply I would like to give to the Prosecutor.
21 With regards to the committee supporters of a football club, the
22 Court informed us that they have been the organisers of the demonstrations
23 on the 22nd of March. I wish to indicate for Court's attention that the
24 accused Tarculovski, after he has been employed in 1999 in the security of
25 the President Boris Trajkovska, has never appeared at a football match and
1 let alone be a leader of this group. So with this respect I can inform
2 the Court that he is neither leader nor he couldn't -- could have been the
3 organiser of that group of football supporters. So I beg the Court to
4 take these facts into account.
5 This is a family man who has established a family, has a child,
6 who possibly in his youth did go to football matches but this cannot be
7 considered as a sin of his. Thank you.
8 And I would like to inform the Court that Mr. Johan would like to
9 address with two sentences.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Tarculovski. The same advice that I gave
11 the other co-accused: You have a right to remain silent. No one can
12 force you to say anything in this Tribunal, but if you do speak, you do
13 say something, then whatever you say may actually be used in evidence in
14 due course.
15 THE ACCUSED TARCULOVSKI: [Interpretation] Your Honour, you are
16 discussing today my application for provisional release which was filed on
17 my behalf by my legal counsel. Everything that my counsel said I can only
18 approve but also add a few sentences to it. Even though I have arrested
19 and detained in prison, I assure you if I had only knew that there is an
20 indictment against me, I would appear before the Courts -- before this
21 Court myself. The same as I would have done it at that time, I am
22 prepared to appear before the Court any time if I am -- if I am addressed.
23 This Court is my only hope to prove my innocence and to return to my
24 family; my daughter and my wife and my mother. My goal, my purpose is to
25 take care of my family in freedom and prepare better my Defence.
1 I thank you for listening to me and I hope you will have
2 understanding to provisionally release me to be with my family in my home
3 country of Macedonia. I thank you.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you, Mr. Tarculovski.
5 Prosecution, with regard to these incidents, demonstrations in
6 March of this year, do you have any comments? Are they of concern to you
7 or are they less serious in your mind than I may have presented them?
8 MR. SMITH: Your Honour, the Prosecution thinks that they are
9 serious in the sense that both accused do have a fanatical sort of support
10 element following them in Macedonia. It doesn't -- it's not necessarily
11 large. But by the nature of some of these members of the ex-Lions at the
12 demonstration, calling for weapons, et cetera, that is a concern,
13 especially in relation to witness intimidation, that sort of behaviour by
14 people that associate themselves with the accused. Whether that's --
15 whether that can be seen to be the fault of the accused, that may not be
16 the point, but the fact that it is occurring is a concern in relation to
17 witness protection.
18 But, Your Honours, as far as the accuracy of the information,
19 which was the Confidential and Ex Parte Annex A to the 22nd of April,
20 2005, motion of the Prosecution, the Prosecution submits it's highly
21 accurate. It initially was instigated by a number name of newspaper
22 reports reporting these events. So as not just to put newspaper accounts
23 of events, a particular mission was conducted in Macedonia and the two
24 most significant security organisations down there were spoken to at
25 length to get a full account, and I think you'll see from the annexes and
1 the attachments that it's very comprehensive and very complete, and if
2 anything further is required, Your Honour, we can call witnesses to that
4 As far as the interviews with Mr. Tarculovski, yes, he did give
5 interviews in 2003, one when he was a member of the Ministry of Interior
6 and one shortly afterwards. The circumstances in which he cooperated back
7 then are quite different to the circumstances in which we say that he
8 didn't cooperate recently.
9 And just lastly, in relation to the tendering of exhibits, I would
10 ask, unless there's an objection, that the bundle of items tagged 1 to 8
11 be tendered, even though we largely referred to tab 6, and they be
12 tendered as P1.
13 And I would also ask that the request for assistance with the
14 Macedonian government in relation to attempts to locate and contact Mr.
15 Tarculovski is headed RFA: BS/T07/MAC-0075, that be tendered as P2.
16 And I would further ask that the attachments to the motions that
17 have been put forward by the Prosecution also be tendered and by their
18 virtue of attachment to the motion, and the Prosecution has no objections
19 to the tendering of Defence exhibits in this case.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. I thank you.
21 One final question to the Honourable Minister. We heard before
22 that in Macedonia there is now -- either it exists already or it's in the
23 making, a law on the protection of witnesses. Is it already in existence
24 or is it in draft form, being debated in Parliament?
25 MS. MLADENOVSKA-GJORGJIVESKA: [Interpretation] The law on
1 protection of witnesses was passed in the Parliament in May. It is
2 effective, but its implementation will start from January 1, 2006, due to
3 taking additional activities needed to initiate its implementation. In
4 the Ministry for the Interior, there is a department that should work in
5 this matter, witness protection, and in the future period a council is to
6 be -- witness protection council will be formed, and the law stipulates
7 who will be the members of this council ex officio and also those who
8 should be representatives of the certain bodies.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you, Excellency, and I think it would be
10 appreciated very much by this Trial Chamber if we obtain a copy of the
11 relative legislation in your language, which we can then have translated.
12 Yes. Is there any further business that the parties would like to
13 transact? None? I see none. So the sitting is adjourned. We will hand
14 down a written decision in due course, within a very short time. Thank
16 I thank you, Excellency.
17 --- Whereupon the Motion Hearing adjourned
18 at 11.11 a.m.