1 Thursday, 14 June 2007

2 [Open session]

3 [The accused entered court]

4 [The witness entered court]

5 --- Upon commencing at 9.06 a.m.

6 JUDGE PARKER: We understand, Mr. Saxon, that there are all sorts

7 of changes necessary because of changes in the health situation and other

8 problems concerning witnesses.

9 MR. SAXON: That is correct Your Honour. The witness who was

10 testifying --

11 JUDGE PARKER: Don't bother. Putting it all on the record. We

12 understand there are problems and they will resolve in time and we are

13 moving on temporarily to a fresh witness with a view to returning to

14 finish the unfinished witness. Is that right?

15 MR. SAXON: Correct, Your Honour. And Ms. Regue will lead the

16 next witness.

17 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.

18 Good morning, sir. Would you please read aloud the affirmation on

19 the card that is given to you.

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

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

22 WITNESS: FARUSH MEMEDI

23 [Witness answered through interpreter]

24 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you. Please sit down.

25 Examination by Ms. Regue:

1 JUDGE PARKER: Ms. Regue, unfortunately, with the movement to and

2 fro and the taking the oaths we never get this in the right order. You're

3 about to announce your next witness.

4 MS. REGUE: Yes, Your Honour. The Prosecution would like to call

5 Farush Memedi, witness M-57.

6 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you very much, yes.

7 Q. Good morning, Mr. Memedi.

8 A. Good morning.

9 Q. Mr. Memedi, do you recall providing a statement to the Office of

10 the Prosecutor in 2004?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. You recall providing a statement, another statement, a brief one,

13 to the Office of the Prosecutor in 2005?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. Do you recall meeting with a lady from the registry of this

16 Tribunal to certify, meaning put a stamp on both your statements also in

17 2005?

18 A. Yes, that's correct.

19 Q. Before coming here, Mr. Memedi, did you have the opportunity to

20 read both the statements in your native language?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Are you satisfied that its content is correct and accurate?

23 A. Yes.

24 MS. REGUE: Your Honour, the Prosecution would like to tender both

25 the statements pursuant to Rule 92 bis.

1 JUDGE PARKER: They will be received.

2 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P266, Your Honours.

3 MS. REGUE: The witness, Farush Memedi is a Ljuboten resident of

4 Albanian ethnicity. Between 10 to 12 August 2001 Macedonian forces

5 attacked Ljuboten with gun-fire and shelling, causing the death of one

6 civilian Tari Murati and the wounding of an another Femi Latifi. On

7 Sunday, 12 August, the witness heard intensive shooting and shelling since

8 8.00 a.m. in the morning. Around noon of the same day a large number of

9 Ljuboten residents, including the witness and his family, decided to leave

10 the village and arrived at Buzalak check-point. Here the police ordered

11 the men to be separated from the women. The men, including the witness,

12 were ordered to lie down and were beaten by the police. They were then

13 transported by police by a police van to Cair or Butel police station,

14 where they were beaten again. They were later taken to Kisela Voda or

15 Prolece police station where they were beaten again.

16 In the evening of 12 August, the police tied the witness's hand on

17 his back with tape. He could not believe that something was being done

18 to his fingers. Afterward he was submitted to the paraffin test and was

19 forced to sign a document, the contents which were unknown to him. After

20 approximately 24 hours, the witness and other detainees were taken to

21 Skopje Hospital where he saw other detainees being mistreated. After

22 approximately one day, the witness was taken to Skopje Court where he

23 appeared before a judge. The witness was then transported to Sutka prison

24 where he remained for about four months.

25 Your Honours, we have some binders for your assistance.

1 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.

2 MS. REGUE: And if we could please -- thanks. Could we please

3 have 65 ter 199.21. It's the photo depicted in tab 3 of your binder and

4 also it's the photo on page 15 of the court binder.

5 Q. Mr. Memedi, what do you see in this photo?

6 A. We can see here the police check-point. Here was the police

7 check-point.

8 Q. And what is the name of this police check-point?

9 A. They call it Buzalak, but someone calls it also Kodra e Zajmit.

10 Q. Where it's located, this check-point?

11 A. This check-point was located exactly at this point.

12 Q. But if we took as a reference Ljuboten, could you approximately

13 say how far is it, how many kilometres from Ljuboten?

14 A. Yes. It's approximately four to five kilometres from Ljuboten.

15 Q. Thanks. In paragraph 10 to 12 of your statement you explain that

16 on Sunday, the 12th of August, of 2001, you and your family left Ljuboten

17 and arrived at the Buzalak check-point. What happened when you arrived

18 there?

19 A. The police was there at the check-point. They stopped us. They

20 separated men from women. They forced us to lay down and they started to

21 mistreat us, to beat us, to hit us with guns. Children started to scream,

22 and they boarded us on a van and sent us to a station, to a police

23 station.

24 Q. If I could have, please, the usher's assistance in helping the

25 witness with a pen.

1 Mr. Memedi, could you please take the pen that the usher is going

2 to give to you. And first of all, could you mark with a cross where the

3 check-point is from -- in the photo?

4 A. The check-point was located here.

5 Q. Can you write number one next to the cross, please.

6 A. On the check-point?

7 Q. Yes, please.

8 A. [Marks]

9 Q. Could you please draw a circle in the area where the men were

10 forced to lying down and then write number 2.

11 A. [Marks]

12 Q. Could you please draw a circle in the area where the women were

13 ordered to go and write number 3.

14 A. [Marks]

15 Q. Thanks, Mr. Memedi.

16 MS. REGUE: Your Honours, I would like to tender this photograph

17 into evidence.

18 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.

19 THE REGISTRAR: As exhibit P267, Your Honours.

20 MS. REGUE: I would like to call ERN N004-4980. It's the photo

21 depicted in the court binder, page 18, photo A.

22 For Your Honours, it's the first tab.

23 Q. Mr. Memedi, what do you see in this photo?

24 A. This photo represents the police station Butel.

25 Q. Were you taken this police station on Sunday, the 12th of August,

1 2001?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. Who took you there?

4 A. Police.

5 MS. REGUE: Your Honours, I would like to tender this photo into

6 evidence.

7 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.

8 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P268, Your Honours.

9 MS. REGUE: I would like to call ERN N004-4998. It is the photo

10 depicted in the court binder, page 19, photo B. Also tab 2 for Your

11 Honours.

12 Thanks.

13 Q. Mr. Memedi, what do you see in this photo?

14 A. This is a cell at the Butel police station.

15 Q. When you were taken to Butel, were you placed in a cell which

16 looked like this one?

17 A. Yes, this is the one.

18 MS. REGUE: Your Honours, I would like to tender this photo into

19 evidence.

20 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.

21 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P269, Your Honours.

22 MS. REGUE: I'd like to call Exhibit P51, page 96. It's the last

23 tab in Your Honour's binder.

24 Q. Mr. Memedi, are you able to see the Macedonian version on the

25 right side of your screen?

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. If you don't see it properly, please let us know, because we have

3 a hard copy for you.

4 A. No, it's okay.

5 Q. Okay. Mr. Memedi, if you look at the upper left corner of this

6 document, in the first line do you see Ministry of Interior of the

7 Republic of Macedonia?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. And then three lines below, 13 August 2001, Skopje. Do you see

10 that, Mr. Memedi?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. Then if we move to the centre of this document, do you see the

13 title, Official Note, and the numbers 536?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. And then below, the title official interview conducted with

16 persons who were apprehended from the village of Ljuboten. Do you see

17 that?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. I'm going read to you the first lines of the first paragraph: "On

20 12 August 2001 at the premises of OVR Kisela Voda, I had interviews with

21 nine persons who were taken from the village of Ljuboten by the associated

22 security forces of the Republic of Macedonia." And then in these first

23 paragraphs we see a list of names. Do you see your name?

24 A. I do.

25 Q. I'm going to read to you the second and the third paragraph: "As

1 a result of the interviews conducted with the above-mentioned persons, it

2 was acknowledged that all of them, these nine persons, were present in the

3 village in time when combat activities were carried out by the security

4 forces in the village of Ljuboten. They stated the following in regard of

5 the events that occurred there.

6 "Shooting could you heard at each side of the village. Actually,

7 fight was led between the police of the Republic of Macedonia and the

8 terrorist gangs. The above-mentioned persons stated they noticed many

9 terrorists engaged in fights, having weapons but about themselves they

10 stated that they did not take part in the fights but they wanted to flee

11 from the village. Some of them wanted to surrender to the police because

12 they did not take part in the fights."

13 Mr. Memedi, when you were in Kisela Voda also known as Prolece,

14 were you ever interviewed by someone from the police?

15 A. No.

16 Q. Did you state, did you say to someone what it says in this

17 document?

18 A. No.

19 Q. Also from your knowledge, what it's written in here is correct?

20 MR. METTRAUX: Your Honour.

21 A. No, this is not true.

22 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Mettraux.

23 MR. METTRAUX: Well, I think the question of my colleague should

24 be rephrased to ask him what he personally knows. The question leave its

25 open what he is being asked, whether he's going to ask whether other

1 people knew it, whether anyone else knew it. I think it should be

2 specified and ask him what his position is. I don't think he can give

3 evidence for anyone else.

4 MS. REGUE: Your Honours, I said from his knowledge if he knew

5 whether these facts were correct. That was my question.

6 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, I know. His knowledge, though, could be

7 understood, as Mr. Mettraux suggests, what he has heard from others.

8 Clearly you didn't intend that, but it could be understood that way. I

9 think as is suggested we should for the moment, at least, concentrate on

10 what this witness knows about what happened to him and his interview.

11 Thank you.

12 MS. REGUE:

13 Q. Mr. Memedi, did you see from your own eyes what it says in this

14 document?

15 A. No.

16 Q. Thanks.

17 MS. REGUE: We could take out this document from the screen, Your

18 Honours. I have no further questions concerning this document.

19 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.

20 MS. REGUE:

21 Q. Mr. Memedi, when you were in prison in Sutka, were you ever

22 interviewed by someone from the police or the Ministry of Interior?

23 A. No.

24 Q. And I should say and my question was if you were interviewed about

25 what happened to you about what happened in Ljuboten, excuse me.

1 A. I do not understand the question. Could you repeat it, please?

2 Q. Sure. If when you were in Sutka prison and afterwards someone

3 from the police or from the Ministry of Interior came to ask you about

4 what had happened to you or what had happened in Ljuboten.

5 A. No.

6 Q. Mr. Memedi, you testified that in Buzalak check-point you were

7 taken and beaten by police. You also mentioned that you were taken to

8 Butel by police officers. Were you beaten in Butel?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. Who beat you?

11 A. The police.

12 Q. In your statement, paragraph 15/16 you also mention that

13 afterwards you were taken to Kisela Vode, Prolece police station. Were

14 you beaten there?

15 A. Yes, they beat us there as well.

16 Q. Who beat you?

17 A. The police.

18 Q. In paragraph --

19 MR. METTRAUX: Your Honour, I'm sorry to interrupt again, but all

20 of that evidence is in evidence. We have a statement that has been

21 tendered. The whole point of Rule 92 bis is precisely to accelerate

22 matters and to allow the evidence in chief to put through with a

23 statement. We're going through the same grounds, Your Honour.

24 MS. REGUE: If Your Honour wish, I can just say everything that is

25 in the statement and then phrase my final question. But in fairness to my

1 learned colleague, I wanted just to lay the ground before I asked witness.

2 JUDGE PARKER: If you are simply wanting the evidence of the

3 witness to be what is in the statement, as it's 92 bis, you really need to

4 ask no more questions about it. If there's something you want to be

5 amplified or made more clear or some additional matter, certainly ask

6 questions. But there's no point in us having the statement and then

7 having the oral evidence as well, if it's the same. Okay.

8 MS. REGUE: Thank you, Your Honour. I will move to the question

9 then.

10 Q. Mr. Memedi, in all the locations that you mentioned in your

11 statement, you explained that you saw police officers. How were the

12 uniforms of the police?

13 A. They had a camouflage uniform.

14 Q. Were you able to see any patch in the uniforms?

15 A. Yes. They had an insignia, police insignia, on their arm, and it

16 was insignia of the Macedonian police.

17 MS. REGUE: Your Honours, no further questions.

18 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you very much, Ms. Regue.

19 Mr. Mettraux, I take it.

20 MR. METTRAUX: Thank you very much, Your Honour.

21 Cross-examination by Mr. Mettraux:

22 Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Memedi. My name is Guenael Mettraux and

23 together with my colleague Edina Residovic I'm appearing on behalf of

24 Mr. Boskoski.

25 Could the witness please be shown what is now Exhibit P267.

1 Sir, you were just shown a picture, a picture will appear on your

2 screen which has been shown to you by my colleague a moment ago. Do you

3 have that picture in front of you, sir?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. You were asked by my colleague to state the name of this location

6 and at page 4, line 8 of the transcript, you said that this place was

7 known as Kodra e Zajmit or as Buzalak; is that right?

8 A. It is called Buzalak, but some people refer to it as Kodra e

9 Zajmit. I don't know how to explain it to you, but this place has two

10 names.

11 Q. Isn't that correct, sir, that Kodra e Zajmit in Macedonian is

12 known as Zamski Ridge and not at Buzalak?

13 A. Yes, in Macedonian it is called Zamski Rid. That's correct. It's

14 called Zamski Rid in Macedonian.

15 Q. And isn't that correct that Buzalak and Kodra e Zajmit are, in

16 fact, two different locations and that Kodra e Zajmit is further down

17 three or four kilometres towards Skopje?

18 A. I wouldn't say three or four kilometres towards Skopje. It's much

19 closer. I know this place very well.

20 Q. But you agree, sir, that in fact Kodra e Zajmit and Buzalak are

21 not one and the same place. They are distant from each other. Is that

22 correct?

23 A. This is my native place, and you cannot know it better than

24 myself. Kodra e Zajmit, it's a little bit further down. Buzalak, it's a

25 little bit more up. So this location that we see on the photograph is

1 neither on Buzalak or Kodra e Zajmit. It's between these two locations.

2 Q. Sir, you're quite right. It's your location and not mine. So if

3 someone from the location just like you were to say that they are two

4 different places separate from between three on four kilometres, would

5 that person be correct?

6 A. I'm telling you the truth. This location is not on Buzalak or

7 Kodra e Zajmit. That's why I mentioned both Buzalak and Kodra e Zajmit,

8 because this particular location is neither on Buzalak or Kodra e Zajmit.

9 It's between the two locations.

10 Q. So we can agree, sir, that this position here is not Kodra e

11 Zajmit; is that correct? Kodra e Zajmit is further south towards Skopje;

12 is that correct?

13 A. Yes. Buzalak is a little bit more up.

14 Q. Very well. I'd like you turn now to a different document that was

15 also shown to you by my learned colleague of the Prosecution, and, Your

16 Honour, it's been shown to you under P51, page 96. We have a different

17 reference. It's the same document, Your Honour, and it's also been

18 admitted as P53 with an ERN ET-N001-983901, and I'm going to use this one,

19 with the Court's permission. It's also been admitted. And the Macedonian

20 is N001-9827-13.

21 Sir, the document that will appear on your screen is the Official

22 Note which was shown a moment ago by my colleague to you.

23 Do you have the Macedonian in front of you, sir?

24 A. Yes, but one can hardly read from it.

25 Q. Well, perhaps, Your Honour, what I will do, I will use the version

1 of the Prosecution with a risk of some slight translation issues, if

2 that's feasible. If the copy --

3 Can you see it now, sir?

4 A. It's a little bit better.

5 Q. Very well. Sir, have you seen that document before today?

6 A. No.

7 Q. Was it shown to you during the week here in The Hague?

8 A. No.

9 Q. If I can draw your attention to the first paragraph of that

10 document which starts with the word "On 12/08/2001." Can you see that?

11 That is paragraph the under the subject heading, sir. It says, "On 12

12 August 2001 in the premise of" and goes on to say ...

13 You see, sir, that your name is mentioned at the end of this

14 paragraph. Do you see that?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. And you also see that in the previous sentence it says this: "They

17 were identified and later on through interviews and examination with these

18 same persons, it was confirmed that these men are as follows."

19 Can you see that?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. And I think you indicated to my colleague that it is your evidence

22 that you were not interviewed by the police; is that correct?

23 A. Yes, this is what I said.

24 Q. Were you examined by the police?

25 A. No.

1 Q. If we go to the last paragraph, sir, of this document, there's a

2 list of names. Can you see that?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. And the first name on the list is yours, Memedi Farush, farther --

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. Born 27 March 1965, village of Ljuboten. Are those -- that data

7 is correct, sir?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. And then there's a list of name of other individuals. Can you see

10 those?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. And those people, sir, they were also present at Kisola Voda or

13 Prolece police station at that time; is that correct?

14 A. You're asking me?

15 Q. Yes, I'm asking you, sir.

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. And you're not disputing having had contact with police officers

18 during that day at Kisela Voda, sir, are you?

19 A. I was at the police station but they did not ask me about

20 anything.

21 Q. Let's look at the previous paragraph. It started with the

22 word: "Shots of weapons could be heard coming out from each side of the

23 village."

24 Can you see that?

25 A. Yes.

1 Q. And that is consistent with your own observation on the 12th of

2 August; is that correct?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. And it goes on to say: "Actually combat activity were led between

5 the police of the Republic of Macedonia and the terrorist gangs. The

6 aforenamed persons stated that they noticed many terrorists fighting and

7 were having fire-arms in their hands."

8 Can you see that?

9 A. Yes, yes.

10 Q. And it goes on to say, "Nevertheless, themselves, they didn't take

11 part in the fights," they said, said they. Can you see that?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. "They wanted to run away from the village and some of them wanted

14 to surrender to police as they did not take part in the fights," sir.

15 Can you see that?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. And that last part of the statement, sir, is correct, isn't it,

18 that you didn't take part in the fight; is that correct?

19 A. No.

20 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... What you wanted also was to

21 flee from the village; is that correct?

22 A. That's correct.

23 Q. And you also wanted to surrender to the police or was it something

24 you were not intent on doing?

25 A. I was with my family with my children, and I simply wanted to go

1 towards Skopje, towards the town.

2 Q. So in fact, sir, the only part of this document with which you

3 take an issue is the suggestion that there were combat activities between

4 the Macedonian forces and terrorists; is that correct?

5 A. No.

6 Q. No, sir, do you mean to say that you did not see any such thing,

7 combat activities between Macedonian forces and terrorists and you say,

8 no, I didn't say that. Is that what you're saying?

9 A. There was no NLA in Ljuboten. The bottom line is that.

10 Q. I understand the bottom line, sir. Perhaps I'll ask you this at

11 this stage: Is what you're saying is you are saying you did not say that

12 there were combat activities between the NLA and Macedonian forces to a

13 police officer in the police station Kisela Voda; is that correct?

14 A. Well, what was I supposed to tell them when they didn't ask me

15 anything?

16 Q. Well, I think that answers my question, sir. But you're not

17 denying, are you, that any of the other eight persons who are mentioned on

18 that document might have said that to the police officer, do you?

19 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Mettraux, you intervened and stopped Ms. Regue

20 when a question of hers could have been understood as asking beyond this

21 man's knowledge. Now you are the biter bit.

22 MR. METTRAUX: I plead guilty, Your Honour. I will ask the

23 question differently.

24 Q. Sir, have you had an opportunity to discuss this matter with any

25 of the other eight persons mentioned on the document?

1 A. No, I didn't. I didn't show interest to discuss this.

2 Q. Thank you. And, sir, I think you've mentioned to one of my early

3 question that your bottom line was that the NLA members were not in the

4 village on that day. Do you remember telling me this?

5 A. I earlier said that.

6 Q. But, sir, in fact that is only a guess on your part. You're not

7 in a position to say whether they were or were not in the village on that

8 day, are you?

9 A. I didn't see anything there. When we arrived at the check-point

10 we were stopped by the police and maltreated. This was it. And there was

11 shooting in Ljuboten -- I mean shelling.

12 Q. What I'm asking you, sir, is you are not in a position to say

13 whether they were members of the NLA in the village on the 10, 11 until

14 the 12th around 12.00; is that correct?

15 A. There was no NLA.

16 Q. Sir, could you please answer my question. You were not in a

17 position on the 10th, 11th and until the 12th of August, 2001, to see

18 whether or not there were NLA members in the village; is that correct?

19 A. I was at home. When I went outside I didn't see anything.

20 Q. Well, sir, let's then go back to your statement.

21 MR. METTRAUX: Your Honour, it is P266. It's just been tendered

22 by my colleague of the Prosecution. And if we could see the second page

23 of that document.

24 If the registry could focus first on paragraph 3 of that

25 statement, I would be grateful.

1 Q. Sir, this is the statement which was your statement which was

2 tendered earlier by my colleague and which you have stated to be accurate.

3 If you look at paragraph 3, sir, that's when you start recounting

4 the events of the 10 of August. Do you see that?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. And the second -- at the second sentence it says: "I remember

7 that at around 8.00 a.m. one morning in August, it might have been a

8 Friday, the shelling and shooting started from the hill in the north above

9 Ljuboten."

10 Can you see that?

11 A. Yes.

12 MR. METTRAUX: I'll ask the registry to turn to the next page in

13 the Macedonian. It's the same page in the English.

14 Q. Sir, can I ask you to look at paragraph 4 of your statement. It

15 says this: "I think it was around 10.00 a.m. when the shelling and

16 shooting stopped. I spent the rest of the day home with my family."

17 So in fact, sir, from Friday 8.00 onwards, you spent the entire

18 day with your family at home; is that correct?

19 A. Yes, I was at home.

20 Q. Okay. Let's turn to the Saturday now. If you can focus on

21 paragraph 5 of your statement. It starts: "The following day we could

22 hear from time to time some shooting."

23 Can you see that?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. And if I can ask you now to look at paragraph 6 of your statement

1 it says this --

2 MR. METTRAUX: And I will ask the registry to move to the next

3 page in the English.

4 Q. Paragraph 6 says this, sir: "We spent the day and the following

5 night in our house. We could not sleep because we were very afraid and

6 very worried about what would happen to us."

7 So, again, sir, you spent the entire Saturday in your home with

8 your family, day and night; is that correct?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. Well, let's now turn to the Sunday morning. You will see it

11 starts at paragraph 7 and it goes on to paragraph 10, I believe. It

12 says: "The following morning, that's a Sunday, it must have been Sunday,

13 at around 8.00 a.m. I heard that very intensive shooting and shelling with

14 all kinds of weapons started." Can you see that? It's the first line of

15 paragraph 7.

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. And then if you go to paragraph 8 you explain that at around 9.00

18 a.m. or shortly thereafter, you moved from your own house to the basement

19 of the house of Daut Memedi, a cousin; is that right?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. And that's where you stayed until 12, when you left sir. That's

22 paragraph 10; is that correct?

23 A. Yes, that's correct.

24 Q. Thank you, sir. So when I told you earlier that you were not in a

25 position to see what was going on in the village, that was correct, wasn't

1 it? You stayed in your house from the Friday, 8.00 in the morning until

2 the Sunday, 12.00, with a transfer to the house of Daut Memedi on the

3 12th. Is that correct?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. And you were not in a position to assess whether or not there were

6 any NLA members in the village; is that correct?

7 A. Myself, I didn't see any.

8 Q. Well, but you were not in a position to see any, sir, because you

9 were in your house or in the house of Daut Memedi; is that correct?

10 A. I didn't see any NLA there, present.

11 Q. Well, sir, let me ask you another thing then. If the army, the

12 police, the OSCE, the European monitors and the ICRC were all saying that

13 there was NLA presence in the village, you would not say that they were

14 wrong, do you?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. Yes, you would say that they are all wrong, sir, is that your

17 evidence?

18 A. I personally didn't see any NLA.

19 Q. My question was different. Are you in a position to say whether

20 or not those organisation would be wrong, if they were saying that there

21 was NLA presence in the village?

22 A. There was no NLA in the village.

23 Q. And if all of those organisations or institution were to say that

24 there was an intense armed confrontation between the NLA and Macedonian

25 forces on that day, are you also saying that they would all be wrong, sir?

1 A. Well, you can call them and ask them about this and they can tell

2 you about what they have seen.

3 Q. Sir, have you been told not to mention the presence of the NLA in

4 the village on that day, or on those days?

5 A. I didn't see any NLA in the village.

6 Q. Sir, have you been asked by anyone not to mention the presence of

7 the NLA in the village on 10, 11 and 12 of August, 2001?

8 A. No. I personally didn't see any NLA presence in the village.

9 Q. Sir, perhaps that may be the translation, but I'm asking you a

10 slightly different question. I'm asking you whether you have been asked

11 by anyone not to mention the presence of the NLA in the village during

12 that weekend.

13 A. No. Nobody asked me anything. This is what I'm personally

14 telling you.

15 Q. Very well. We'll move on to evidence which you gave to my

16 colleague about what you say happened to you in the Prolece and Kisola

17 Voda, that's one and the same, police station. Do you remember answering

18 question of my colleague in relation to that?

19 A. Could you please repeat your question. It's not clear to me.

20 Q. No, it wasn't clear. Sir, do you recall answering a number of

21 question from my colleague about what happened to you in the Prolece

22 police station?

23 A. Yes. I was asked about a statement, whether it was correct or

24 not.

25 Q. And you also told my colleague that you were mistreated at Prolece

1 police station; do you remember?

2 A. Yes, yes.

3 Q. And in your statement, sir, there's something you've apparently

4 omitted to mention to the Office of the Prosecution, and that's the fact

5 that a number of police officers at Prolece police station tried to

6 protect you from any mistreatment; is that correct?

7 A. No.

8 Q. And what you omitted to mention to the Office of the Prosecution

9 is that the people who attempted to mistreat you were police reservists.

10 Isn't that right?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. But that people who tried to shield you from the mistreatment was

13 the police commander, the commander of the police station, and the regular

14 police. Isn't that the case, sir, that's what they tried to do, to

15 protect you from the police reservists?

16 A. No. They were all wearing masks and were ill treating us. They

17 would curse us and we would -- we were just lying down and they were

18 hitting us.

19 Q. So that we're clear, sir, are you now saying that no one, no

20 member of the police force in Kisola Voda or Prolece police station tried

21 to protect you from any further mistreatment? Is that your evidence?

22 A. No.

23 Q. So no, this did not happen; that's your evidence. No one tried to

24 protect you; is that correct?

25 A. Yes.

1 MR. METTRAUX: I'd ask the registry to bring up 1D185 under the

2 ERN 1D00-2071, that's the English. And the Macedonian is 1D00-2074.

3 Q. Do you have that document in front of you, sir?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. As you can see from the first page, sir, this is the record of

6 interviews taken from Ljuboten residents by the OSCE. Can you see that on

7 the first page?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. The source of that document is Mr. Andrew Palmer, senior rule of

10 law officer, OSCE, spill-over monitor mission to Skopje. Can you see that

11 on the top of the document?

12 A. Yes, I can.

13 Q. And the receiver of that document is Mr. Dan Saxon, trial

14 attorney, OTP. Can you see that?

15 A. Mm-hm, yes.

16 Q. And the date that appears at the bottom of the page which seems to

17 be the date when it was transmitted which is the 25th of October, 2005.

18 You agree?

19 A. Yes.

20 MR. METTRAUX: I'd ask the registry to turn to the next page,

21 please.

22 Q. Sir, can you see a list of names with case file code and --

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. And if I can ask you to focus on the number 18, 1-8, of that list,

25 can you see it? It says TB 027, 13.01.02-3 and follows the name Farush

1 Memedi. Can you see that?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. And that's you, sir?

4 A. Yes.

5 MR. METTRAUX: I ask the registry to turn to the next page of that

6 document.

7 Q. Sir, I'll ask you first to focus on the first line of that

8 document. It say this: "Interview on 13 January 2002 in Ljuboten was

9 released due to presidential pardon." Can you see that first line?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. And then there is a number [Previous translation continues] ...

12 which is TB 027-13.01.02/3. Can you see that?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. And you will agree that's the same number that appeared on the

15 previous page next to your name. Do you agree?

16 A. This is the same?

17 Q. It looks like it is the same, yes, sir.

18 If the -- if you go to the next line it says this: "TBHDU Marie

19 van Baltenar [phoen] in Ljuboten conducted the interview on 13.01.02 with

20 the release from presidential pardon." You can still see that?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. And I'll ask you now to go to the bottom of that page to look at

23 the last paragraph which starts with the words: "At 0200." It says

24 this: "At 0200 at 13.08.01 one police officer come to the room and I got

25 water, end of beating. At 1500 hours the shift changed. Some reservists

1 wanted to enter and the beating started again. They yelled and screamed.

2 The commander of the police station in civil dressed asked for assistance

3 from the regular police. The 200 -- 200 and -- 200 or 300 or 200 and dash

4 30 reservists had sticks. The regular police come and got the reservists

5 out. At 0718 hours the beating started again by masked police. I was

6 kicked on my leg and in my chest. I started to cry. The commander

7 exchanged the police. After that, I was not maltreated. At 24 hours I

8 was offered medical service. We left on 14.08.01 for the hospital. On

9 10.08.01 I was brought to court, accused of terrorism. A public defence

10 lawyer was appointed."

11 Sir, that's what you told the OSCE representative, isn't it?

12 MS. REGUE: Your Honours.

13 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, Ms. Regue.

14 MS. REGUE: I think that the first question will be whether this

15 witness recalls the interview by the OSCE. I didn't hear.

16 MR. METTRAUX: Well, that was my question.

17 Q. Sir, did you --

18 JUDGE PARKER: It wasn't, Mr. Mettraux, but it will be, I'm sure.

19 A. No, I do not remember this interview.

20 MR. METTRAUX:

21 Q. Are you suggesting you never met with any representative of the

22 OSCE, sir?

23 A. I don't remember this.

24 Q. But you recall saying this to a person or representative from any

25 particular organisation upon your release?

1 A. No. I don't remember this.

2 Q. Sir, is there another Farush Memedi living in Ljuboten?

3 A. No. There is no other -- it is only me, but I don't remember this

4 statement.

5 Q. So if a representative of the OSCE was referring to Farush Memedi

6 and to the fact that she had an interview with Farush Memedi on 13 January

7 2002 after release from prison, that would be you, sir, wouldn't it?

8 A. It could be me, but I don't remember that.

9 Q. But that not be anyone else, there was no -- you've indicated no

10 Farush Memedi from Ljuboten, and none that was detained and released

11 pursuant to a presidential pardon. Is that correct?

12 A. This is correct. There is a Farush, but there is no Memedi. But

13 I don't remember the statement. I thought that we had given a statement

14 only to The Hague representatives.

15 Q. But do you recall that someone after you were released from prison

16 came to ask you questions, didn't you, and that was in the early days of

17 January -- or in the early days of 2002. Can you recall that?

18 A. No.

19 MR. METTRAUX: Well, Your Honour, at this stage we'll seek to

20 tender this document with the caveat obviously that there may be an issue

21 of the weight at a later stage.

22 MS. REGUE: Your Honours, I object to this statement.

23 JUDGE PARKER: The statement will be marked for identification at

24 the moment. There is nothing to verify that it's been made, it's denied.

25 MR. METTRAUX: Well, perhaps just a matter of clarification, Your

1 Honour, if I may ask my colleague to state what objection the Prosecution

2 has to the admission of that document which may be relevant to later

3 attempts on our part to use this material.

4 MS. REGUE: Your Honours, I would like to know first which is the

5 reasons -- which is the basis why my learned colleague is seeking to

6 tender --

7 JUDGE PARKER: Neither set of answers -- questions will be

8 answered. If would you continue with your questioning, Mr. Mettraux, the

9 document is marked for identification and not admitted.

10 MR. METTRAUX: Thank you, Your Honour.

11 Q. Sir, from Prolece police station you've indicated that you were

12 taken to the court in Skopje. Can you recall that?

13 A. No.

14 Q. Where were you taken first from the police station?

15 A. I -- when I became aware, I was at the city hospital. I don't

16 remember how I was taken there.

17 Q. Sir, I'm not sure I have understood your answer properly, sir.

18 Are you saying that you went first to the hospital and from the hospital

19 to the court?

20 A. Yes, that's correct.

21 JUDGE PARKER: While you are pausing, Mr. Mettraux, I'll ask the

22 registry officer to indicate the number of the document marked for

23 identification.

24 THE REGISTRAR: 65 ter document 1D185 will become Exhibit 1D48,

25 marked for identification, Your Honours.

1 MR. METTRAUX: Thank you, Your Honour.

2 JUDGE PARKER: Could I mention so that it doesn't confuse people

3 later, that due to an interesting characteristic of the search systems,

4 when we are marking a document for identification, the registry officer

5 has to identify it as an exhibit and then adds "marked for

6 identification." If it's not identified as an exhibit, some of the search

7 facilities will not operate with respect to it. But let it be very clear

8 it is not an exhibit. It is merely marked for identification and by the

9 addition of that phrase and designation, it will be clear to all that it

10 is not yet part of the evidence.

11 MR. METTRAUX: Thank you, Your Honour.

12 Q. Sir, I'd like to take you to the time when you were taken to the

13 court. Can you recall?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. And to an answer of my learned colleague, you were asked about

16 uniform worn by the police. Can you remember being asked about that?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. And, sir, I think you indicated that the police officers you saw

19 were wearing camouflage uniform and had insignia. You said insignias of

20 the Macedonian police. Can you remember that?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Sir, did you mean to indicate that this is also the observation

23 that you made at the court police or was it an observation you only made

24 in relation to other locations?

25 A. I saw it at the court and in other police stations.

1 Q. Isn't it the case, sir, that apart from one individual, you were

2 not in a position to see what uniform they were wearing at the court?

3 A. Once again, please.

4 Q. My suggestion to you is that, aside from one particular policeman,

5 you were not in a position to observe any of the other uniform worn by

6 police officers present at the court on that day; is that correct?

7 A. Why wasn't I to see them -- in a position to see them? They are

8 there in the hall lined up. They are left here at the corner in the

9 hall. There were police officers present there. We were brought in by

10 other police officers.

11 Q. And you are saying now, sir, that you were able to see that they

12 were wearing camouflage uniforms and that they had police patches on their

13 shoulders. Is that your evidence?

14 A. Yes.

15 MR. METTRAUX: I'll ask that the witness be shown P266. It would

16 be the fifth page of the document, paragraph 22.

17 Q. Sir, this is again the statement which you gave to the Office of

18 the Prosecutor. At paragraph 22 you said the following: "Around midnight

19 or after midnight the police took the four of us to Skopje Court where I

20 could see lots of men, maybe 20 or so, from the Ljuboten village."

21 Can you see that?

22 A. [No interpretation]

23 Q. "I could not recognise any of them because they were all

24 covered" --

25 A. Yes.

1 Q. Can you see this?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. "We were ordered to sit next to them."

4 Can you see this?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. Then you say: "There was a policeman in camouflage uniform

7 carrying an automatic weapon who was guarding us. Another policeman was

8 walking on the corridor and if one of us would move a bit, he would

9 immediately go on and beat with him something that he had in his hand."

10 Can you see that?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. And that's all you told the Prosecution at the time about what

13 happened to you in the corridor at the court; is that correct?

14 A. Yes. Well, I haven't spoken at the court. I said nothing at the

15 court.

16 Q. Well, sir, I'm -- perhaps you have misunderstood my question or I

17 put to you a poorly phrased question. What I read out to you is the only

18 evidence which you gave to the Prosecution when you were first interviewed

19 on the 30th of 2004 [sic], and I'm talking about what happened to you in

20 the corridor of the Skopje Court. Is that correct?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Then two days ago, sir, you were interviewed once again by the

23 Prosecution, is that correct, you had a meeting with representatives of

24 the Office of the Prosecutor?

25 A. Yes.

1 Q. And during that interview, sir, you said this to the Prosecution.

2 You said that when you were in that corridor you were told to look down

3 and to cover your face with a T-shirt. Isn't that right?

4 A. To cover our face with T-shirt. I don't understand the question

5 again.

6 Q. Well, two days ago you recall having a meeting with the

7 Prosecution during which you were asked a number of question about what

8 happened to you in the corridor of the Skopje Court; is that correct?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. And on that occasion you told a representative of the Prosecution

11 that you were told by the policeman to look down and to cover your face

12 with a T-shirt, is that correct, or with a shirt, I'm sorry, with a shirt?

13 A. No. We didn't have our head covers. We had our head down --

14 turned down and with eyes turned down entering the corridor and we were

15 not allowed to see. I don't understand the question, what it is about.

16 Q. Well, if you were recorded as saying that you were told by the

17 policeman to cover your face with your shirt, that would obviously be a

18 mistake of the person who recorded your statement. Is that what you're

19 saying?

20 A. I didn't cover my head with a shirt. At the police station, yes,

21 but not in the court. This is a mistake.

22 Q. So if you were to be recorded as suggesting that you were told at

23 the court on the corridor of the court to cover your face with your shirt,

24 that would be wrong, is that correct, if you haven't told that to the

25 Prosecution.

1 A. No. Maybe they have made a mistake.

2 Q. Right. But you were told, sir, that -- on that same day when you

3 met with the Prosecution, you also told them that you were told to turn

4 around and to face the wall; is that correct?

5 A. Yes, to face the wall, yes.

6 Q. And you made it clear to the Prosecution when you met with them

7 that you could not see who among those policemens were beating you; is

8 that correct?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. Sir, you were interviewed once more by the Prosecution very

11 briefly yesterday; is that correct?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. And yesterday what you told the Prosecution is that you remembered

14 that all the police officers, all the policemen that you witnessed on that

15 day were wearing camouflage uniforms. Isn't that correct?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. And you also told the Prosecution yesterday, 13 of June, that the

18 uniforms that you saw had patches with the word "police" on the sleeves;

19 is that correct?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. Sir, is that also correct that you -- apart from the one policeman

22 which we've mentioned from your statement, you had never mentioned having

23 seen more than one camouflage uniform at Skopje Court in any of your prior

24 statements?

25 A. I have seen police officers in the Skopje Court with camouflage

1 uniforms.

2 Q. Just focussing on my question, sir, prior to yesterday and aside

3 from the one policeman whom you expressly identified as wearing a

4 camouflage uniform, you never said or you never suggested to the Office of

5 the Prosecution or to anyone else that you had seen camouflage uniform

6 being worn at Skopje Court. Is that correct?

7 A. Maybe they didn't ask me.

8 Q. Well, in none of your earlier statements or meetings with the

9 Prosecution did you ever mention having seen patches on any of the

10 policemen; is that correct?

11 A. I don't remember if I said, but I have said that I have seen

12 insignia.

13 Q. So if it did not appear in your statement, that would again be a

14 mistake of the person who took the statement; is that correct?

15 A. They haven't asked me. If they had asked me, I would have said

16 they had camouflage uniforms and patches on their arms. But The Hague

17 Tribunal did ask me what uniforms the police was wearing.

18 Q. So if they have asked you and that it wasn't recorded, sir, would

19 you agree that it's the person who took the statement who failed to

20 mention it in your statement? Is that what you're saying now?

21 MS. REGUE: Your Honour, I think the witness just said that they

22 haven't asked me. So now I don't understand if they asked the following

23 question --

24 MR. METTRAUX: Well, Your Honour, perhaps I'm confused by the last

25 part of the answer of the witness. He said but The Hague did ask me what

1 uniform the police was wearing. I understood the witness now to be saying

2 that he was asked.

3 MS. REGUE: I think that there are two issues. One issue is the

4 uniforms. The other are the patches so --

5 MR. METTRAUX:

6 Q. Okay. Let's take it, sir, one step at a time. Did the

7 Prosecution, the Office of the Prosecutor, when they first met you in the

8 village of Ljuboten ask you about what uniforms the police was wearing?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. And on that occasion, you identified one policeman with a

11 camouflage uniform; is that correct?

12 A. Not one policeman, several policemen.

13 Q. So if your statement suggested that you have only identified one

14 policeman with a camouflage uniform, you are saying that the person who

15 took this statement failed to put that down in your statement; is that

16 correct?

17 A. I don't understand the question.

18 Q. Well, your statement, sir, records you as saying that one

19 policeman in camouflage uniform carrying an automatic weapon was guarding

20 us. Then you talk about another policeman without any mention of his

21 clothes. That's the only two policemen you are mentioning in your

22 statement. So I'm asking you: You did not --

23 JUDGE PARKER: That is the only one mention of clothing of

24 policemen --

25 MR. METTRAUX: Yes.

1 JUDGE PARKER: -- in the statement. The effect of the statement is

2 clearly to indicate there were at different times and in different places

3 a number of policemen. The subject of clothing is not mentioned. I think

4 we understand exactly what you're saying, but the way you're putting it to

5 the witness, it becomes quite confusing, and it's one thing what actually

6 happened in the witness's evidence. It's another thing whether he has

7 described that correctly when he was interviewed and yet a third thing,

8 whether what he described was fully written down when he was interviewed,

9 and I think they are being blurred, Mr. Mettraux.

10 MR. METTRAUX:

11 Q. Sir, can you recall -- or are you suggesting that now you

12 mentioned more than one police officer wearing a camouflage uniform in the

13 corridor of the Skopje courtroom, sir, or did you only mention one at the

14 time, or can't you recall?

15 A. I remember I said that there were several policemen in camouflage

16 uniforms.

17 Q. So if you have mentioned that there were several policemen in

18 camouflage uniform at the time and that your statement only records one,

19 that would be, again, a mistake of the person who took the statement,

20 right?

21 A. No, he didn't make a mistake. Why do you say he would have made a

22 mistake?

23 Q. Sir, just as a matter of clarification, if your statement was

24 mentioning specifically only one policeman in camouflage uniform and you

25 have now just told me that -- you mention that several policemen in

1 camouflage uniform, your statement would inaccurately reflect what you

2 told this person. Is that correct?

3 MS. REGUE: Your Honour, I think the witness has answered the

4 question.

5 JUDGE PARKER: Carry on, Mr. Mettraux.

6 MR. METTRAUX:

7 Q. Sir, you have also been asked about patches. Is that your

8 evidence, sir that prior to yesterday, you had never been asked about what

9 patches the police officers in the corridor were wearing. Is that your

10 evidence?

11 A. I was asked.

12 Q. Just to be clear: Were you asked prior to yesterday or was it the

13 first time yesterday that you were asked about patches worn by the police?

14 A. I was asked even before, related to these patches.

15 Q. And when you were asked, were you asked about those patches the

16 first time when you met with the Office of the Prosecution in Ljuboten on

17 30 September 2004?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... Your Honour.

20 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you, Mr. Mettraux.

21 We need to have a break now and we will resume at 11.00. The

22 court officer will take you out in a moment.

23 We adjourn now until 11.00.

24 --- Recess taken at 10.31 a.m.

25 --- On resuming at 11.03 a.m.

1 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Mettraux.

2 MR. METTRAUX: Thank you, Your Honour.

3 Q. Sir, do you know a person, a fellow villager, by the name Isni

4 Ali?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. And you've met with him in The Hague in the course of this week;

7 is that correct?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. Did you discuss with Mr. Ali the evidence which you are giving

10 today, sir?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. And did you discuss the issue of the policemen present in the

13 corridor of the court in Skopje?

14 A. No.

15 Q. Sir, if Mr. Ali were to say that the uniform worn by the police in

16 the corridor of the courtroom were of a blue colour, you would say he's

17 wrong, wouldn't you?

18 A. Well, he can give his responses and I can give mine.

19 Q. Thank you. Sir, do you know a person called Vebi Bajrami?

20 A. As a fellow villager.

21 Q. Yes. And you also know, sir, that this person testified before

22 the Tribunal recently, is that correct?

23 A. Yes, I heard about it.

24 Q. But you didn't meet him here in The Hague; is that correct?

25 A. No, no. I have met him, but I don't know whether it's him,

1 actually, because I know him only by Vehbi, I don't know his last name.

2 Q. Well, Mr. Bajrami said this to the Prosecutor on the 8th of June,

3 2007: Vehbi Bajrami thinks that the policemen who beat the other detained

4 people from Ljuboten at Skopje Court were court police and not the same

5 policemen who were at Mirkovci police station.

6 Do you agree with that, sir?

7 A. I don't know what he saw.

8 Q. But would you agree with his suggestion that the people who did

9 the beating at the court were court police?

10 A. I don't know what he saw while he was at the court.

11 Q. Well, I'm asking you, perhaps, sir, would you agree that the

12 police whom you saw mistreating people at the court were court police, or

13 you don't know?

14 A. I don't know.

15 Q. Thank you, sir. You've indicated to my colleague and in your

16 statement that you were mistreated prior to and at the time when you were

17 in Skopje Court, is that correct, in the corridor?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. And would it be correct to say that you bore the marks, the

20 bruises of those beatings at the time?

21 A. You mean bodily injuries?

22 Q. Yes, sir.

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. Including on your face?

25 A. Yes, and I have a scar on my face.

1 Q. And those bodily injuries, sir, they remained apparent for quite

2 some time; is that correct?

3 A. Yes, during the time I was in prison for those four months. And

4 later on they healed.

5 Q. Just a matter of clarification, sir, of the date. Is that correct

6 that you were eventually released on the 14th of December of 2001?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. Sir, the reason why you were brought before the court in Skopje

9 related to charges that you had committed an act of terrorism; is that

10 correct?

11 A. That's not correct.

12 Q. Well, weren't you charged and indicted for a crime of terrorism

13 under Article 313 of the criminal code, sir?

14 A. I was charged for that, but I never carried out terrorist acts.

15 MR. METTRAUX: Could the witness please be shown P50. That would

16 be ET-N002-0138-1. And the Macedonian version would be N002-0084-55.

17 Q. Sir, do you have the document in front of you?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. Sir, this document says that it's a criminal charge. It is

20 submitted against Farush Memedi, father Husein, mother Beguse, born on 27

21 March 1965 in Skopje, municipality of Skopje. Can you see that?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. Thank you, sir. And if you look at the top left corner of that

24 document, it says that the document comes from internal affairs unit,

25 Cair, can you see that?

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. And it is dated 14 August 2001; is that correct?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. And is that also correct that it's being sent to the basic public

5 prosecutor in Skopje? That's the next line, sir.

6 A. I never saw this document. I'm seeing it for the first time

7 today. Maybe it is addressed to the organ you mentioned.

8 Q. Well, in any case, that's what the document says; is that correct?

9 A. Yes. That's what the document says, but I didn't know of it.

10 Q. And if you go down to the bottom of that page, that first page,

11 sir, it says that due to presence of founding suspicious -- suspicion, I'm

12 sorry, that he committed a criminal act terrorism according to Article 313

13 of the criminal code of the Republic of Macedonia. Is that what it says?

14 A. Yes.

15 MR. METTRAUX: I'd ask the registry to go to the third page after

16 that document in English. And that would also be the third page in the

17 Macedonian.

18 Q. Sir, I draw your attention to the first paragraph on that page 3.

19 It is also the first paragraph in the Macedonian. It says that, "The

20 reported persons prepared the obtained weapons and ammunition to be used

21 in the morning hours on 12 August 2001. Proceeding around 8.00 to

22 initiate a direct attack on the positions of the joint Armed Forces of the

23 Republic of Macedonia, located in the area of the village Ljuboten, with

24 the aim to destroy them and to endanger the constitutional order and

25 security of the Republic of Macedonia."

1 Can you see that paragraph, sir?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. If you go further down in that document, jumping over one

4 paragraph, there's a paragraph starting: "In OVR Kisela Voda." Can you

5 see this?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. It says that, "In OVR Kisela Voda official conversation was

8 conducted with the aforementioned persons on which an Official Note was

9 put together. We have enclosed this Official Note."

10 Can you see this?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. And then it goes to say that, "After the conducted conversation

13 with the reported persons, paraffin gloves were taken with -- which were

14 then submitted to expert processing of MOI of Republic of Macedonia,

15 criminalistic technical department.

16 Can you see that?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. And then it says, "The MOI of the Republic of Macedonia

19 criminalistic technical department has informed us with expert report

20 number 10.2.6-29838-1, dated 14 August 2001, that the result for the gun

21 powder particles were positive for the reported persons. We have enclosed

22 the expert report with this charge."

23 Can you see this?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. And then in the last paragraph, sir, the person who wrote that

1 document says the following: "The elements of a committed criminal

2 terrorism envisaged and punishable in accordance with Article 313 of the

3 criminal code of the Republic of Macedonia are evident from the

4 aforementioned -- and the submitted facts. We therefore propose that you

5 submit a request for conducting an investigation against the reported

6 persons in order to prove the criminal act and the criminal responsibility

7 of the reported persons."

8 Can you see that?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. And it is signed by the head of the OVR Cair, Mr. Lube Krstevski.

11 Can you see that?

12 A. Yes.

13 MR. METTRAUX: Your Honour, we'd wish to tender this document at

14 this stage.

15 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.

16 MR. METTRAUX: I'm sorry, Your Honour, my fault. I think it has

17 been admitted already as part of the P50. I apologise.

18 Q. Sir, is that correct that all of the other persons mentioned on

19 that document were also from the village of Ljuboten; is that correct?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. And all of these persons had tested positive to nitrate particles;

22 is that correct? Or are you not able to say?

23 A. No. I'm speaking of myself. I don't know for the others, but

24 personally, as far as I'm concerned, that's not correct.

25 Q. You can blame the counsel for the question, not yourself.

1 Is that correct or is that --

2 A. Could you please repeat your question? It's not clear to me.

3 Q. I think you have answered my question, sir, and I think you made

4 it clear that you -- am I correct to understand that you do not know of

5 the results of the paraffin glove tests in relation to the other people

6 mentioned on that document? Am I correct?

7 A. This is not very clear to me.

8 Q. I'll move on, sir.

9 Are you aware of the fact that a number of villagers who had been

10 brought in to the police were immediately released from the police

11 station, or soon thereafter?

12 A. We were released the following day, in the evening.

13 Q. That would be the Monday, sir; is that correct?

14 A. I don't remember the day, but I know that a number of fellow

15 villagers were released.

16 Q. Is that correct, sir, they were released because their paraffin

17 test was negative? Is that something which is within your knowledge?

18 A. No.

19 MR. METTRAUX: I'd like the witness to be shown another document,

20 which is P51, page 3 in the English, and it is P51 N001-9987-07.

21 Q. Sir, do you have that document in front of you?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. If I may draw your attention to the first paragraph of that

24 document at the top, it say: "The investigating judge of the Basic Court

25 Skopje II, Skopje, Ognen Stavrev, deciding upon the request for

1 implementation of the investigation submitted by basic public prosecution

2 Skopje with a proposal to determine measure, detention under KO number

3 2801-01 dated 4 -- 14 August 2001 against accused Memedi Farush, and then

4 it goes on to list a number of other people.

5 Can you see that?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. And if you go further down you can see that the nature of that

8 document is a decision of enforcement of investigation against, and the

9 first name to appear is yours; is that correct?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. If I may ask you to turn or the registry to turn to the second

12 page of the English and that would also be the second page of the

13 Macedonian.

14 Sir, I'll ask you to look at the second paragraph on that page,

15 once it appears on your screen. It says the following: "These activities

16 derived a well-founded suspicion that accused Memedi Farush and a number

17 of others, each of them committed by one criminal act of terrorism

18 pursuant to Article 313 from KZ," KZ standing for criminal code [Realtime

19 transcript read in error: "court"]. Can you see that?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. And then underneath you can see that the person who prepared that

22 document presents what is being translated as an argument. Can you see

23 that? It's a subheading sir, under the Roman II numbering.

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. Thank you, sir. I think my French English has betrayed me, Your

1 Honour. Have said -- or I should have said "criminal code" and it has

2 been recorded as "criminal court" at transcript page 46, line 18.

3 JUDGE PARKER: I think you French English manages much better than

4 my Australian English when it comes to the transcript.

5 MR. METTRAUX:

6 Q. Sir, if I may ask to you look at that third page of that document

7 now. You'll see that the document come from Basic Court Skopje II,

8 Skopje, KI, and it is dated 14 August 2001 again. And it is signed by

9 investigating judge Ognen Stavrev. Can you see that?

10 Sorry, sir, you haven't yet received the documents. I will ask

11 you my question again.

12 Can you see a signature, sir, on that page?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... It says investigating judge,

15 Ognen Stavrev, is that correct?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... Above that line there is a

18 note or a phrase saying Basic Court Skopje II, Skopje, KI number 439-01

19 and it is dated 14 August 2001. Can you see that?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. And then if you look at the last paragraph of that decision, there

22 is something which has been translated as "on advice," and it

23 said, "Period of three days is allowed to lodge a complaint against the

24 decision of enforcement of an investigation when the decision has been

25 received and it is allowed a period of 24 hours to lodge a complaint

1 against the decision for detention and it is submitted -- and it is to be

2 submitted through the investigative judge to the criminal counsel of this

3 court."

4 Can you see that?

5 A. Yes.

6 MR. METTRAUX: Your Honour, I would like to tender this document.

7 It's again admitted already, I'm told.

8 Q. Sir, do you remember receiving that document at all?

9 A. No.

10 Q. I'd like the witness to be shown --

11 I'd like the witness to be shown another document, which is

12 Exhibit P51. It's at page 28 in the English version. And in the

13 Macedonian version it is P51, page N001-9987-25.

14 Q. Do you have the document in front of you, sir?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. If you look first perhaps at the right-hand corner there is a

17 number which is the same number as I read out to you earlier, which is

18 439-01. Can you see that?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. And underneath, there is a date, which says 15 August 2001, and

21 underneath --

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. -- your name, Farush Memedi; is that correct?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. And on the left side it says village of Ljuboten, Ognen Stavrev.

1 Can you see that?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. If we turn to the next page of the document, it says that the

4 interview started at 3.05. Then there's an advice about the use of your

5 own language. And I would like you to turn to the next paragraph where it

6 starts: "He was informed that basic public prosecution." Can you see

7 that? That's the second paragraph.

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. It says that he was informed that basic public prosecution Skopje

10 under KO number 2801 --

11 MR. METTRAUX: Your Honour, we do not seem to have the right

12 English version. I apologise, Mr. Memedi.

13 The English should be Exhibit P51, page 28 and there's an ERN --

14 yes. I'm grateful to the registry.

15 Q. I apologise, sir. Can I ask you once against to turn to the

16 second paragraph. It says that, "He was informed that basic public

17 prosecution Skopje under KO number 2801-01 dated 14 August 2001 submitted

18 a request on enforcement of investigation within the proposal to pose

19 detention because of the well-based suspicion the accused committed a

20 criminal act of terrorism, pursuant to Article 313 from KZ, criminal

21 code," and it is stated that you understood it.

22 Can you see that?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. Then the next paragraph, it says that, "Pursuant to Article 3,

25 paragraph 2, and Article 63, paragraphs 1 and 2 from the ZKP, the accused

1 was advised that a defence attorney appointed by him can be present at his

2 interrogation. Hence, he stated that he would like Tahir Fidovski, an

3 attorney from Skopje, appointed to him as a defence attorney by ex officio

4 and who was present at today's hearing to act as a defence attorney on his

5 behalf."

6 Sir, before I go any further with this document, do you recall

7 having that meeting with Mr. -- with Judge Stavrev?

8 A. There was a lawyer there, but I don't know him. I don't know

9 whether he was a lawyer or something else.

10 Q. And you don't remember the name of that person, sir; is that

11 correct?

12 A. Correct. I don't know him.

13 Q. Then if we look at the next paragraph, sir, it says -- and that's

14 the last line. Well, I mean first the first line. You were informed that

15 you had the right not to respond to any questions. And the last sentence

16 says, "Therefore, the accused stated he will use the entitled right and he

17 will remain silent."

18 And that's correct, sir, that's what you already told me earlier

19 today. You decided to remain silent; is that correct?

20 A. It wasn't possible for me to speak and that's why I said that. I

21 was very much beaten, maltreated. I was not in a position to speak.

22 Q. And it concludes, "I do not have anything else to stay. These

23 minutes been read out loud to me and I accept it as my own and I put my

24 signature onto it," and you went on to sign it; is that correct?

25 A. I don't remember signing it but it is my signature.

1 Q. Thank you.

2 MR. METTRAUX: Your Honour, I will not move to have it admitted.

3 Q. Sir, while you were in this meeting with Mr. Stavrev, you did not

4 raise any complaint with him of mistreatment or beatings; is that correct?

5 A. He could see us by himself. He could see us that we are beaten.

6 Q. But you didn't tell him anything, you didn't raise any complaint

7 to him; is that correct?

8 A. Didn't he have eyes to see?

9 Q. Sir, I can't ask you a question about what Mr. Stavrev did or

10 saw. I'm asking you did you make any complaint to Mr. Judge Stavrev about

11 what had happened to you?

12 A. For this reason, we -- we didn't have the opportunity to speak--

13 the possibility to speak in the court because I was very beaten up and I

14 couldn't speak. This is the reason.

15 Q. Sir, but my question is slightly different. Is that correct that

16 did you not raise any complaint with Judge Stavrev about what had happened

17 to you in the days and hours prior to this interview? Is that correct?

18 A. How could I complain? I don't understand that question, how to

19 complain. Tell the police to complain? I don't understand the question.

20 Q. My question is as follows, sir: You did not tell Mr. Stavrev,

21 Judge Stavrev, that you had been beaten at Kisela Voda police station, for

22 instance?

23 A. No, I didn't say anything.

24 Q. You didn't tell him either that you had been beaten prior to that

25 time at another police station?

1 A. No, I didn't.

2 Q. And the lawyer who was present with you on that day, he didn't

3 make any complaint or did not make any remark in relation to those -- to

4 the judge; is that correct?

5 A. No, he didn't.

6 Q. Sir, I'd like to show you another document.

7 MR. METTRAUX: Your Honour, it is under the same large Exhibit P50

8 and in the English it is under the ERN ET-N002-0128-01. And the

9 Macedonian version of that document is under N002-0084-45.

10 Q. Do you have that document in front of you, sir?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. And if I can draw your attention to the top of the document, it

13 says that it's the public prosecutor's office. Then there is a number,

14 2801-2, 2001. Skopje, 7 September, 2001. Can you see that?

15 A. [No interpretation]

16 Q. And the next line suggest that it is being sent to the Lower Court

17 Skopje II, Skopje. Can you see that?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. And the title of that document is "indictment." Can you see this?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. And then it goes on to list a number of individuals who have been

22 indicted, Mr. Ali Riza under number one. Qamuran Rexhepi under number 2.

23 Can you see that?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. If we can turn to the third page of that document in the English,

1 and that would be page number 3, although it is the fourth page of

2 Macedonian with an ERN 0084-48.

3 MR. METTRAUX: I apologise. It's the third -- the second page in

4 the English and it would be the third page in the Macedonian. I apologise

5 to the registry. The ERN for the Macedonian is 0084-47.

6 Q. Sir, do you have number 9 in front of you?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. And that refers to you, Farush Memedi, father Husein, mother

9 Beguse and born on 27 of March 1965. Is that correct?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. If we can go to the fourth page of the English version, it is

12 ET-N002-012804. And it is also page 4 of the Macedonian version.

13 Sorry. That would be the next page in both languages.

14 Your Honour, there seems to be a difference between the documents

15 that I have in front of me and the documents that appears on the screen.

16 The English version should be ET N002-0128-04, in the English.

17 MR. METTRAUX: Your Honour, there seems to be a difference between

18 the documents that I have in front of me and the documents that appears on

19 the screen. The English version should be ET N002-0128-04 in the

20 English. Your Honour, there seems to be a problem with the pagination,

21 but I think we can go directly to the last page of the document. That

22 will save everyone's time. Thank you.

23 Q. Sir, if we go to the last paragraph but one, it starts with the

24 words "this defence of the accused." Can you see that?

25 A. Yes.

1 Q. And then there's a paragraph, the last paragraph and that's the

2 one I want you to focus on. It says: "In consideration of the above, I

3 find that the actions of the accused Ali Riza," and then there's a number

4 name.

5 Can you see your name appearing further down the list? It's the

6 last paragraph, sir.

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. And the deputy prosecutor moves on to say, "I move that they be

9 found guilty and that in determining the type and length of the sentence,

10 the Court should weigh both the mitigating and aggravating circumstances."

11 Can you see that? And just -- well, just above perhaps before you

12 respond to my question it relates to a crime which is said to contain the

13 elements qualifying the crime of service in an enemy army from Article

14 322, paragraph 1 of the criminal code. Can you see that?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. And it charges -- it goes on to charge you with participating in

17 an armed attack as combatants against the Republic of Macedonia. Can you

18 see this?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. And then it moves on to suggest that you should be found guilty;

21 is that correct?

22 A. Well, this is not true. I can see it.

23 Q. Would you like a break, sir? Are you ...

24 A. If possible, yes.

25 JUDGE PARKER: Are you saying you need just a short break or would

1 you like a longer break? I'm not sure what the position is.

2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] A short break.

3 JUDGE PARKER: We will adjourn, I think, for a quarter of an hour,

4 Mr. Mettraux, and resume at 12.00.

5 [The witness stands down]

6 --- Break taken at 11.45 a.m.

7 --- On resuming at 12.22 p.m.

8 JUDGE PARKER: We delayed our return as we heard the witness was

9 still not well. Time having now stretched even further, I think it's time

10 to consider again where we should proceed with the rest of today.

11 Mr. Saxon.

12 MR. SAXON: Your Honour, I have been informed by the Victims and

13 Witness Unit that the witness who was testifying before the break is not

14 able to continue today and therefore I would propose that the Prosecution

15 commence with witness M-056, who is prepared now to testify, seems to be

16 in very good health.

17 JUDGE PARKER: Well, let us hope. We are getting a growing list

18 of people who are not able to see through the -- the whole course. Very

19 well. Thank you for being able to arrange that. And we proceed with the

20 next witness.

21 MR. SAXON: Your Honour, I have an application to make before the

22 witness comes, and I would like to ask if we could please go into private

23 session.

24 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, briefly into private.

25 [Private session]

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11 Page 2086 redacted. Private session.

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted)

4 (redacted)

5 (redacted)

6 (redacted)

7 (redacted)

8 (redacted)

9 (redacted)

10 [Open session]

11 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're in open session.

12 MR. SAXON: So the Prosecution will call now Witness M-056, Your

13 Honour. I think it will take a minute or two for the witness to arrive in

14 the courtroom. While we're waiting, may I have Your Honour's permission

15 to make a brief and perhaps a rather strange application.

16 JUDGE PARKER: Indeed.

17 MR. SAXON: Your Honours, the application that the Prosecution

18 needs to make is one I have never made before, at least not in this

19 Tribunal. It is it to exclude some Prosecution evidence that has been

20 admitted. And I will explain the rather unique circumstances that arose.

21 I believe yesterday, with the last Prosecution witness who became

22 ill, counsel for the Prosecution attempted to admit into evidence under

23 Rule 92 bis an addendum that had been produced during proofing, which was

24 an addendum which had not been certified according to the Rule, and

25 counsel rightfully objected and the Trial Chamber rightfully ruled that

1 there was no legal basis to admit that addendum.

2 However, it's the Prosecution's understanding that earlier this

3 week, a similar addendum was tendered under Rule 92 bis and the Trial

4 Chamber admitted it, and I believe it is due to a misunderstanding between

5 Prosecution counsel at that moment and the Trial Chamber. And I would --

6 I'm referring to what was admitted as Exhibit P247.2. It was an -- it was

7 submitted as an addendum to the witness statement of Vebi Bajrami.

8 Prosecution believes that it was actually -- there was actually no

9 proper legal basis for that addendum to be admitted, and so the

10 Prosecution would ask the Trial Chamber that it remove that addendum from

11 the exhibits.

12 JUDGE PARKER: Were there consequences in the course of

13 questioning by either Prosecution or Defence counsel?

14 MR. SAXON: Your Honour, I'm afraid --

15 JUDGE PARKER: I'm looking at the question whether it might be

16 necessary if this motion were granted to recall the witness.

17 MR. SAXON: Your Honour, I think the parties would have to

18 carefully look at the transcript before I could answer that question.

19 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you, Mr. Saxon, and thank you indeed for the

20 promptness and the honesty with which the matter is brought before us.

21 The document was admitted, I believe, without objection, from memory. We

22 would like you and, if necessary, after discussion with Defence counsel to

23 look at the consequences of the motion on the effective questioning that

24 followed of the witness, so that we don't want to create the position

25 where it is necessary to recall the witness because this foundation for

1 the way it was dealt with is removed after he is gone.

2 So could we simply delay dealing with your motion, ask you to look

3 at the implications, as we've indicated, and we will hear from you

4 whenever it is next convenient, in your judgment, to bring the matter up.

5 MR. SAXON: Very well, Your Honour. Perhaps -- well --

6 Your Honour, would the Trial Chamber permit me to approach the

7 Bench and provide you with packages of exhibits that we intend to show the

8 next witness? The usher is not in the room right now.

9 JUDGE PARKER: We will have the Chamber's legal officer or the

10 registry officer approach you, Mr. Saxon.

11 [Trial Chamber confers]

12 [The witness entered court]

13 JUDGE PARKER: Good afternoon, sir.

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

15 shown to you now.

16 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

17 JUDGE PARKER: Microphone.

18 MR. SAXON: The microphone isn't turned on. I apologise Your

19 Honours. It was my mistake.

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

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

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

23 WITNESS: WITNESS M-056

24 [Witness answered through interpreter]

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

1 So that you are aware, sir, you will be informed that your

2 evidence is being given with protective measures. Both your voice and

3 your face will be distorted, so that it ought not to be possible to

4 identify you outside those that are in this courtroom, and we will be

5 referring to you by the pseudonym of Witness 56. So that your name won't

6 be used in the courtroom.

7 And that having been said, I believe Mr. Saxon has some questions

8 for you.

9 MR. SAXON: Before I start my questions if I could ask for the

10 assistance the usher to put this piece of paper, it has ERN number

11 N006-4863, if that could be placed in front of the witness, please.

12 Examination by Mr. Saxon:

13 Q. And, Witness, do you see the piece of paper in front of you?

14 A. I do.

15 Q. And without stating your name, is that your correct name that's

16 written on that piece of paper?

17 A. Yes, it is.

18 Q. And is the other information written on that piece of paper

19 correct?

20 A. They are correct.

21 Q. All right. Witness, today I will be referring to you as M-056 or

22 56. I will not address you by your true name. If there are situations

23 where I need to ask you questions which might identify you, then I will

24 ask to move into what we call private session.

25 MR. SAXON: If I could ask the usher's assistance, please, to show

1 that piece of paper to Defence counsel. And, Your Honours, if Defence

2 counsel have no objection, then I would move that this document be

3 admitted as an exhibit.

4 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.

5 MR. SAXON: And, Your Honours, before I forget.

6 JUDGE PARKER: And it will be received under seal.

7 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P270, Your Honours.

8 MR. SAXON: Thank you.

9 Before I forget, Your Honours, there is a mistake in the index in

10 the binder of documents that has been provided to you. I'd simply like to

11 point it out to you so that there is no confusion created. It's on page 2

12 of the index at what is marked as item 21, and the description of item 21

13 begins: "Two video recordings," and then it gives a date and the date

14 listed there is 3 May 2005. That is incorrect, Your Honour. The date

15 should be written 7 May 2002.

16 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.

17 MR. SAXON: Your Honours, can we move into private session,

18 please.

19 JUDGE PARKER: Private.

20 [Private session]

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11 Pages 2092-2097 redacted. Private session.

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted)

4 [Open session]

5 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I think that maybe

6 there is a mistake because the learned colleague refers to a document he

7 was -- he was showing this document is to Goran Georgievski, the son of

8 Bojko, not Georgievski Bojko.

9 MR. SAXON: I'm grateful for that clarification. I obviously did

10 not understand the structure of the English translation. I'm grateful.

11 JUDGE PARKER: We are in public session, are we? Thank you.

12 MR. SAXON:

13 Q. Witness M-056, I'd like you to turn your mind, please, to the

14 month of May in 2001. In the middle of May 2001 was the -- were the

15 Tigers units operating in the area of a village called Vaksince?

16 A. In -- in the vicinity of the village of Vaksince. Not in the

17 village of Vaksince.

18 Q. Thank you. And I stand corrected; I appreciate that.

19 If we could now please show the witness the map of Macedonia which

20 is on page 2 of the court binder, please. This would be tab 5 of the

21 binder. No, that's not correct. It would be tab 3, yes, you were right.

22 Witness M-056, just briefly, please, if I can turn your attention

23 to the northern part of the country of Macedonia on this map. Can you

24 indicate, tell us where the village of Vaksince is located?

25 A. It's near the village of Lojane, which is on the very

1 Macedonian-Albanian border and next to the Tabanovce village.

2 Q. And would it be fair to say that Vaksince is located to the north,

3 a bit to the north-west of the town of Kumanovo?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Can you tell us, please, why were the Tiger units deployed near

6 Vaksince in May of 2001?

7 A. To arrest terrorists.

8 Q. Okay. Well, what was going on in the Vaksince area in May of

9 2001?

10 A. The entire territory was full of terrorists that were well

11 established with heavy weapons.

12 Q. Was there fighting ongoing between the groups you referred to as

13 the terrorists and the Macedonian security forces?

14 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction, fortified instead of

15 established.

16 A. Yes.

17 MR. SAXON: I'd like to show the Chamber and the witness and the

18 parties some video material. And, Your Honours, if I turn to tab 4, you

19 will see the transcript of some video clips. These are videos from the

20 Prosecution's 65 ter exhibit number 975. It's video footage that was shot

21 by the Macedonian television in May of 2001. And it comes from the

22 archive of Macedonian Radio and Television. And initially I would like to

23 show the witness a clip that runs from 0905 to 1255. And we may pause a

24 couple of times so that I can ask questions to the witness about what

25 we're seeing.

1 [Videotape played]

2 MR. SAXON: Can we pause there, please.

3 Q. Witness, if you're able to help us, Witness, these gentlemen in

4 the back of that truck, would they be members of the Macedonian army, the

5 police or some other institution, if you can tell?

6 JUDGE PARKER: That's at 23:5 on the counter.

7 MR. SAXON: Thank you for that precision, Your Honour. I will do

8 that in the future.

9 A. Yes, these are members of the regular forces of the Macedonian

10 army.

11 MR. SAXON: Can we continue, please.

12 [Videotape played]

13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, they are members of the regular

14 forces of the Macedonian army.

15 MR. SAXON: Thank you.

16 [Videotape played]

17 MR. SAXON: If we pause right there, at 1:04:7.

18 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

19 MR. SAXON: Actually, let's continue, please.

20 [Videotape played]

21 MR. SAXON: Can we pause there, please. Well, the picture is bit

22 blurry.

23 Q. Were you able in what you have seen so far to identify the

24 gentleman who's in the grey jacket, and this is the 01197. Do you

25 recognise that gentleman, Witness?

1 A. Yes, I recognise him.

2 Q. Who is that?

3 A. That is the minister of the interior.

4 Q. Was that Ljube Boskoski at that time?

5 A. Yes.

6 MR. SAXON: Can we continue, please.

7 [Videotape played]

8 MR. SAXON:

9 Q. Do you know, Witness M-056, why Mr. Boskoski came to the area

10 around Vaksince at that time?

11 A. No.

12 MR. SAXON: Your Honour, at this time I would seek to tender that

13 last clip.

14 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.

15 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P272, Your Honours.

16 MR. SAXON: Can we continue with the next clip, please.

17 [Videotape played]

18 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

19 MR. SAXON: I'm very sorry.

20 Q. Witness M-056, can you tell us what we're seeing here?

21 A. We see an army combat helicopter Mi-24.

22 Q. And why were such helicopters used around the area of Vaksince at

23 that time?

24 A. Because we could not act in a different way. The terrorist forces

25 were acting against with us heavy weapons.

1 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] I apologise.

2 THE INTERPRETER: Could the counsel turn the microphone on. We

3 are not able to hear.

4 Could the counsel repeat. The interpreters were not able to hear

5 her.

6 JUDGE PARKER: I'm sorry, because the microphone was turned away

7 from you, the interpreters couldn't hear what you said.

8 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] I apologise.

9 The Prosecutor did not establish the grounds for the last question

10 that he asked, because the witness, before that, did not say anything

11 whether helicopters were used on the territory of Vaksince, and I think it

12 would be necessary that the previous question is whether there was

13 helicopters there at all, and then to suggest to the witness the question

14 that was just asked by my colleague.

15 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Saxon.

16 MR. SAXON:

17 Q. Witness M-056, when you were deployed at the area around Vaksince,

18 did you observe helicopters being used?

19 A. Not around Vaksince, but around Slupcane.

20 Q. And is Slupcane near Vaksince?

21 A. It's next to Vaksince. It is a little bit bigger than Vaksince.

22 Q. All right. And how were such helicopters used at the time?

23 A. They were used to observe, to enter -- and to destroy potential

24 attackers that were attacking us.

25 MR. SAXON: Please continue, please.

1 [Videotape played]

2 MR. SAXON: Stop.

3 Q. Witness M-056, can you explain to us what that helicopter is

4 doing, why we see those bright lights coming off of it? This is at

5 00:34:8.

6 A. I did not see at this recording what the helicopter is doing.

7 Q. Well, do you know why -- during the crisis time, do you know why

8 such helicopters shot off these types of flares or lights?

9 A. These flares are fired to defend the helicopter from stingers or

10 rocket launchers from the ground that those were launchers that the NLA

11 members had.

12 MR. SAXON: Can we continue, please.

13 [Videotape played]

14 MR. SAXON: Keep going, please.

15 [Videotape played]

16 MR. SAXON: Stop.

17 Q. If you look at now -- we're 58:9 and we see a house there. That

18 appears to be - if I can use the vernacular - going up literally in smoke,

19 While you were deployed in this area in May of 2001, did the fighting take

20 place close to or even in the villages themselves?

21 A. Most frequently in the vicinity of the villages.

22 MR. SAXON: If we can continue, please.

23 [Videotape played]

24 MR. SAXON: Stop here.

25 Q. You see Mr. Boskoski standing there. This is at 02.13.0. Do you

1 see that?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. There's a man standing behind Mr. Boskoski in what appears to be a

4 black jacket on what is our left, and he has what appears to be a shaven

5 head. Do you recognise that person?

6 A. No.

7 Q. When the Tiger units were deployed around the area of Vaksince,

8 did they participate in operations with members of the Macedonian army?

9 A. Yes. Sometimes we had coordinated actions together with the army

10 of the Republic of Macedonia members.

11 Q. And in those -- when the Tiger units were participating in

12 coordinated actions, how many -- with the army, how many chains of command

13 did you respond to at that time?

14 A. During the war, our unit was placed under the command of the

15 General Staff of the army of the Republic of Macedonia.

16 Q. Did you also respond to the chain of command of the Ministry of

17 Interior?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. Why was the situation in the area around Vaksince so difficult for

20 the security forces of Macedonia in May of 2001?

21 A. Because first there was a big number of them. I referred to the

22 terrorists. Then they had very well established defence. They had the

23 advantage of the configuration. Not just configuration, they had many

24 trenches and lots of equipment. It is impossible to get there quickly or

25 easily.

1 MR. SAXON: If we can just move a few more seconds along this

2 video clip.

3 [Videotape played]

4 MR. SAXON:

5 Q. I think you just heard Mr. Boskoski speak about moving forward

6 step by step and until we return the constitutional order to Macedonia.

7 Did you hear that?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. By May of 2001, what had happened to the constitutional order of

10 Macedonia?

11 A. The security was endangered.

12 Q. And why was it in danger?

13 A. Because we were attacked by larger or smaller, depending on the

14 location of that deployment, terrorist groups of NLA.

15 MR. SAXON: If we could just finish this clip, please.

16 [Videotape played]

17 MR. SAXON: Your Honour, I would seek to tender this last clip,

18 please.

19 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.

20 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P273, Your Honours.

21 MR. SAXON: The next clip begins at 53:20 of this video and will

22 go to about 54:55. If we could start it, please.

23 [Videotape played]

24 MR. SAXON:

25 Q. Witness M-056, when you and your units were deployed in the area

1 around Vaksince in May of 2001, did you observe numbers of persons who

2 were displaced by the fighting?

3 A. Yes. I saw them going out of the Albanian villages. It was the

4 civilian population.

5 MR. SAXON: Can we continue, please.

6 [Videotape played]

7 MR. SAXON:

8 Q. Witness M-056, a moment ago you explained that you saw numbers of

9 persons in May of 2001 who had been displaced by the fighting and that --

10 that these were the civilian population who had left the Albanian

11 villages. What instructions did you give to the members of your units in

12 terms of how to treat these civilians?

13 A. My unit had no contact with these civilians.

14 Q. Did you give any instructions to the members of your unit as to

15 how they should treat civilians if they encountered them?

16 A. We did not issue additional instructions because that has been

17 agreed previously, how to act with civilians.

18 Q. And what was -- to use your term, what was the agreement that had

19 been agreed on previously in your unit?

20 A. The civilians are always treated in a proper manner with due

21 respect to their rights.

22 Q. And civilians would not be beaten, for example?

23 A. Yes, civilians should not be beaten unless they show resistance,

24 unless they are armed, and unless it is found that there is something else

25 behind that civilian.

1 MR. SAXON: Can we continue with this video, please.

2 [Videotape played]

3 MR. SAXON: Your Honour, I would seek to tender that last video.

4 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.

5 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P274, Your Honours.

6 MR. SAXON: Your Honours, may we move into private session again,

7 please.

8 JUDGE PARKER: Private.

9 [Private session]

10 (redacted)

11 (redacted)

12 (redacted)

13 (redacted)

14 (redacted)

15 (redacted)

16 (redacted)

17 (redacted)

18 (redacted)

19 (redacted)

20 (redacted)

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11 Pages 2108-2114 redacted. Private session.

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted)

4 (redacted)

5 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.46 p.m.,.

6 to be reconvened on Friday, the 15th day of June,

7 2007, at 9.00 a.m.

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25