1 Tuesday, 17 July 2007
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness entered court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 2.18 p.m.
6 JUDGE PARKER: Good afternoon.
7 And good afternoon, General. Could I remind you of the
8 affirmation you made at the beginning of your evidence, it still applies.
9 Mr. Saxon.
10 WITNESS: RISTO GALEVSKI [Resumed]
11 [Witness answered through interpreter]
12 Examination by Mr. Saxon: [Continued]
13 Q. General, yesterday you mentioned that you and Goran Mitevski and
14 Minister Boskoski used to meet and you made all possible efforts to make
15 an on-site investigation in Ljuboten village. This is at page 3586 of the
17 Were these meetings or discussions with Mr. Mitevski, Mr. Boskoski
18 and yourself, was that before the commission that you were a member of
19 issued its report on the 4th of September, 2001?
20 A. I couldn't answer precisely because we would be in session or we
21 would meet on a daily basis literally. Sometimes even several times in a
22 day and this is why I can't remember when exactly what you mentioned took
24 Q. All right. Before the commission issued its report on the 4th of
25 September, did Minister Boskoski ever make any comments that you heard
1 about the work that the commission was doing?
2 A. We discussed this issue several times, and I know that everyone,
3 using his own line of contacts and command, would seek support from the
4 international community. I don't know what the minister did and whom he
5 discussed the issues with. I know that I discussed with the General, I
6 don't know if I remember his name correctly. Maybe it was Spanner, head
7 of the NATO unit.
8 Q. General Galevski, I'm sorry, but you're not answering the question
9 that I asked you. My question was simply this: Before the committee
10 produced its final report, did Minister Boskoski make any comments in your
11 presence about the work that the commission was doing?
12 A. Yes. I answered in the affirmative that we discussed the issues
13 several times with --
14 Q. And what comments, if you can recall, did Minister Boskoski make?
15 A. I couldn't quote but it was along the lines that it should be
16 investigated what took place there. And I know that in one of the
17 meetings even the public prosecutor general was present. Because we made
18 serious efforts to enter the village and to make the on-site
20 Q. All right. General, after the commission produced its report on
21 the 4th of September, 2001, did you ever hear Minister Boskoski make any
22 comments about the report?
23 A. I don't recall.
24 Q. Okay. Can you recall whether Minister Boskoski asked you and the
25 other members to do anymore work on the report?
1 A. I couldn't answer precisely. I know that the director Mitevski
2 relayed some information from the minister to me several times. I tried
3 yesterday and I would like to clarify now, if you allow me, I would like
4 to shed more light on the situation in which the committee worked.
5 Q. I think I'd like to you answer my question, please.
6 So your answer to my question whether Minister Boskoski asked you
7 and the other members to do more work is you're not sure, you couldn't
9 A. I don't remember him telling me directly, but I know that the
10 Director Mitevski relayed a message from the minister several times, but
11 the minister instructed him or gave him guidelines, I'm not sure. I
12 couldn't quote exactly what was the message.
13 Q. Was that after the report was produced or before?
14 A. I think that such comments or discussions took place both before
15 and after the -- afterwards.
16 THE INTERPRETER: Could the interpreters ask that the microphone
17 be moved closer to the witness? We can't hear him clearly.
18 MR. SAXON: Could you move closer to the microphone, please.
19 JUDGE PARKER: What would also help, General, is if you lifted
20 your voice as though you were speaking to Mr. Saxon. Your voice is
21 extremely quiet, and that means that it is not being picked up even though
22 the microphones are close to you. Thank you.
23 MR. SAXON:
24 Q. Help us, please. What were the instructions or guidelines that
25 Minister Boskoski relayed to Director Mitevski, if you know?
1 A. I think that I also answered this. First I apologise for the
2 voice I was using. This is the best I can do. I will try to speak up a
4 I couldn't answer precisely, but I will repeat again. I remember
5 well on several occasions the Director Mitevski told me that the minister
6 insisted that the decisions are followed.
7 Q. Okay. I'd like to move to a slightly different topic, General, if
8 I may. I'd like to ask you to turn your mind back to Sunday, the 12th of
9 August, 2001, the day the events in Ljuboten village occurred.
10 Do you recall on that afternoon, the afternoon of the 12th, do you
11 recall that you ordered a police unit to go to the village of Ljuboten?
12 A. I don't remember the exact time in the day, but my subordinate,
13 Goran Goergievski, who was in charge of the <<posebna>> units, was given an
14 order by me over the telephone, because I was rather far from Skopje at
15 that time to the scene with the personnel that he had available at that
16 time from his unit in order to prevent direct clash between the civilian
17 population from the village of Ljuboten and from the neighbouring
19 Q. General Galevski, before you --
20 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] I apologise, Your Honours, I
21 apologise, my learned colleague, but again in line 19, the word – page 4,
22 line 19, the word "posebna" was interpreted as "special."
23 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.
24 MR. SAXON:
25 Q. General Galevski, before you issued this order to Goran
1 Georgievski to bring his unit to the area of Ljuboten, did you consult
2 with anyone, or did you just decide to issue the order?
3 A. I think that on that day there were several occasions that I spoke
4 on the phone with both the minister and the Director Goran Mitevski with,
5 my subordinate in charge of the uniformed part of the police force,
6 Skopje, Mr. Ljupco Bliznakovski, the colleague that I've mentioned Goran
7 Georgievski, and there must have been other colleagues whose names I could
8 not recall at the moment, or enumerate them.
9 Q. All right. So I think is the answer to my question, then, you
10 might have consulted with your colleagues in the Ministry of the Interior
11 before issuing the order to Goran Georgievski. Is that correct?
12 A. Of course I could have, but I probably have had consulted with
13 him, because it was related to the Skopje region, I must have spoken to
14 Ljupco Bliznakovski, who was in charge of the uniformed police in the
16 Q. Would you have consulted with anyone else outside of the circle of
17 persons that you have referred to?
18 A. I don't recall.
19 Q. Okay. Yesterday, General, you -- you explained how police
20 officers and police inspectors interviewed suspects of crimes at police
21 stations and how then reports and Official Notes were produced based on
22 the information received. Do you remember explaining that to us
23 yesterday? Just yes or no, do you remember that?
24 A. Yes, I remember.
25 Q. This is at pages 3597 to 3598 of the transcript.
1 General, if you could take a look at tab 15 in your binder. Tab
2 15 contains 65 ter 430.
3 THE INTERPRETER: And while the usher is there could we please ask
4 him to turn on the right-hand side microphone.
5 MR. SAXON: Mr. Usher, we can see that the right-hand microphone
6 is turned off. Could you turn that on, please.
7 Q. And, General, if we could start with the first page in the
8 Macedonian version, which bears ERN N005-1061. And we have a translation
9 in English as well.
10 You see, General, this is a document from the city secretariat of
11 the interior, administration of operative matters, division of serious
12 crimes. Do you see that at the upper left?
13 A. Yes, I see it.
14 Q. And then we see bearer Aleksovski Bobi and then date below that,
15 26th January, 1989, Skopje and there's a stamp further down to the right.
16 It says evidence. There's a number and a year that's difficult to read in
17 the Macedonian version. Up at the top middle it says operative
18 information and then a bit lower down we see it says subject, threat to
20 Are with you me, General?
21 A. Yes, I'm with you.
22 Q. The first paragraph begins: "On the 5th of December, 1988" --
23 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours.
24 JUDGE PARKER: [Previous translation continues] ...
25 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] We object to the relevance of the
1 document because we don't see what makes this document relevant, document
2 of 26th of January, 1989 in relation to the events in 2001.
3 Secondly, my learned colleague should tell us whether it is was
4 ascertained that those people are related to some Ljuboten events, are
5 they related or otherwise to some crimes that the Prosecutor claims were
6 committed, and whether these deeds were known to the witness in any
7 possible way. Otherwise, we see no relevance for a document dated 1989
8 being shown to the witness.
9 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Saxon, relevance?
10 MR. SAXON: Your Honour, before I rely too precisely, I would
11 simply like to indicate that if you review pages 864 to 870 of the
12 transcript of this trial, you will see a person named on this document
13 mentioned in the transcript. And that is essentially the relevance as to
14 why I want to bring this document to the Chamber's attention, Your Honour.
15 JUDGE PARKER: Proceed.
16 MR. SAXON:
17 Q. General, the first paragraph talks about a person named Kuzmanov
18 Zoran who was attacked without reason by unknown persons. Do you see
20 A. Yes, I see it.
21 Q. And then in section III, there's a Roman numeral III, says, "We're
22 going to undertake measures to uncover the names of the HH persons," and
23 then there's a sentence, it says,"There is a justified suspicion that the
24 probably wrongdoers are the brothers Janevski Vlado and Aleksander. Are
25 you following with me?
1 A. Yes, I am.
2 Q. And below that it says persons Janevski Vlado "Kunta," father,
3 Pero, mother Ljiljana.
4 I have a question for you General. In the Macedonian language is
5 the name Pero sometimes a short version of the name Petar?
6 A. I think there are two different names with a common source. You
7 can find many people with the name Pero and their ID card also bears that
8 name, Pero.
9 Q. But would someone named Petar sometimes be referred to as Pero?
10 A. Yes. It could be a pet name for Petar.
11 Q. So we see a man Vlado Janevski, Kunta, born on the 8th of
12 September, 1965 in Skopje, who they live on the street City Park number
13 13. Below that we see Vlado's brother Janevski Aleksander, same parents,
14 born on the 8th of July, 1969, living at the same address. Do you see
16 A. Yes, I see it.
17 Q. Now back -- and then we see the drafter is Aleksovski Bobi. Now,
18 back in the late 1980s would such operative information have been recorded
19 in this way?
20 A. I think, yes.
21 MR. SAXON: Your Honour, again, you will see the nickname Kunta at
22 paragraph 870 of the transcript, and Kunta was referred to as a member of
23 the security forces that were with Johan Tarculovski in the village of
24 Ljuboten on the 12th of August, 2001, and this gentleman known as Kunta
25 suffered a wound at that time.
1 Q. Can we turn to what is page 2, please. Turn to the next page,
2 General. This is a document -- it is also operative information from the
3 city secretariat of the interior, administration of the operative matters,
4 division of serious crimes. Same bearer, Aleksovski Bobi is a typist
5 mentioned. This is about a year earlier than -- actually, no, it is
6 drafted around the same time. It is from December, 1988. Again the
7 subject, threat to security and we have the same victim, Zoran Kuzmanov
8 can you see man off who is reporting in the first paragraphs that on two
9 occasions he was attacked by unknown persons who had previously threatened
10 to kill him. Did you see that, General? First paragraph?
11 A. Yes, I see it.
12 Q. And then in the next paragraph we see the names Janevski
13 Aleksander and Janevski Vlado mentioned again. It says there was an
14 interview with Vlado and then there's a sentence about apparently Vlado
15 being in a drunken state and then we see again persons Janevski Vlado,
16 Kunta, father Pero, mother Ljiljana, born on the 8th of September, 1965,
17 in Skopje. Do you see that, General?
18 A. Yes, I see it.
19 Q. So would this also have been a typical way that operative
20 information was recorded in the late 1980s?
21 A. Yes, it is the usual way in which it is done.
22 MR. SAXON: Your Honour, I would tender these two documents,
24 JUDGE PARKER: For what purpose, Mr. Saxon?
25 MR. SAXON: I would like the Chamber to know the true name of the
1 man known as Kunta and I would like to know something about -- I would
2 like the Chamber to know something about the background of the man known
3 as Kunta.
4 JUDGE PARKER: The material so far is relevant to those is already
5 on the transcript, is it not?
6 MR. SAXON: No, Your Honour. All we have on the transcript -- I'm
7 sorry, I did not explain myself clearly.
8 On page 870, we have a nickname, Kunta.
9 JUDGE PARKER: Yes.
10 MR. SAXON: But we do not have the true name of the person known
11 as Kunta, because the witness --
12 JUDGE PARKER: But the transcript now has connected a person with
13 the nickname Kunta with the named person on these documents.
14 MR. SAXON: That is correct, Your Honour.
15 JUDGE PARKER: That is revealed in the transcript.
16 MR. SAXON: That is correct, Your Honour.
17 JUDGE PARKER: Yes.
18 MR. SAXON: But I would also like the Chamber to have evidence
19 related to the criminal background of persons who were in the village with
20 Johan Tarculovski on the 12th of August.
21 [Trial Chamber confers]
22 JUDGE PARKER: We will not receive the documents, Mr. Saxon.
23 MR. SAXON: All right.
24 Q. Can we turn, please, to tab 11. This is 65 ter number 657.
25 General, this is a document, it is a decision, actually, issued by
1 the Ministry of Internal Affairs on the 29th of May, 2001 in Skopje. It
2 is a decision to form the headquarters of the operative action Ramno. Do
3 you see that?
4 A. Yes, I see it.
5 Q. And do you see on the bottom, you see there's a signature of Ljube
6 Boskoski, the minister for the internal affairs. Do you see that?
7 A. Yes, I see it.
8 Q. Do you see that on the first page, if you look at number 3, we see
9 your name, Risto Galevski, as a person who will be part of this
10 headquarters. Do you see that, General?
11 A. Yes, I see it.
12 Q. What was the purpose of the headquarters of operative action
13 Ramno? What work did it do?
14 A. The decision itself, item 1 of it reads: "In order to organise
15 head, coordinate, and direct the measures and activities related to the
16 operational action Ramno, the headquarters is established."
17 Q. Tell us please again what was operative action Ramno then?
18 A. The operational action Ramno was the name for the overall
19 activities related to the resolving of the problems that happened at the
20 very beginning of 2001 in the village of Tanusevci and continuously spread
21 towards the neighbouring villages in the Kumanovo Skopje and Tetovo
22 regions. All of these activities were managed by these same and it was
23 the operational action named Ramno.
24 MR. SAXON: Your Honour, I would seek to tender this document,
1 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.
2 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P381, Your Honours.
3 MR. SAXON: Your Honours, at this time I have no further
5 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you very much, Mr. Saxon.
6 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] May I, Your Honours?
7 JUDGE PARKER: Indeed, Ms. Residovic, we were just letting you
8 have time to get things collected together.
9 Cross-examination by Ms. Residovic:
10 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you very much, Your Honours.
11 And in order to avoid interrupting the witness later, we have
12 quite a number of documents, Your Honours, that we wish to show this
13 witness in the course of cross-examination, so I would like to ask for the
14 assistance of the usher in distributing these documents, and they are
15 compiled in three binders, to the Chamber, to the witness, and to the
16 colleagues from the Prosecution.
17 Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Galevski.
18 A. Good afternoon.
19 Q. My name is Edina Residovic and together with my colleague Guenael
20 Mettraux we appear for Mr. Ljube Boskoski.
21 Before I start asking you questions that I have planned for you, I
22 will kindly ask you to listen to a warning that I wish to issue to you.
23 You and I speak languages that we could understand, that the languages are
24 not the same but we are able to understand one another and you could
25 answer the question that I'm asking very rapidly, but I kindly ask to you
1 wait for my question to be interpreted so that the Court and the
2 colleagues in the courtroom are able to know what is it that I'm asking
3 and then what is your answer to my question.
4 Have you understood this?
5 A. Yes, I understood.
6 Q. Thank you. In 1975 you finished your police high school and you
7 started working at the police right away. Is that so?
8 A. Yes, it is.
9 Q. As you said to my learned colleague, the Prosecutor, in the course
10 of your work you also graduated from the security faculty; is that
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Until 1992 you used to work in the traffic police; is that
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. After that, you were on the duty of a deputy and later on you were
17 a commander of the Kisela Voda police station in Skopje; is that correct?
18 A. Deputy commander in the traffic police station and after that I
19 was assigned a commander in the other stations. I was not a deputy, I was
20 directly a commander.
21 Q. In 1995, you were appointed a head -- a chief inspector in the
22 public order and security department with the purpose to improve the
23 methodology of the police work and you were later appointed a head of the
24 administration of public law and order. Are these information correct?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. In 2000, you were appointed deputy of the under-secretary in the
2 Ministry of Interior for the police, and on the 11th of April, 2001, you
3 were appointed under-secretary in the Ministry of Interior for the police;
4 is that true?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. During your -- when you were appointed as an under-secretary for
7 the police, Dosta Dimovska was the minister of interior; is that correct?
8 A. Yes, exactly.
9 Q. After the police academy was established and after it was in full
10 swing as a personal request that you filed to the government, the
11 government of the Republic of Macedonia appointed you on 12th of February,
12 2002 director of the police academy; is that correct?
13 A. Partially, yes. At that time it was called a centre for education
14 for personnel of the security fields and since that was an institution
15 that was about to be discontinued, this was supposed to be transported in
16 the police academy which took place in -- sometime in mid-2003 as a police
17 academy and that has been functioning continually since then.
18 Q. If I understood you well, you are -- you now bear the rank of a
19 police general. Is that so?
20 A. Yes, since sometime in 2001.
21 Q. As you have already testified in August 2001, you were at the
22 position of the under-secretary for the police within the Ministry of
23 Interior of the Republic of Macedonia.
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. So if I were to say that you -- in 2001, you were the -- the chief
1 of all uniformed police expect for -- until August 2001 the Tigers unit
2 then that statement would be correct. Isn't it so?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Until August 2001, the special Tiger unit was linked to the
5 minister of the interior. Is that so?
6 A. Yes, it was so.
7 Q. You also said that in addition to the education you got in the
8 Republic of Macedonia, you underwent a number of specialist courses
9 abroad, where you acquired additional knowledge from the police practice
10 and operations area. Is that correct?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Bearing in mind all these duties that you were carrying out, I
13 would ask you to answer several questions of mine that are linked to the
14 competencies, the organisation of work of the ministry, especially about
15 the position, the rights and obligations of the minister, to the extent
16 that you are aware of.
17 You remember that my learned colleague asked you yesterday about
18 the establishment of the commission or one of the commissions that were
19 established on 13th of August that you were a member of and the other
20 commission that was established by Minister Boskoski. The first one was
21 established by Minister Boskoski, and the second one that was later
22 established by Minister Hari Kosta. Do you remember that?
23 A. I remember the first one and I don't remember the second one.
24 Q. But you remember that you were asked by my learned colleague, the
25 Prosecutor, yesterday about it?
1 A. Yes, we discussed this issue.
2 Q. Since the question of the commission -- of the commission, its
3 work and operation might be important for the manner of work within the
4 Ministry of Interior, I'll be free to ask you several questions on these
5 matters as well.
6 Before I go on to some specific questions from this area, I would
7 like to ask you whether my statement would be correct, that during your
8 entire work in the Ministry of Interior of the Republic of Macedonia, so
9 also in 2001, you and all the members of the ministry were obliged to act
10 according to the domestic legislation according to the laws and
11 regulations that were adopted based on that law?
12 A. Yes, of course.
13 Q. The application of the regulations, the procedures prescribed by
14 law and the competences of the bodies that were envisioned with the laws
15 of the Republic of Macedonia were also applicable in 2001, meaning in the
16 time of the crisis; is that correct?
17 A. Yes, it is correct.
18 Q. Is it also true that in the Ministry of the Interior there was
19 also a principle that information coming from the lower organisational
20 units of the Ministry, that is to say organs which are on a lower level
21 of hierarchy, should be trusted?
22 A. Yes, it is correct.
23 Q. So the ministry of any country, but we could not speak of those
24 because those facts are not even known to me, but surely for the ministry
25 of the Republic of Macedonia, the ministry has been basing its
1 information, plans, and programmes on the law and the trust in the
2 information that it would acquire from its own structure, from its bodies,
3 units that within the Ministry of Interior. Is that correct?
4 A. Yes. That is the system that has been operational for years.
5 Q. Please, General, tell me, since we already are speaking about the
6 laws that regulated the organisation, the operation and the competency, is
7 it true that the law on organisation work of the bodies of certain
8 administration was the one that prescribed the basic principle of
9 organisation, the competency, and the operation of all the state
10 administration bodies. Is that correct?
11 A. Yes, such a law exists.
12 Q. The ministries in line with the laws of the Republic of Macedonia
13 are part of the state administration, so this law also applied to some
14 general competencies of the ministries so thus also of the Ministry of
15 Interior. Is that correct?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. However, for the Ministry of Interior there was a special law that
18 is the law on the Ministry of Interior, that set the -- the competency,
19 the scope, the organisation of the ministry and also other issues that are
20 important for its operation. Is that correct?
21 A. Yes, that's correct.
22 Q. And if there are certain evidences already spoken before this
23 Court, but I would like to ask you, General, is that correct that the
24 framework of competencies of the interior in line with the law were the
25 affairs of the public and the state security. Is that correct?
1 A. I'd like you to repeat your question, please.
2 Q. Is that correct that the Ministry of Interior covered the scope of
3 the public security as well as it was in charge of the state security?
4 A. Yes, that is correct. I'm sorry for asking you. I can hear you,
5 I understand your question, I understand your language, but then I'm also
6 hearing in Macedonian and that confuses me a little bit, but the answer
7 was yes.
8 Q. Keeping these competences in mind of the public and state
9 security, is that correct, General, that within the Ministry of Interior
10 there were two main parts organised, the first one being the bureau for
11 public security which encompassed all the affairs of public security as
12 well as the administration for security and counter-intelligence that was
13 in charge of the affairs of state security. Is that correct?
14 A. Yes, it is correct.
15 Q. And each of these parts was -- of the ministry was headed by a
16 minister. Is that so?
17 A. Yes, it is so.
18 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction, director, not
20 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation].
21 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... Administration for state
22 security was acting in -- in summary that was the uniformed police that
23 was primarily in charge to maintain the law and order and it also
24 consisted of a criminal police that -- whose primary task was to prevent
25 the commitment of crimes and detection and prosecution of perpetrators in
1 the pre-criminal procedure -- in the pre-trial procedure. Is that the
2 basic task of these parts within the public security?
3 A. Yes, that's correct.
4 Q. Your department of the police was in the public security sector;
5 is that correct?
6 A. Yes, it is correct.
7 Q. Your immediate superior was the director of the public security
8 bureau; is that correct?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. In 2001, as you already said to my learned colleague, Goran
11 Mitevski was at that position; is that correct?
12 A. At the beginning of 2001 it was Zvonko Kasirski, and I don't
13 remember exactly when it started, but then it was Goran Mitevski.
14 Q. In August 2001, Goran Mitevski was the one; is that correct?
15 A. Yes. In August it was already Goran Mitevski.
16 Q. Thank you. I'd like to ask you now to look in your binder number
17 1 in tab 1/1, so small 1. To look the Exhibit P92, number N001-9490, and
18 the English version is the same number with the addition of ET, so
20 So, General, is this the law on the organisation and the operation
21 of the state administration bodies of which you testified a while ago that
22 is in charge of certain general questions of the operation of all of the
23 ministries as well as the Ministry of the Interior?
24 A. Yes, it is.
25 Q. I would like to ask you now to turn to page 2 of this document.
1 There is N001-9504. And English version is the same with the addition of
2 ET. And you can see there that in Article 47 of this law -- I apologise.
3 That is N001-9504. That is the second page in this binder but not of the
4 law. So it refers to Article 47. So N001-9504.
5 And while we're waiting to see this text displayed on the
6 screen -- I apologise. I might have misspoken. 9490 is the English
7 version, and 009504 would be the document in the Macedonian version.
8 In any event, that is Article 47. So I would like to go back a
9 page backwards. All right. Thank you.
10 Article 47 lists what is applicable to all the ministries in
11 general, that is, that the ministries are headed by a minister; is that
13 A. Yes, it is.
14 Q. Article 49 lists that the minister represents the ministry. It
15 organises it and ensures enforcement of the laws and the -- works in line
16 and that it adopts other acts and also adopts other measures that under
17 its competencies and that are in line with the law.
18 Is that a general position for the ministries as well as the
19 Ministry of Interior?
20 A. Yes, this is applicable to all the ministries.
21 Q. I would like to ask now to look into page N009525
22 [as interpreted], the Macedonian version, Article 55, and English version
23 is N001-949 -- I can't really read what is written there. Okay. The
24 Article is 55.
25 I apologise. I'm not able to see exactly in this range what is
1 the number of that page.
2 But what I want to ask you is that what is envisioned by
3 Article 55 and that is whether it is under the competence of all the
4 ministries, as well as the Ministry of Interior, to adopt rules, orders,
5 directives, plans, and other decisions based on which the employees of a
6 certain ministry would carry out the laws and the other regulations. Is
7 it what was the competence also of the Ministry of Interior, whereby you
9 A. Yes, it is.
10 Q. I would like to ask you now to -- I would like to ask you
11 something now.
12 Is it true that the position of the minister of the interior was
13 actually -- had the general competences to represent the ministry to adopt
14 regulations and general programmes, plans of work, the minister was not
15 the operational body that was managing the units and the bodies within the
16 Ministry of Interior?
17 A. I would like -- I would answer like this. The minister was and is
18 a manager of the ministry but while the operative affairs are carried out
19 by operative workers. He carries no work on the field.
20 Q. I would like to ask you now to look into this document that is
21 found under this large tab 1 numbered 2, and that is Exhibit P86 and I
22 would like to ask -- I will ask that the Macedonian page is turned
23 N000-8983. So that is Articles 8 and 9 that are of our interest, while
24 the English page should also be N000-8964.
25 This -- General, we can see here the scope of work and the
1 organisation of the ministry. The subheading is police.
2 General, is that the part -- that part of the police that was in
3 your department, that is, the department headed by you in 2001?
4 A. Yes, exactly. This article covers my work.
5 Q. Is that correct, General, that Article 8 actually confirms your
6 answer that you gave about the substance and the basic tasks carried out
7 by the uniformed part of the Ministry of Interior, that is to say, the
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Article 9 reads that: "For the immediate execution of the police
11 and other interior activities, at least one police station is established
12 in each of the municipalities."
13 Do you see that written?
14 A. Yes, I see it.
15 Q. May I ask you, General, is it true that when I say that the basic
16 works of the police listed in Article 8 are carried out in the basic
17 police units. That is to say, in the police stations or the basic police
18 bodies, that is the departments within the municipalities, or sectors in
19 the cities?
20 A. Yes, it is correct.
21 Q. So you, as a head of the entire department of the police in the
22 Republic of Macedonia, were not in a position also to immediately manage
23 to -- that is to carry out the police works in the field directly. That
24 was the task of the authorised officials in the basic units of the
25 ministry; is that correct?
1 A. Yes, it is.
2 Q. Thank you. Is it correct, General, that in the essence, the
3 operations of the Ministry of Interior were -- are mainly carried out by
4 the authorised officials, that is, persons who are authorised that are
5 originating directly from the law?
6 A. Yes, it is correct.
7 Q. Is it correct that a police officer for the majority of the tasks
8 carried out needs no order but the police officer, bearing in mind his
9 position, carries out its works pursuant to the law?
10 A. Yes, exactly.
11 Q. But it is also correct that the police might act upon orders as
12 well; is that correct?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. And mainly in live -- in the majority of the cases a police
15 officer or an authorised official in the criminal police receives the
16 order from his or her immediate superior, that is to say, the commander of
17 the police station or the head of the department of the interior within
18 the municipality. Is that the way how things work in the police?
19 A. Yes, it is the commander most often who directly does this.
20 Q. And the immediate managers, the immediate superiors, actually are
21 issuing daily orders related to the legal execution of the police work,
22 and, if necessary, they also issue specific orders for work of each of the
23 police officers; is that correct?
24 A. Yes, it is correct.
25 Q. Pursuant to the law, an authorised official, in addition to the
1 uniformed police and persons employed in the criminal police, are also
2 persons higher in the commanding rank, so you were also an authorised
3 official. Is that correct?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Pursuant to the law, the minister was also an authorised official;
6 is that correct?
7 A. Yes, it is correct.
8 Q. But the rule-book for organisation of the work of the Ministry of
9 Interior establishes the scope of operation of each of the authorised
10 officials, so it was neither under your competence nor under the
11 competence of the minister was to operatively carry out the tasks nor to
12 effectively control the police officers in the field. Is that correct?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. The director of public security and the director of state security
15 as well as the state secretary in the interior ministry, all of -- none of
16 them were appointed by the interior minister. They were appointed
17 directly by the government. Is this correct?
18 A. Yes, the government appointed them upon the proposal of the
20 Q. Now I would like to ask to you look at this document which is in
21 tab 4. This is an excerpt from the Official Gazette of the Republic of
22 Macedonia, number 40, from 2001. It is 65 ter 1D462. This is one page.
23 It's 1D4261.
24 In the Macedonian text, under number 819, you can see that a
25 decision was adopted for the appointment of the director of public
1 security. You already told me that in -- somewhere in 2001 Goran Mitevski
2 became director of the public security bureau. In this text, we can see
3 that on May 15th, 2001 the government of the Republic of Macedonia had
4 appointed as director of the public security bureau Goran Mitevski who
5 was, until then, charge -- director of the security and
6 counter-intelligence division. Does this document confirm your testimony
7 that it is the government which appoints the director of the public
8 security bureau?
9 A. Yes, it is the government, that's correct.
10 Q. On page 1D4262 of the English version, there is also a text of the
11 previous page of this Official Gazette, and here we can see under item
12 815 --
13 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] I don't know, there is 1D462
14 [as interpreted]. I was informed that this page is not in your binder,
15 but I will read this part. It says: [In English] "The government of the
16 Republic of Macedonia of the session held on 15 May 2001, submit a
17 resolution for the appointment of the director of the security and
18 counterintelligence division.
19 [Interpretation] And under [In English] Point 1 is "Dr. Zoran
20 Verusevski, associate professor for the security faculty in Skopje, is
21 appointed as a director of the security and counter-intelligence division
22 organ of the structure in the Ministry of Interior."
23 [Interpretation] Therefore, from this, we can conclude that at the
24 same meeting the government appointed also the director of the state
25 security bureau. Is this correct?
1 A. Yes, it is correct.
2 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I seek to tender this
3 document as an exhibit.
4 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.
5 THE REGISTRAR: As exhibit 1D105, Your Honours.
6 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation]
7 Q. Thank you. But the fact that the director of the state security
8 bureau is appointed by the government of the Republic of Macedonia, is it
9 correct that it is the assembly which conducts the control over the work
10 of the state security pursuant to the law?
11 A. Yes. There is a parliamentary committee in that respect.
12 Q. Now I'd like to ask you to look at the document in tab 5. This is
13 65 ter 1D207.
14 It's is only one page, Your Honour. We have only a draft
15 translation of the document. When the final translation is ready, we will
16 also submit it.
17 General, you have before you an excerpt from the web site of the
18 interior ministry which establishes the competences of the director of the
19 public security bureau and institution itself. I will read it and I will
20 ask you to tell me whether this is the accurate position of the director
21 of the public security bureau. It says: "The public security bureau, it
22 is headed by the director who upon the proposal of a minister is appointed
23 or dismissed by the government of the Republic of Macedonia for a mandate
24 of four years. The director is independent in conducting his duties
25 within the bureau and he responds for -- he's held responsible for his
1 work before the minister and before the government upon the proposal of
2 the director of the bureau the minister adopts acts for the administration
3 and the work and the systemization of the jobs within the bureau and this
4 undergoes an approval from the government. Are this information accurate
5 in relation to the position of the director of the bureau?
6 A. Yes, it is correct.
7 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, we would like to
8 tender this document as an exhibit.
9 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Saxon.
10 MR. SAXON: Your Honour, the Prosecution believes that before we
11 can be sure of the probative value of this document and relevance, it
12 needs to be established whether the text as it is expressed here or the
13 principles that were -- are expressed here were also in force in the
14 summer of 2001, because it's my understanding that this was taken from the
15 web site of the Ministry of Interior on the 18th of April in 2007.
16 JUDGE PARKER: Ms. Residovic.
17 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, we said that we took
18 it from the web site. I just wanted to show it to the witness who was at
19 a high ranking position within the Ministry of Interior and to ask him to
20 confirm whether this competence was accurate. If the witness can confirm
21 it, then we propose this document to be accepted as an exhibit.
22 JUDGE PARKER: The point is when was it operative and whether it
23 was operative at the time relevant to the indictment.
24 Can you assist with us with respect to that, Ms. Residovic?
25 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] This could explain the witness. I
1 will ask the witness about this.
2 Q. Could you tell me, General, whether this -- whether the director
3 of the public security has this -- had this position in 2001, whether
4 there was such a position in 2001?
5 A. Yes, there was such a position as in 1999 when this position was
6 in fact established.
7 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] If this answer is sufficient, then
8 I would seek to tender this document as an exhibit.
9 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Saxon.
10 MR. SAXON: Your Honour, the Prosecution believes the question
11 should be whether the information about the public safety bureau as
12 expressed in this printout from the web site also was in force or also was
13 applicable to the public safety bureau and its director in the summer of
14 2001. And I don't think the last question and answer give us that
16 JUDGE PARKER: I think there is need for something more from the
17 witness, Ms. Residovic.
18 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation]
19 Q. General, you heard the directives of the Honourable Bench to my
20 question. You answered that this was a competence even before 2001. But
21 the competence could have stopped before 2001 and my precise question
22 would be whether this was a competence of the director of the public
23 security bureau also in 2001?
24 A. Yes, it was.
25 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.
1 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit 1D106, Your Honours.
2 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation]
3 Q. Could you please now look at the document in tab 10.
4 Respectively before this Court, the witness M-37 testified, who --
5 to a question: "[In English] Is it correct that M-37 that in actual fact
6 the task and responsibility of the police were set out in the -- in the
7 law, primarily the law of the interior and in the field of crime in the
8 law of criminal procedure of the Republic of Macedonia? Is that right?"
9 "Yes, that is right."
10 [Interpretation] Do you also agree, General, that the tasks of
11 police officers were primarily prescribed by law, as the witness
13 A. Yes, that's correct.
14 Q. A few moments ago we spoke about the way the law regulates the
15 basic competences and basic organisation of the interior ministry. Is it
16 correct, Mr. General, that the internal organisation of the Ministry of
17 Interior affairs, its organisational scope, the administration and the
18 responsibility for conducting -- for executing the duties are defined by
19 the rule for organisation and work of the interior ministry?
20 A. Yes, that is correct.
21 Q. Could you please now look at the document in tab 6. This is it
22 exhibit 1D64.
23 This was only marked for identification, and, Your Honour, at the
24 moment, when we showed this document to an earlier witness, we gave the
25 translation of only few articles. Now we have prepared the whole text of
1 the document, both in Macedonian and in English, and after the questioning
2 of this witness, we will seek to tender this as an exhibit.
3 Q. General, you see, -- you're looking at the first page of the rule
4 for the organisation and work of the Ministry of Interior from January
5 2001. Is this the rule regulating the issues that I asked you before?
6 A. Yes, that's correct.
7 Q. Now I'd like to ask you to look at the last page of this
8 document. This is 1D4389, and the English version is 1D4413. The
9 document is accompanied also by a chart. I have showed only the last
10 page. Therefore, 1D4389, and the English version is 1D4413.
11 You can see that this rule was adopted on January 26th, 2001, when
12 Dosta Dimovska was minister of the interior. Is this correct?
13 A. Yes, that's correct.
14 Q. Could you please look at page 1D4372, Macedonian version, and
15 1D4393, English version.
16 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] There would be a confusion on the
17 e-court. I have been warned that the whole text was -- was under number
18 65 ter 217.1 and the pages were as I have read them before, 1D4372
19 Macedonian version and 1D4393.
20 Q. Since we are waiting for the document to appear on the screen, we
21 all have the hard copy before us. You have already found the first page
22 of documents. Did you find the first page, General? Could you please
23 look at Article 2. It says that the work of the ministry is headed by the
24 minister of the interior, is this the general competence related to the
25 heading of the ministry, which is in accordance what we have seen
1 concerning the overall state bodies?
2 A. Yes, that's correct.
3 Q. The last Article says that the bureau of public security as an
4 organ within the ministry is headed by the director. Is this what you
5 said before, that the director is a person heading the public security
7 A. Yes, that's correct.
8 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Saxon.
9 MR. SAXON: I'm very sorry to interrupt. It is probably
10 completely my fault but I am simply lost. I'm not sure where my colleague
11 is reading from, and I don't see that she's --
12 JUDGE PARKER: We haven't got it on the screen because the number
13 given is not correct. The court officer is trying to find it.
14 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
15 JUDGE PARKER: The number you've given starts at an article later
16 than the one you want referred to.
17 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I could make
18 questions -- no, I apologise. It would be better to have the document,
19 but it is obvious that at this moment we cannot speak of these rule-book,
20 and I will turn to something else until we find the correct pages.
21 JUDGE PARKER: Would it be easier for you to have the break now?
22 We're within three minutes of the break time. And enable the document to
23 be found during the break.
24 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. You have
25 solved the problem. Thank you very much.
1 JUDGE PARKER: We will do that and resume at a quarter past 4.00.
2 --- Recess taken at 3.42 p.m.
3 --- On resuming at 4.19 p.m.
4 JUDGE PARKER: Ms. Residovic.
5 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
6 Your Honours, I would like now that the witness is shown 65 ter
7 217.1. That is page 1D4372, and the English version, page 1D4393.
8 This -- it is under tab 6 in this binder. That is the first page --
9 Q. General, found in tab 6. That is the rule-book for organisation
10 and operation of the Ministry of Interior. Please turn the page and
11 you'll see the page we are looking for with the number 1D4372. Did you
12 find it? It starts with Article 1.
13 A. Yes, I found it.
14 Q. The preamble of this rule-book reads that the rule-book is adopted
15 based on Article 55, paragraph 1, of the law on organisation and work of
16 the bodies of the state administration. Do you remember, General, that
17 when we were looking at this law we saw that it is under the competence of
18 any ministry as well as the Ministry of Interior to adopt rule-books and
19 other by-laws. Is that what we already saw in the mentioned law?
20 A. Yes, it is so.
21 Q. Article 2 -- you can see in Article 2 that the minister heads the
22 work of the Ministry of Interior, that is, also if we recall the law on
23 the organisation of the state administration, that is a general provision
24 that establishes that all the -- all the ministers as well as the Ministry
25 of Interior heads the ministry as an administrative body. Do you remember
2 A. Yes, I remember.
3 Q. In the last paragraph of Article 2, it is stipulated that the
4 public security bureau as a body under the ministry is headed by a
5 director, and this is the position of the director of public security that
6 you previously described. Is that correct?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Article 3 of this rule-book reads: "For the execution of the work
9 under the competence of the public security bureau two departments are
10 established, police department and criminal police department, and a
11 number of independent organisational forms."
12 The rule-book with this provision actually sets forth what you
13 testified about, about the way the public security bureau is organised; is
14 that correct?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. I would like to ask you now to turn to page 8 of this rule-book,
17 that is Article 8. And the Macedonian version is 1D4379, and the English
18 version is page number 1D4401.
19 This article, General, you can see that for the conduction of the
20 internal affairs of the territory of the Republic of Macedonia, following
21 regional organisational forms of the ministry are established. And then
22 there are 11 sectors listed, sectors of the interior, on the territory of
23 the Republic of Macedonia. Do you see that?
24 A. Yes, I do.
25 Q. Tell me, General, is this article reading that the execution of
1 the internal affairs the sectors as established, does this confirm what
2 you already said, that the basic affairs of the Ministry of Interior are
3 carried out actually in the basic forms of operation of the ministry?
4 A. Yes, it confirms it.
5 Q. I would like to ask you now to look into Article 21. That is on
6 page 16 of this rule-book that. Is the Macedonian page 1D4387, and English
7 page is 1D4410.
8 And, General, I would like to ask you to look into this article
9 and to see whether that is the article that regulates the competences and
10 the responsibilities of the individual persons within the ministry.
11 The first paragraph of this article reads that: "The different
12 forms in the ministry and the public of the -- in the public safety bureau
13 as a body within the ministry, are headed -- are headed by heads whose
14 title and position are set forth by the book of rules of the systemization
15 of the jobs within the Ministry of Interior, depending on the type of the
16 organisational type. The heads of the department for police and the
17 department for the crime police and the heads of the analysis and
18 investigation sector, the anti-terrorism sector, the helicopter unit, the
19 surveillance and archiving department, the sector for personal protection,
20 the sector for alias and immigration affairs, the sector for fire
21 protection, explosives and danger substances, and the department for the
22 defensive preparations are functionally connected with the head of the
23 public safety bureau and are responsible immediately before the head for
24 the works and the tasks of their area.
25 Do you agree, General, that these -- that hereby those parts of
1 the Ministry of Interior are set forth that are directly responsible to
2 the director for public security. Is that correct?
3 A. Yes, it is correct.
4 Q. The next article reads: "The commander of the special task unit,
5 the Tiger, and the heads of the internal control department, the
6 international cooperation department and European integration department,
7 the operative techniques sector, the finance sector and other joint works,
8 the sector for legal and the personal affairs, the telecommunications
9 sector, the encrypto protection and the IT and the sector for
10 administrative, supervisory works are connected by their works also with
11 the head of the public security bureau and the head of the safety and
12 counter-intelligence department."
13 Would it be true if I were to say that only these parts of the
14 ministry as well as the special unit the Tigers were directly linked to
15 the minister and responsible before him in accordance to this rule-book
16 from 2001?
17 A. Yes, correct. I would also add that the special task units
18 because of its features in specific cities was directly linked to the
19 minister, but in the practice the minister never commanded or headed that
20 unit. He only transferred his authority and most frequently that was to
21 the head of the police department. So this is where the approval for use
22 of this unit was given.
23 Q. General, please look into Article 22 now. It reads that the heads
24 of the organisational forms within other organisational form are directly
25 responsible before the head of the appropriate organisational form. The
1 employees are responsible before their immediate heads and the head of the
2 organisational form to which they belong, for the specific execution of
3 their tasks an operations.
4 General, does this article set forth the responsibility of the
5 employees towards the -- their direct superiors?
6 A. Yes, it does regulate.
7 Q. I would like to ask you now to look into Article 26 of this
9 Article 26 reads: "A collegium exists within the ministry acting
10 as an advisory body to the minister. The immediate composition of the
11 collegium is composed of the minister, the deputy minister, the director
12 of the public security bureau, the director of the administration for
13 security and counter-intelligence, the heads of the police department and
14 the heads of the criminal police and the state secretary."
15 Tell me, General, is it true that minister head this collegium and
16 that you were also a member of that minister's collegium?
17 A. Yes. There were meetings of the collegium held frequently or less
18 frequently where I participated and I think this was -- he was one of the
19 rare ministers, unlike the others before him or after him, who used to
20 call the meetings of this collegium.
21 Q. On the question of my learned colleague the Prosecutor you
22 answered that on several occasions you used to meet with the Director
23 Mitevski as well as with the minister and that he insisted to investigate
24 or to further investigate the things related to Ljuboten. Would you be
25 able to tell me whether these requests of the minister were primarily
1 expressed at the meetings of the collegium or were there specific meetings
2 called for these matters?
3 A. I wouldn't be able to tell you precisely how many meetings these
4 things were discussed but at one of the meetings where the public
5 prosecutor was present, this topic was discussed and then all the
6 information and the activities that I head or was I supposed to carry out
7 were -- then the order went to the Director Mitevski.
8 Q. Thank you very much. The Article 27 reads that for reviewing of
9 the matters related to the operation of the police department, the
10 criminal police department, and about the other affairs carried out in the
11 organisational forms which are directly functionally related to the
12 director of the public security bureau there is a special experts
13 collegium of the director of the public security bureau. So it could be
14 seen from here that also the director of the public security bureau had
15 his own collegium in which you were also a -- a member. Is it true?
16 A. Yes, it is.
17 Q. The Prosecutor in relation to the operation of the -- to the work
18 of the commission asked you whether you had some special meetings. Tell
19 me, please, you responded that you used to meet frequently with the
20 minister, sometimes two or three times a week. Please tell me was this
21 collegium of directors of yours at that time operational and did you meet
22 regularly for the regular affairs and did you meet one or several times in
23 the course of the day?
24 A. It is true that we used to meet very often, sometimes one, two,
25 three times a day, and in addition to the activity that came as a result
1 of the investigation of the Ljuboten affairs, we had a number of events
2 that were burdensome for the security of the country. I would primarily
3 mention here the start of the blockade of the regional roads towards the
4 Blace border crossing. That blockade was ongoing for about three weeks or
5 something in the month of August. Another activity that required our
6 attention was the plan to return the police patrols in the crisis areas.
7 That was a period that -- that required literally engagement without any
8 days of rest for all of us.
9 Q. General, if I understood you well, because of these affairs as
10 well as because of the needs of the work of the collegium you used to meet
11 very often with the director of the public security bureau, Mr. Goran
12 Mitevski. Don't -- do you think that I am right to understand there was
13 no need for some special meetings of the committee consisting of three
14 persons which, according to the book of regulations and because of some
15 other affairs, are meeting regularly and, as you said, you discussed very
16 often during these meetings about the work of the commission that was
17 established by the minister?
18 A. Exactly. At this period it would have been impossible to meet
19 only because of this, because we had many other events and affairs that we
20 were meeting about. There were a lot of protests, there was a lot of
21 blockades. I mentioned the plan to return the police patrols to the
22 crisis areas, et cetera, so the headquarters or the team of the director
23 or the collegium, the experts collegium, was a -- a -- permanently in
25 Q. Okay, thank you. I would like to ask you the following page that
1 is 1D4839 and Article 28, while the English page is 1D4412.
2 This article that is part of the final for provisions of the book
3 of regulations reads that this rule-book is accompanied by an
4 organisational structure schematic, and is it -- is it customary when
5 changes are made to this book of regulation to also make a schematic
6 representation of all the links existing within the ministry and all the
7 direct lines of responsibility of the bodies towards each other. Is that
8 the usual fashion how these books of regulations were created?
9 A. Yes, that is a usual thing to create such an organigram. This is
10 also taking place now in the reforms which actually were initiated during
11 Mr. Boskoski's tenure.
12 Q. Let us look to the following page which actually is the schematic
13 representation of the relations within the ministry. That is 1D4390 of the
14 Macedonian version and the English version is page number 1D4414.
15 Please have a look at the schematic, and to tell me whether this
16 schematic, this chart, represents the internal links and mutual
17 responsibilities within the ministry as set forth by the book of
18 regulation from January 2001?
19 A. Yes. This chart exactly represents the rule-book that we
20 previously discussed about.
21 Q. And if we look into this chart, outside of this bold black line of
22 this rectangle that represents the public security bureau, we can see
23 these parts of the ministry that were directly linked to the minister and,
24 among them, only the special Tiger unit from within the ranks of the
25 Special Unit is represented there. Is that correct?
1 A. Yes, it is correct.
2 Q. Within the Public Security Bureau, you would agree with me that
3 together with the police department headed by you, directly operationally
4 connected to them were the Security Sector which also included sections
5 for the security of the president and the prime minister, security of
6 important facilities and persons, diplomatic and consular sections, and
7 other sections of the Security Sector.
8 A. Yes, that is correct.
9 Q. If one speaks about the parts that refer to the providing personal
10 security of the prime minister, the parliament or the president, would you
11 agree with me that de jure -- even though de jure, they were within the
12 public security bureau, the effective control and the -- the effective --
13 the active control were in the hands of the persons that they were
14 securing, for example, the president of the parliament the president of
15 the republic or --
16 A. Yes, de facto they were under their control. I know this from
17 practical experience.
18 Q. I would like to ask you now to jointly look into the document
19 found in tab 7.
20 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, before I go to the
21 next document, I would propose to -- to have the previous text of the
22 exhibit number --
23 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter didn't get the number.
24 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] -- that was marked for
25 identification to be replaced with this text and to receive the final
1 number 1D64.
2 JUDGE PARKER: In what way do the texts differ?
3 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, the last time for
4 the purposes for investigation of one of the -- examination of one of the
5 witnesses we only took the provisions of Articles 21 and 22 about the
6 competences of the minister in the organisational chart that was reviewed
7 at that time. We were not able to submit the entire text and its
8 translations, so at that time I said that it might be good to mark the
9 document for identification until we are able to provide the entire text
10 of the rule-book to the Court, and its translation.
11 [Trial Chamber confers]
12 JUDGE PARKER: We will receive the whole document as a new
14 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
15 THE REGISTRAR: It will be Exhibit 1D107, Your Honours.
16 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation].
17 Q. General, I would like to ask you now to look into the document
18 found in tab 7, that is exhibit number 1D65. The page is 2D437, the
19 Macedonian version, and 1D2403 is the English version page.
20 General, this is the rule-book amending the rule-book on
21 organisation and work of the Ministry of Interior of June 2001, and my
22 question to you is whether it is correct that all amendments to the
23 rule-book were adopted also through an act issued by the minister as
24 rule-books amending the previous -- the original rule-books?
25 A. I apologise, I did not understand the question.
1 Q. Is it correct that a rule-book is amending with an act containing
2 the amendments and additions to the rule-book?
3 A. Yes, it is correct. This is the right of the minister; it is
4 probably proposed by one of his associates.
5 Q. Thank you. If you now look at 1D2348, Macedonian. 1D2404,
6 Article 2 tells us that a new sector for operative reconnaissance is
7 introduced. And in page 1D2349, and the English page 1D2405, we have a
8 new chart which adds to the earlier chart also this new sector established
9 through the rule-book amending the rule-book. Is that correct?
10 A. Yes, it is correct.
11 Q. In this rule-book, there are no changes of the -- to the
12 competences of the minister; is that correct?
13 A. It is correct.
14 Q. You stated earlier, General, that the minister transferred certain
15 competences to you as the under-secretary for police, also in relation to
16 the Special Unit Tiger, actually the competences to use that unit. Is
17 that correct?
18 A. Yes, it is correct. He is authorised to put the unit into use and
19 he places the unit under the command of the head of police.
20 Q. I would like to ask you now, General, to look at the document in
21 tab 8. That is the Exhibit 1D66. Macedonian page is 1D2321, while the
22 English page is 1D2407.
23 This is, you would agree with me, General, yet another amendment
24 to the rule-book on the organisation an operation of the Ministry of
25 Interior adopted in August of 2001. Is that correct?
1 A. It is correct.
2 Q. If you turn to the following page, 1D2322 Macedonian, and 1D2408
3 English, the Article 1, after enumerating these various amendments to the
4 rule-book, in the second-before-the-last paragraph reads: "From the 1st
5 of August, 2001, the item 1, special tasks unit Tiger from the Article 7
6 is moved to the part A, department for police, in Article 4 and becomes
7 item 6."
8 And the Article 3 reads that in the Article 21, if you remember
9 those were the competences of the minister, in the items 3 and 4, the
10 words "the commander of the special tasks unit Tigers and" are erased.
11 Is it correct that this rule-book confirms the earlier decision of
12 the minister that actually transfers the competences to use the Tigers
13 unit to the head for police?
14 A. From the -- in the organisational sense, yes. The order, or the
15 authorisation to use this unit remain with the minister. So
16 organisation-wise, it belongs now to the police department since August
18 Q. Could you please look now at the chart behind this page, 1D2323,
20 Does this chart now, General, represent the change of status,
21 actually the position, of the unit for special tasks Tiger, in the way
22 established by the rule-book?
23 A. Yes, it represents that.
24 Q. Thank you very much. We have looked at the rule-book on
25 organisation operation of the public security. Is it also correct,
1 General, that there is a rule-book on the organisation and operation of
2 the security and counter-intelligence department?
3 A. I have never seen it, but I believe it happens -- it exists and it
4 would be logical for it to exist.
5 Q. Considering the business conducted by this part of the Ministry of
6 the Interior, you could agree with me if I say that their ways of
7 operation, the methods of operation are slightly different than those used
8 by the public security?
9 A. This is why they're not titled public security.
10 Q. So I can understand that your answer is yes?
11 A. Yes, correct.
12 Q. The work of the public security using its own structures then the
13 links in the enemy's forces, links to foreigners, then use of operational
14 means, et cetera, provides an opportunity for the state security to gather
15 significant information of importance for the security of the country.
16 Is this conclusion of mine correct?
17 A. It is correct. This is why they exist.
18 Q. And is it correct that the information so gathered and the
19 knowledge verified by state security are attached importance and
20 confidence in the course of assessment of certain situations, especially
21 when issues of security of the state are at stake?
22 A. Of course, yes.
23 Q. When we speak about those competences of the minister to pass
24 certain general acts could you agree with me, General, that it is true the
25 adoption of a general act that the minister is running the ministry and
1 not by issuing specific tasks to authorised officers. So, his way of
2 management is primarily through the establishment of procedures, adoption
3 of rule-books, instructions, guidelines or any other general acts?
4 A. Yes, your conclusion is correct. Through the instruments
5 available to him, he takes care about the legality in the operation and
6 enforcement of the laws and secondary legislation in force.
7 Q. And when a minister issues a guideline or adopts a rule-book, then
8 the authorised officers in that area have the duty to act upon that
9 rule-book and they do not need any special orders issued for any specific
10 case and the instructions how they should proceed. Is that correct?
11 A. Yes, it is correct.
12 Q. I would like to ask you now to look at this document in tab 12.
13 That is Exhibit P94 and the number, Macedonian is R042-4710, while the
14 English is R042-471DT, this is draft, which means draft translation of the
15 document, because the original translation is still not received.
16 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] I apologise, this is Prosecutor's
17 draft translation. It is it obvious that it was not translated. But we
18 had no objections, as you know, Your Honours. Not all documents need to
19 be translated again by the ICTY because we did not believe there were
20 problems here with the translation.
21 Q. General, this is a guideline on modes for issuance of special
22 weapons and special communication means to the authorised officers in the
23 Ministry of Interior, adopted as early as in April 1998.
24 Tell me, please, General, is this one of the instruments, so to
25 say, or modes to which the minister regulates the ways in which the
1 authorised officers act within a certain area of activity of the ministry?
2 A. Yes. These guidelines regulate the issue in the area of issuance
3 of weapons.
4 Q. And the guidelines establish the procedure that the authorised
5 officer needs to carry out in order to issue a person with a weapon or
6 another instrument envisaged in these guidelines; is that so?
7 A. Exactly.
8 Q. Such authorised officer does not need any additional orders. He
9 has the duty to act as it is provided for in these guidelines.
10 A. Exactly.
11 Q. I would like to ask you now, General, to look at the next page of
12 this document. That is R042-4711, English is R042-4711-DT, and here in
13 chapter two, issuing official weapons, in Article 1, you see -- could you
14 please look at this article to avoid reading it because it is rather
15 lengthy and I will tell you what is my understanding of it. So I would
16 like to see your reaction, your response to it.
17 This article regulates the modes for issuance of weapons at the
18 headquarters of the ministry. So at the body on a state level, and it
19 provides that the authorised officers in the headquarters of the ministry,
20 including you, are issued weapons through a special decision of a
21 minister. Is my understanding of this article correct?
22 A. Exactly.
23 Q. I would like to ask you now to look at the following page, which
24 is R042-4712, and the English R042-4712-DT, Article 3. Could you please
25 look at this article, and I will tell you again what is my understanding
1 of it about the issuance of official weapons in units of police.
2 This article stipulates that the police units are issued official
3 weapons in a police station by the authorised head for equipment, that the
4 authorised officer issues weapons -- or issued weapons only in accordance
5 with the guidelines about the type, make, and model of weapons.
6 Is it correct, General, that other persons, apart from those who
7 are in the actual headquarters of the ministry on the level of state are
8 issued weapons in police stations and that is pursuant to the rules
9 applicable to issuance of weapons? The minister has nothing to do with
10 the issuance of weapons to persons done in police stations and no one in
11 the ministry has anything to do with it?
12 A. It is correct.
13 Q. Article 4 provides for the issuance of weapons in the
14 organisational units, sectors, divisions or the administrations and it
15 reads that in those units, there are authorised officers, equipment
16 handlers, and they are those who issue weapons in accordance with the
17 rule-book to the authorised officers. Is my understanding of the Article
18 4 correct?
19 A. It is correct.
20 Q. So if someone were -- would ask to be issued weapons in the
21 Ministry of the Interior, your authorised officer, your deputy or
22 assistant, would it be correct for me to say then -- that then the
23 minister would need to issue a special decision for issuance of weapons to
24 that officer. Is that correct?
25 A. Precisely.
1 Q. But if someone would come to the OVR Kisela Voda or the police
2 station Butel to be issued weapons, then the weapons would need to be
3 issued and could be issued only by the authorised officer pursuant to
4 these guidelines and the authorised officer would not need any additional
5 orders for that. They would have the duty to act upon those guidelines.
6 Is that correct?
7 A. Precisely.
8 Q. Thank you. The responsibility related to issuance of weapons
9 belonged to all police stations in the Republic of Macedonia, so also the
10 police station PSOLO and the authorised officers in that police station
11 have again the duty to issue weapons, equipment or uniforms pursuant to
12 the general acts of the ministry; otherwise, they would be in breach of
13 the law?
14 A. Correct.
15 Q. Thank you. Considering the fact that the ministry employs a huge
16 number of employees and among them there are many authorised officers who
17 have direct rights and responsibilities pursuant to the law, is it correct
18 that the employment of people in the ministry is conducted in accordance
19 with the law and the collective agreement that was concluded as early as
20 in 1998 between the Ministry of the Interior and the Macedonian police
21 trade union?
22 A. Yes, it is correct.
23 Q. Is it correct, General, that the employment in the ministry,
24 according to the terms of the collective agreement and the law is in the
25 majority of cases founded upon a public act and the procedure that is
1 established in this collective agreement?
2 A. Yes, exactly.
3 Q. Is it also correct, General, that the act for establishment of a
4 given unit or a special department in the ministry could envisage also a
5 different mode for a person to start their employment but that mode need
6 also be provided in the general act?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. The act for establishment?
9 A. Yes. It did happen in the ministry that a new department was
10 established through a decision of the Security Council.
11 Q. For instance, the unit for the -- the decision for the
12 establishment of a special unit Tiger or later the rapid deployment
13 battalion, those decisions would need to also comprise the conditions for
14 employment in that unit and the conditions under which certain persons
15 would be employed in those special units. Is that understanding of mine
17 A. Yes. There is a prescribed procedure for admission for
18 recruitment of the employed in a unit, in any unit.
19 Q. And when an employee, after a procedure, public ad or such
20 specially provided procedure, when that is completed, then that employee
21 would start an employment relation with the Ministry of the Interior. Is
22 that correct?
23 A. It is correct.
24 Q. On behalf of the ministry it is the minister who only signs the
25 decision about the employment of that employee; is that correct?
1 A. Yes, it is correct.
2 Q. If someone were to claim that the minister personally had
3 contracts with some employees of the Ministry of Interior, then this would
4 be a falsity, to say the least; is that correct?
5 A. Exactly.
6 Q. I would like to ask you now, General, to look together in this
7 document in Roman numeral II, it is actually in tab 14. And that is
8 Exhibit 1D53, Macedonian R042-42496 [as interpreted] and the English is
9 again -- no, I apologise. Yes, it was correct. R042-4696.
10 Do you have the document in front of you?
11 A. This is book of rules.
12 Q. Yes. Book of rules on the conditions and procedure for deployment
13 and work of the members of the special tasks unit of the Ministry of
14 Interior. And you see the subheading above Article 2 specifies the
15 conditions and procedures for work in this unit.
16 Would this be, general, one of the ways -- actually, not one --
17 the way in which the special units established, would have the procedure
18 and the conditions for recruitment of workers for that unit regulated?
19 This was something that we discussed a moment ago.
20 A. Yes, this is correct.
21 Q. Tell me, General, is it correct that it is not only the employment
22 contract but also the responsibility of the employees of the -- in the
23 Ministry of Interior are regulated in the collective agreement concluded
24 between the ministry and the police trade union?
25 A. Yes. Any disciplinary violations or breaches of the contract are
1 enumerated in the collective agreement.
2 Q. And is it correct that this collective agreement also provides for
3 substantive or disciplinary responsibility of the officers if they are in
4 breach of their duties and responsibilities specified in detail in that
6 A. Yes, it is correct.
7 Q. And do you agree with me, General, if I say that actually the
8 disciplinary procedure, pursuant to those acts, could be run only against
9 a known perpetrator, a known perpetrator, known person, who has
10 perpetrated any of the breaches enumerated in the collective agreement?
11 A. Yes, I agree with you.
12 Q. So against an unspecified number of persons or unknown persons who
13 would be in breach of their responsibilities, one could not run a
14 disciplinary procedure. Is that correct?
15 A. It is correct.
16 Q. Is it also correct that within the Ministry of the Interior there
17 is a disciplinary committee as a permanent committee that discusses the
18 issues of disciplinary responsibility of certain workers within a
19 procedure specified in the collective agreement?
20 A. Yes. There forever was and there is now such committee to
21 establish the disciplinary responsibility.
22 Q. The role of the minister is to appoint the committee that would
23 follow the procedure in discussing the issues of disciplinary
24 responsibility; is that correct?
25 A. It is correct.
1 Q. Is it correct, General, that actually, if there are information or
2 suspicion that a worker or an authorised officer has perpetrated any of
3 the violations enumerated in detail in the collective agreement, then
4 their immediate superior has the duty to gather all relevant facts about
5 that situation to inform the actual worker officer about it and to prepare
6 a proposal that would initiate the procedure that will establish the
7 disciplinary responsibility?
8 A. Yes, this is the responsibility of the superior.
9 Q. In that procedure, the employee in question would be provided with
10 all rights, the right to object, to retain an attorney, et cetera, that
11 the employee has such rights?
12 A. Yes, I would add he would also have the right to representative
13 from the union.
14 Q. Yes, thank you. You have answered my next question. To the right
15 to have a representative of the union present there. If from this
16 procedure, foreseen by the collective agreement, the minister cannot
17 establish himself a proposal to raise a disciplinary procedure against
18 someone with the exception of the Tiger unit which was under his immediate
19 control, then this would be correct?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. The disciplinary commission debates on all the facts and they
22 opposed the facts one to each other, the employee and the employer oppose
23 their facts. Is this correct?
24 A. Yes, it is correct.
25 Q. And after this, a disciplinary commission establishes a proposal
1 which is then submitted to the minister, therefore it establishes a
2 proposal in which either the procedure is stopped or proposes given
3 sanctions against the employee with an ultimate possibility to fire him.
4 Is this correct?
5 A. Yes, this is correct.
6 Q. Therefore, without a request from the disciplinary commission and
7 the appropriate proceedings, the minister could not on his own establish
8 that there was a breach of duty – he could, if he had the information,
9 suspend an employee until the conclusion of the disciplinary proceedings.
10 Is this correct?
11 A. Yes, this is correct. If he would acted otherwise, he would be in
12 breach with the rules.
13 Q. Your personal experience and knowledge -- from your personal
14 experience and knowledge, could you say that all the procedures against
15 employees from interior ministry were conducted in that way?
16 A. I don't understand in which way you mean.
17 Q. Does your experience in the Ministry of Interior is such that
18 disciplinary procedures against ministry employees were in accordance with
19 the collective agreement as we have just discussed?
20 A. Yes, certainly. I have personal experience in that, because for two
21 terms I have been president of such a commission, and there has never been
22 a disciplinary procedure conducted without a prior proposal by a superior.
23 Q. Therefore, as far as the question from the -- my learned colleague
24 the Prosecutor and also in relation to the possible knowledge that there
25 have been breaches of the duty by police officers in police stations or
1 check-points or interior ministry units, you were able to know about such
2 breaches, only the superiors had gathered facts and that a given police
3 officers had violated his duty and if such facts were submitted for
4 further procedure. Is this correct?
5 A. Yes, it is correct.
6 Q. Is it correct that regardless of your insisting from your
7 subordinates from the Skopje sectors or from Skopje police stations to
8 have information about what actually happened at that time, despite that,
9 you never received any justified proposal that any of the employees in
10 police station had truly violated their duties and responsibilities?
11 A. Yes, that's correct.
12 Q. Is it also correct, General, that the minister, while executing
13 his ministerial competences, can also, due to insatisfaction by the work
14 from a certain employee or for other health reasons, he has the right with
15 his personal decision to dislocate the employee, even at a lower rank but
16 also in accordance with his education and qualifications?
17 A. Yes, the ministers had such discretionary right and unfortunately
18 they still have it.
19 Q. However, he cannot punish him without a disciplinary procedure?
20 A. Yes, that's correct, as far as the procedure is concerned; while
21 as far as the dislocation is concerned, he has the full right to do that.
22 Q. Okay. Thank you. Therefore, General, we spoke about the
23 organisation of the interior ministry and the competences of the minister,
24 the command chain, and so on and so forth, we also mentioned that there
25 are certain units, certain police units. Could you please tell me before
1 I ask you about this, whether before the Tigers were put into the
2 organising chart within the police, that those police units were within
3 the police division. The special unit Tigers was established much -- much
4 before 2001, and as we saw, it existed until August -- I apologise, it was
5 until 2001 in August directly linked to the minister.
6 Can you please tell me whether it is correct that all the changes
7 within the Tigers special unit were also adopted through an amendment and
8 the modification of the rule-book we mentioned before. Therefore, these
9 changes could not have been introduced upon a personal order?
10 A. Yes, all the changes were made in addition to the amendments to
11 the rules for systemization of the jobs within the Ministry of Interior,
12 otherwise they would not be able to receive salaries because this is a
13 connected system.
14 Q. Although we spoke about this before, let's look at a document in
15 tab 18, which is Exhibit P56. So Macedonian version R042-4737. The
16 English version is the same number, only an ET is added.
17 General, this is an exhibit in this trial, and this is a decision
18 related to one of the members of the Tigers special unit. Is that
20 A. Yes, it is correct.
21 Q. In the upper left corner you can see that this is a -- a document
22 from the Ministry of Internal Affairs, number 16.2, from June 8th, 2001.
23 Therefore, it shows that this is an act adopted by the ministry, not by a
24 minister or by one person. Is this correct?
25 A. It is correct.
1 Q. In the preamble of this decision, we read that in conformity with
2 Article 27, paragraph 3 of the labour relations law, Article 55, paragraph
3 1 of the law on the organisation and work of the state administration
4 agencies and Article 31 of the collective agreement of the Ministry of
5 Interior, the following decision is adopted.
6 Does this preamble, General, clearly show that these employee and
7 any other employee is employed in accordance with the acts related to the
8 collective agreement and other acts regulating the interior ministry?
9 A. Yes, that is correct.
10 Q. This is only an example. This document is only an example which
11 confirms what you said that the minister never signs himself acts or
12 personally employs people in the ministry. He only does that on behalf of
13 the ministry pursuant -- after a relevant procedure has been previously
14 conducted. Is this correct?
15 A. Yes, this is correct.
16 Q. When we are speaking of this special unit Tigers, could you please
17 tell me whether it is true that the unit Tigers, in August 2001, did it
18 ever took part to any activities related to the events of Ljuboten?
19 A. I categorically confirm that it did not take part in the Ljuboten
20 events. It was far from the Ljuboten events because it was engaged fully
21 in the area of the Radusa village.
22 Q. You personally on August 11 you were also in Radishan where this
23 unit was deployed?
24 A. Yes, that is correct, and I had the command over this unit at the
1 Q. At that time, Minister Boskoski was also there on the field,
2 wanted to give morale encouragement to the soldiers that were engaged
4 A. Yes. He wanted to go there to be sure about the seriousness of
5 the situation. We were all grateful he was there, and for helping to act
6 as it -- as we should act.
7 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, maybe we should-- it
8 is time for a break now.
9 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, thank you.
10 We will resume at 6.00.
11 --- Recess taken at 5.31 p.m.
12 --- On resuming at 6.02 p.m.
13 JUDGE PARKER: Ms. Residovic.
14 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you very much, Your Honours.
15 Q. General, please look at the document in tab 19. That is 65 ter
16 1D473, and the page is 1D4291, and the English page is 4292.
17 General, this is a document from the Ministry of Interior, the
18 special tasks unit from the 5th of May, 2003, addressed to the department
19 for police. Could you please look at this document. Is it correct that
20 it actually states what you testified about a moment ago, that the unit
21 for special tasks, Tigers, from the 10th to the 12th of August, was active
22 in the area of Radusa, Skopje region. Is that correct?
23 A. It is correct.
24 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I seek to tender
25 this document as a Defence exhibit.
1 JUDGE PARKER: Can you tell me, General, your answer before the
2 break to Ms. Residovic: Was it based upon this report of Major-General
3 Zdravkovski or did you make some other inquiry?
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I remember well that Saturday
5 evening, Saturday to Sunday, probably I have seen this document when it
6 arrived but I have forgotten about it. Actually I remember well what was
7 taking place in Radusa, who were the people I was there with, and I know
8 well that the unit Tiger couldn't physically be present at two locations
9 at the same time.
10 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.
11 It will be received.
12 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit 1D108,Your Honours.
13 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation]
14 Q. Could you please look at the document in tab 20, General. That is
15 exhibit 1D56, N000 -- no, I apologise. 1D2317, and the English, 1D2318.
16 This is, General, again, another information that the Ministry of
17 the Interior is -- has addressed to the police division in November of
18 2003, and there it is also stated that in the period from 10 to 12 August,
19 2001 the Tiger unit was involved in the area of the village of Radusa. Is
20 this a document written later something that, again, confirms your
21 knowledge from 2001, that the unit Tiger, was at another task at the
22 village of Radusa at the aforementioned time?
23 A. At the time when this document was written, I was not on the job
24 in question, I was not the head of the police department, but the
25 commander of the special tasks unit from his inspection of the daily logs,
1 daily schedules and reports that are maintained in the special tasks unit
2 Tiger has made this inference and I also claim that it is correct.
3 Q. Thank you very much. I would like to ask you to look at the
4 document in tab 21. This is 65 ter 1D212, pages 1D2319 and the English is
6 From the upper left corner, you see again that on the 12th of
7 November, 2003 the special tasks unit provides information to the office
8 of the director about the use of certain means by this unit.
9 Tell me, please, General, is it possible that, considering the
10 documents kept by the special units Tiger, would it be possible to
11 ascertain later what was the ammunition and how was it used by the special
12 unit Tiger?
13 A. I am not sure if I understood the question, but the special unit
14 uses means and equipment, so that also means weapons and ammunition,
15 according to the rule-book. And according to this rule-book, they did not
16 have such ammunition available. This unit does not have it.
17 Q. Thank you very much.
18 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I seek to tender
19 this document into evidence as well.
20 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.
21 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit 1D109, Your Honours.
22 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation]
23 Q. I would like to ask you now, General, to look at the document in
24 tab 36. That is P75, R 042-4692, Macedonian version; while the English is
25 R 42-4692-ET, ET.
1 Before we look at this document, tell me, General, is it correct
2 that within the Ministry of the Interior there was a unit that had the
3 title posebna?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Is it correct that this unit, this posebna unit, was composed of
6 regular police officers who customarily conducted their tasks in the
7 police stations in OVRs or other places but they were somewhat better
8 trained and they were younger in age and they had a better training, so
9 were those, in general, the persons who could be deployed in the posebna
11 A. Yes. The posebna unit was composed of active police officers who
12 carry out regular tasks.
13 Q. Is it correct, General, that that posebna unit was established in
14 order to safeguard the security in the Republic of Macedonia when a more
15 complex security situation would occur or when the public law and order
16 were violated?
17 A. Exactly, posebna unit was established for this purpose a long time
18 ago. This decision that we see in front of us only increases the number
19 of its members because of the needs that developed.
20 Q. So you now answered the next question I was about to ask you. The
21 document that you have from front of you of the 26th of June, 2001, with
22 the title decision to establish a special police unit of the police of the
23 Ministry of the Interior is essentially a decision related to the posebna
24 unit. Is that correct?
25 A. It is correct.
1 Q. I would like to ask you now at the last page of this decision
2 which is R0424695, and the English 4694-ET and let's look together at the
3 item 15 which says that with the entry into force of this decision the
4 validity of the decision on establishing a special police unit for
5 performing specific tasks and then it gives the number, SD number
6 15-1749/1 of 2nd of June, 1993.
7 Is this item, General, stating that this unit was established a
8 lot earlier than this amendment of 26th of June, 2001?
9 A. Yes. A lot earlier -- also earlier than 1993.
10 Q. Therefore, I would like to ask you to look at the document you
11 have in tab 35. That is 1D57 exhibit, pages 1D2283, and the English is
13 This decision of the Ministry of Interior has the date, 2nd June,
15 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction 1993.
16 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation]
17 Q. Is it also correct that this is the decision that was abolished
18 with the decision of 26th of June, 2001, the decision that we looked at a
19 moment ago?
20 A. I think yes.
21 Q. And you stated that to the best of your knowledge, the unit
22 posebna was actually established before this date. Is that so?
23 A. Yes, it is so, because I have been a member of that unit.
24 Q. I would like to ask you now at the second page of this decision,
25 that is 1D2284, and the English is 1D2286.
1 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction, 7.
2 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation]
3 Q. And in the item 15, you could see what you have just stated that
4 this unit existed earlier. Because that item states the entering into
5 force of this decision terminates the decision SD number 602/1 of the 1st
6 of March, 2001.
7 Do you see that, general?
8 A. Yes, I see it.
9 Q. So according to your testimony, this means that actually the unit
10 posebna existed even before the Republic of Macedonia gained independence, so
11 during the time when the Republic of Macedonia was one of the republics
12 in the Socialist Federative Republic of Yugoslavia. Is that so?
13 A. Exactly.
14 Q. And, General, if someone were to assert before this Court that
15 this document that we looked at a moment ago, P75 of 26th of June, 2001,
16 was the document pertaining to the rapid interventions battalion, Lions,
17 this would simply not be the truth; is that correct?
18 A. Exactly.
19 Q. It actually pertains to posebna unit?
20 A. Yes, it is so.
21 Q. And as you answered my colleague -- my learned colleague's
22 question today or yesterday, I don't remember exactly, on the 12th, in the
23 afternoon, when you heard that there could be a serious clash between the
24 population of Ljuboten who was leaving the village and the citizens who
25 were numerous and armed and were going towards that Ljuboten population,
1 you then said, in consultation with Mr. Bliznakovski, from the sector
2 Skopje, you decided it was necessary to deploy the posebna unit, so
3 exactly this unit, in order to protect the population that was leaving the
4 Ljuboten village and prevent the unforeseeable consequences if a direct
5 clash were to occur.
6 Is that the unit that we discussed about just now?
7 A. Yes, it is the posebna unit that we discussed about.
8 Q. And when you mentioned your immediate subordinate, the head of the
9 uniformed police in the city of Skopje, you then referred to Ljupco
10 Bliznakovski, deputy assistant to the minister for the city of Skopje?
11 A. Yes, precisely. He was in charge of the uniformed police for the
12 city of Skopje.
13 Q. And if you could confirm this, Ljupco Bliznakovski is otherwise a
14 professional police officer with great knowledge in ammunition and he
15 himself was at a given time commander of the posebna unit, is that so?
16 A. Yes, he was the commander of a special unit. Then he was the
17 director of the department for posebne units in the department that I was
18 chairing, and then head for the uniformed police in the city deputy
19 assistant minister for the city of Skopje.
20 Q. And you had full confidence when you consulted with
21 Mr. Bliznakovski and when you decided that the posebna unit would be
22 deployed in the afternoon in order to protect the population and protect
23 the police stations from the outraged population. Is that correct?
24 A. Yes. It is true I had full confidence. I consider Bliznakovski
25 to be an exceptional professional.
1 Q. I would like to ask you, General, now to go backwards, to go back
2 to look at the document found in tab 22. That is Exhibit P74 R042-4682,
3 the English version is 4682-ET, page 1.
4 Did you find it, General?
5 A. Would you repeat the number, please.
6 Q. That is the decision to establish a rapid intervention police
7 battalion and it is found in tab 22.
8 A. It is all right.
9 Q. Thank you. In the upper left corner of this decision, General, we
10 may see that the Ministry of the Interior passed this decision on 6th of
11 August, 2001. Do you see that?
12 A. Yes, I see it.
13 Q. In the preamble of this decision, in the middle of the preamble,
14 actually, we might say that it is in the second line, the legal ground to
15 pass this decision pursuant to the law is item 2 of the decision of the
16 government of the Republic of Macedonia to establish a special purpose
17 unit TOV number 98/1, dated 12th of June, 2001 in part of item 1 and item
18 2 of the decision of the president of the Republic of Macedonia to
19 establish a temporary unit for combatting terrorism classified as A,
20 DT.Number 07-54, dated 15th of June, 2001.
21 Do you see it?
22 A. Yes, I do.
23 Q. General, if you look into this decision, so to avoid reading it,
24 to avoid reading the entire decision, please have a look at it and then I
25 would ask a few questions related to it.
1 Would you agree would me, General, if I were to say that this
2 decision is an act which implements the decision of the government and of
3 the president in which initiates the start of the establishment of the
4 rapid intervention battalion of the Ministry of the Interior that will be
5 later called the Lions?
6 A. Yes, it is correct.
7 Q. Is it correct that this decision as well, as well as the decision
8 that we reviewed when we saw the establishment of the Tigers special unit,
9 that this decision establishes the reasons for establishing this unit that
10 is found in item 2. Item 3 determines that -- determines the composition
11 of this battalion, and if I were to say, General, that pursuant to this
12 decision, in line with item 3, this police battalion is composed of
13 members of the posebna unit of the Ministry of the Interior, of we
14 spoke -- of which we spoke recently, then from the members of the regular
15 composition of the police force, that is the employees that are
16 permanently employed in the ministry and from the members of the reserve
17 force of the Ministry of Interior, would that statement of mine be correct
19 A. Yes, exactly.
20 Q. If you now look the second page of this decision, that is
21 R 042-4683, that is the Macedonian part. Let me see whether the English
22 version is -- the English version is still at the same page. So in this
23 item 3, the structure is established as well as the command of the
24 battalion. Is it correct?
25 A. Yes, it is.
1 Q. Item 4, which is at the English page 0424682-ET, page 2, item 4 in
2 the essence establishes the procedure in which the employees who are not
3 already in the regular police force, that is to say, that part of the
4 reserve force that will be voluntarily assigned to this unit, as well as
5 the conditions that they must meet in order to become members of this
7 The first part refers to paragraph 2, I asked you about, that is
8 the reserve force of the ministry is not in a permanent employment
9 relation with the ministry. Is that correct?
10 A. Yes. They're only engaged where the reasons for their deployment
12 Q. So this decision provides a possibility also to include the
13 reserve police force in the rapid intervention unit so that part of the
14 reserve force, according to this decision, will establish an employment
15 relation with the ministry. Is that correct?
16 A. Yes, following a certain prescribed procedure.
17 Q. Thank you. In item 5 that you on page 3 of the Macedonian text
18 sets forth the way of selection of the members of the police battalion;
19 that is to say, the procedure in which that battalion will be composed?
20 A. Correct.
21 Q. Since the preamble of this decision refers -- the minister refers
22 to the decision of the government as well, are you aware, General, that
23 the government as well as the president at the time have passed certain
24 decisions that were the basis for the minister to pass such a decision in
1 A. Yes, I was completely involved in these procedures, although I
2 didn't see the written decisions but I was present at the meetings of the
3 Security Council where this decision was passed.
4 Q. Okay. Thank you. Since these documents in tab -- found in tab 23
5 and in tab 24, since these are the decision of the government and the
6 decision of the president, I will just say that these are just exhibit
7 numbers 1D59 and 1D60 and as you said yourself, you know about their
8 existence but you never saw these texts, so I wouldn't like to again show
9 you these documents. Thank you.
10 I would like to ask you now to look at the document found in tab
12 Since in the decision of the president it has been decided to
13 establish a joint temporary unit for combatting terrorism --
14 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] I apologise. I didn't say this is
15 exhibit number P275, R 0424690, and the English version only has a ET as
16 an addition.
17 Q. So in line with that presidential decision, you again could see in
18 the preamble that the minister refers to the decision of the president of
19 the republic for the establishment of a temporary unit for combatting
20 terrorism classified as A?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. With this order as envisioned with the decision of the president,
23 the minister had to decide what are going to be the units that will
24 compose this joint unit. And is it correct, General, that with this
25 decision -- with this order the minister decided to put in the composition
1 of the temporary unit the police battalion for rapid intervention that was
2 exactly established for this purpose by the decision of the president as
3 well as the special tasks unit, and if I may add to this, that is the
4 Tiger unit.
5 Is my understanding that these are the two units that were
6 supposed to be -- the units that would go together with the units of the
8 A. Exactly. These were the two units that were supposed to be part
9 of this joint unit.
10 Q. General, would it be true if I were to say that starting from the
11 decision to establish the rapid intervention battalion, that that is
12 exactly when the start of the establishment of this battalion was?
13 A. Exactly.
14 Q. Please look at the document found in tab 26. That is exhibit
15 1D61, 1D2353, the English is 1D2356.
16 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] I apologise, 2355.
17 Q. When we discussed the organisation and the work of the Ministry of
18 Interior, you then said that all the changes in the organisation are also
19 executed through a rule-book. Is that correct?
20 A. Yes, it is.
21 Q. Please look at the second page of this rule-book on amendments and
22 additions of the rule-book. That is 1D2354, the English version is
23 1D2356. And then in Article 1, in 1.1, it is established that this new
24 subitem is -- is inserted which says Lions, rapid intervention battalion.
25 Is it true, General, that with this amendment of the rules dated
1 5th of September, 2001, that the battalion for rapid interventions was
2 introduced in the organisation and operation of the Ministry of Interior
3 and that was the first time when it was named Lions for the first time?
4 A. Correct.
5 Q. Is it correct, General, that in order to establish an effective --
6 to effectively establish this unit, an amendment of the systemization of
7 the positions was needed whereby the conditions would be stipulated for
8 each of the members of this unit as well as the conditions and the
9 procedure for deployment, the right and the obligations of the members of
10 this battalion?
11 A. Yes, exactly like that.
12 Q. When we previously saw the organisational chart of the Ministry of
13 the Interior, we saw that in this department for the police there is a
14 department for special units. We also saw that in addition to the
15 posebna, the special unit Tiger was added to this department. So when we
16 saw that organisational chart of 21st of August, 2001, the rapid
17 intervention battalion was not there for a simple reason, that at that
18 time that battalion did not exist. Is that correct?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Only after all these acts were adopted, the acts that you spoke
21 about, sometime in late Autumn this unit, rapid intervention battalion,
22 Lions, was established. Is that correct?
23 A. Yes, it is.
24 Q. Please now look at the document in tab 30. That is 65 ter 1D208.
25 That is 1D2307 in Macedonian, and the English version is 1D2392, and this
1 is part of the Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia, number 16,
2 from 2002, and I would like you to look at the right-hand page. You have
3 there a decree for amendment and addition to the decree on the uniform and
4 uniform insignia of the police of the Ministry of Interior. Do you see
6 A. Yes, I do.
7 Q. So basically it is obvious from the preamble that this decree was
8 passed on 25th of December, 2001 by the government of the Republic of
9 Macedonia. Is that correct?
10 A. Yes, that's correct.
11 Q. And in the text itself, you can see that the government of the
12 Republic of Macedonia has established a uniforms and insignia of the
13 police and of the rapid intervention unit, the Lions. Is that correct?
14 A. Yes.
15 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, we would like to
16 tender this document as an exhibit.
17 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.
18 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit 1D110, Your Honours.
19 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation]
20 Q. Now I would like to ask you, General, to look at the document in
21 tab 31. This is exhibit 1D63. The Macedonian is 2371 and the English
23 Before I make you some questions related to this order, could you
24 please tell me, General, while you were in the Ministry of Interior until
25 February 2002, were you aware that the training of these -- no, let me
1 first say in the training of the rapid intervention battalion, did experts
2 of NATO units, especially the British Army, participate?
3 A. I cannot recall precisely. I know that there was a training, but
4 for the special unit or rapid intervention unit, battalion, or regular
5 police officers went to some training in Stip where they were trained by
6 some British troops. This is the one I recall. I don't exclude that
7 there have been other trainings and there were British instructors at this
9 Q. Could you now look at the document in tab 33, please. This is
10 exhibit 1D88, page 1D3763 and 3764. In the left upper corner, this is
11 again an act of the Ministry of Interior from 3rd of February, 2003, and
12 the document, this decision was adopted by the interior minister Mr. Hari
13 Kosta. Can you see this?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. This decision terminates the decision to form rapid intervention
16 police battalion. Is this correct?
17 A. Yes, it is correct.
18 Q. The item 1 establishes this termination of this unit that was
19 created with the decision of the 16th of 1st, number 4475. Do you recall
20 whether this was exactly the decision that was adopted by the Minister
21 Boskoski while executing the orders of the president?
22 A. Yes. The first was established, the second was terminated, that
23 is correct.
24 Q. Since the rapid intervention battalion was created much later than
25 the events in Ljuboten, do you agree with me, General, that the Lions were
1 not present in Ljuboten?
2 A. I confirm that the Lions were not in Ljuboten or at any other
3 crisis area during the crisis. They were created in accordance with the
4 documents we have before us, and they were present only in their base
5 where they were conducting training activities.
6 Q. Therefore, you confirm, General, that this decision of August the
7 6th, surely a decision that starts the procedure or the creation of the
8 rapid intervention battalion?
9 A. Yes, that's correct.
10 Q. And if someone would claim before this Court that this decision
11 from August the 6th was only a way to formalise some factual units or
12 paraunits and to give them a legal framework, then this affirmation would
13 be totally untrue?
14 A. Yes, it would be even offending that there have been paraunits,
15 para -- police paraunits.
16 Q. From what you -- what you have said, you have responded to my next
17 question. As a head in a police department you can say that within the
18 Ministry of Interior, neither before nor after, there have ever been
19 parapolice units?
20 A. Yes, that's correct.
21 Q. Could you please now look at the documents in tab 34.
22 First could you please tell me, after the Lions were terminated,
23 they were reorganised in an anti-terrorist unit. Is this correct?
24 A. I didn't understand you. I'm sorry.
25 Q. Namely, after this decision terminating the Lions in February
1 2003, these people, as a legal successor, a new unit was created within
2 the Ministry of Interior. Is this correct?
3 A. I think so, although I cannot confirm it, because at that time I
4 was not employed in the interior ministry. I was outside of the ministry.
5 Q. I would like now to ask you to look this document. This is a
6 telegram with number -- document bears the number 65 ter 1D471, number of
7 page 1D4287, and the English version is 4288.
8 First of all, the signature is of General major Goran
9 Georgievski. Do you know Goran Georgievski ?
10 A. Yes, I know him.
11 Q. If I remember well, while responding to a question of the
12 Prosecutor you said that on the 12th you communicated with Goran
14 A. Yes. He was head of the posebna unit and I asked him that with
15 his people from this unit he would leave for Ljuboten.
16 Q. Therefore, on May 4th, 2004 he is responding to question posed by
17 the police department from April 30th, 2003, and he claims that the Lions
18 were not engaged on the 11th and 12th of August, 2001, since at that time
19 the unit was not created at all.
20 Does this affirmation of Commander General Major Goran Georgievski
21 is consistent with what you just said, that the unit Lions did not exist
22 on August 11th and 12th, 2001 and they neither participated in any action
23 at that time?
24 A. Yes, exactly that.
25 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] I'd like to tender, Your Honours,
1 this document, as an exhibit.
2 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, Mr. Saxon.
3 MR. SAXON: Just a question, whether my learned colleague can
4 explain, if she knows, why this telegramme was produced, in response to a
5 particular inquiry.
6 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I cannot testify on
7 the reasons for which a certain document has been sent to the police
8 department, but since from the very text we can see that the police
9 department is an official organ of the interior ministry and did request
10 certain data which are relevant for my client and for this case, I wanted
11 to know whether the witness knew that this -- whether the information
12 contained in this document are accurate, and this is what the witness
14 JUDGE PARKER: The document will be received.
15 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit 1D111, Your Honours.
16 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
17 Q. General, as I said in the beginning of this cross-examination, you
18 answered the questions that my learned colleague made to you related to
19 the creation of the commission or working groups. My question is whether
20 you are aware that the Ministry of Interior used a method of work through
21 creating working groups and commissions at all levels of the ministry?
22 A. Could you be more precise, please.
23 Q. My question is whether in its work within the ministry or the
24 level of the state, was there a working method that supposed the creation
25 of working groups and commissions in order to analyse a given issue?
1 A. Within the Ministry of Interior, yes. Not within the sectors.
2 Q. Is it correct that the commissions, that the creation of the
3 commissions was also one of the rights or competences held by the minister
4 that enabled him to get an insight into an issue or a situation?
5 A. Yes, certainly.
6 Q. However, the commissions could be also created by the public
7 security directors or the state security bureau directors. Is this
9 A. Yes, that is correct.
10 Q. The commissions that are created by the director could be of
11 permanent composition or could be ad hoc commissions. Is this correct?
12 A. Yes. There are working commissions that are permanent or with a
13 defined term, such as a commission for disciplinary responsibility, which
14 have a defined mandate, two to four years, I don't remember, and these
15 commissions are created until a given issue exists and until it is
17 Q. You have responded to my question, so some of the longer
18 commissions are commissions such as disciplinary commissions, commissions
19 on professional standards, employee issue commissions, which usually have
20 a term of duration equal to the mandate of the minister. Is that correct?
21 A. Yes, it is correct.
22 Q. While the ad hoc commission can be related to the duration of a
23 given issue. Is this correct?
24 A. Yes, that's correct.
25 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, since I have a lot
1 of documents related to the work of the commissions that refer to
2 commissions related to the events from the indictment, I am afraid that if
3 I start now I will be interrupted in the middle of an issue I would like
4 to ask the witness about, so I would propose and I would like to ask if we
5 could now stop with the cross-examination for today.
6 [Trial Chamber confers]
7 JUDGE PARKER: Very well. We will adjourn now. We continue
8 tomorrow morning at 9.00. I'm reminded it's in Courtroom II.
9 General, if you could understand from that that we must break now,
10 but we resume tomorrow morning at 9.00. And we will therefore adjourn
12 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 6.58 p.m.,
13 to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 18th day of
14 July, 2007, at 9.00 a.m.