1 Tuesday, 26 February 2008
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness entered court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 9.02 a.m.
6 JUDGE PARKER: Good morning.
7 And good morning, sir. The affirmation you made at the beginning
8 of your evidence still applies.
9 Mr. Mettraux.
10 WITNESS: ZLATKO KESKOVSKI [Resumed]
11 [Witness answered through interpreter]
12 Examination by Mr. Mettraux: [Continued]
13 MR. METTRAUX: Thank you, Your Honour, and good morning.
14 Q. Good morning, Mr. Keskovski.
15 A. Good morning.
16 Q. I'd like to turn, Mr. Keskovski, now to the 12th of August,
17 Sunday, the 12th of August, and I'd like to ask you, if you can recall,
18 where you were the morning of the 12th?
19 A. The morning of the 12th of August, around 9.00, 10.00, we took the
20 president from his residence to his office, to the cabinet of the Republic
21 of Macedonia. I stayed in my workplace in my office, preparing the
22 activities for the successful preparations for the signing of the Ohrid
23 Agreement, which took place at the residence of the president of the
24 Republic of Macedonia on the 13th, the following day.
25 Q. Just a second, Mr. Keskovski. We'll take that one step at a time.
1 First, you said that: "We took the president from his residence."
2 Who is "we"? Was there anyone else with you at that time?
3 A. I mean the people from the sector of security of the president.
4 Q. And do you know who is driving the president usually? I think you
5 indicated yesterday, but if could you recall that.
6 A. The first driver of the president was Mr. Mladenov Aco, usually.
7 Q. And can you recall now whether that was Mr. Mladenov who was
8 driving the president on that day?
9 A. Yes, as I said, Mladenov.
10 Q. And now can you recount what happened when you arrived at the
11 office of the president's cabinet, that morning?
12 A. The morning, when we came to the cabinet of the president, as I
13 started to say, I went to my office in order to start the preparations for
14 the Ohrid Framework Agreement. Before arriving, the president asked for
15 my mobile phone to make some standard calls which he made on a daily
17 Q. And did the president at some stage ask to see you or did you go
18 to see the president on your own at some stage that morning?
19 A. In the course of the day, that is to say, prior to starting the
20 meeting which I scheduled regarding the organisation of the Ohrid
21 Framework Agreement with the whole group, the whole sector for the
22 security of the president, the president called me in my office and told
23 me to come see him immediately.
24 Q. And what did he tell you, if anything, at that point?
25 A. The president called me in, told me that in Ljuboten and in the
1 area of Ljubanci there have been some activities, and said that he wants
2 to establish contact immediately with the minister of interior, Mr. Ljube
4 On his order, I attempted to find the minister; however, I was
5 unable to establish contact with him. This is a telephone number which I
6 had memorised in my mobile phone.
7 Q. Just a second, we'll get to that point in a second, Mr. Keskovski.
8 Did the president first tell you who he had gotten that information
9 from, about things happening in Ljuboten and Ljubanci? Did he tell you
11 A. He did not tell me who he received this information from. He
12 asked me whether I had the possibility to establish contact with
13 Mr. Tarculovski. I tried to reach him, too, on my mobile phone, but I was
14 unable to do so at that moment.
15 Q. And you've indicated that he then asked you to try to get in touch
16 with Mr. Boskoski. Could you -- or did he tell you why he wanted to talk
17 to Mr. Boskoski at that point?
18 A. In the morning of the 12th, there was information about an angry
19 mass of people, a crowd in the area of Radisani, who were, so to say,
20 armed with iron rods and other weapons of domestic character from
21 household items, ready to charge and to deal with the terrorist groups
22 stationed in the village of Ljuboten.
23 Due to these reasons, because these were ordinary people,
24 civilians, they could have had direct contact with ordinary civilians of
25 Albanian ethnicity causing conflict and skirmishes on an ethnic basis.
1 All of this could have put into question the signing of the Ohrid
2 Framework Agreement. And due to these reasons, the president asked for
3 Mr. Boskoski and attempted to establish contact with him.
4 Q. And could -- you started explaining the efforts that you made to
5 get in touch with Mr. Boskoski. Could you explain what steps you took to
6 contact Mr. Boskoski and whether you were successful in doing so.
7 A. I tried to reach Mr. Boskoski on the telephone and the telephone
8 numbers I had at my disposal, but I was unable to do so, because during
9 the weekend our office did not work with the standard team that works
10 during the working week. The president pointed that I should ask at the
11 office of the prime minister to try to establish contact with
12 Mr. Boskoski, that the office of the prime minister should tell me how I
13 might try to get in touch with him.
14 I did so, and I spoke with Mr. Ljusev who was at his work post.
15 He gave me several telephone numbers from the immediate entourage of
16 Mr. Boskoski. I believe this was specifically the number of the driver of
17 Mr. Boskoski. I called this number, cell phone. I established contact
18 with the driver and asked him whether the minister was with him and
19 whether he is available for a telephone conversation. He told me that he
20 was. And in the first voice contact I had with the minister during that
21 time, I told that the president wanted to speak with him.
22 I handed the phone over to the president.
23 Q. Just a second before we go to that, Mr. Keskovski.
24 Did you exchange any word, did you say anything to Mr. Boskoski,
25 or did he say anything to you at that point?
1 A. No. According to the standard procedure, I noted that
2 Mr. Boskoski was on the telephone. As I said previously, this was the
3 procedure. When the president will speak to someone on the other end of
4 the line, I have to know who is it with. There was no other conversation
5 between Minister Boskoski and myself, just the regular pleasantries,
6 "Good morning, Good afternoon, Mr. Minister, the president of the Republic
7 wishes to speak with."
8 Q. And did the minister and the president then talk to each other?
9 A. Yes. The president explained to Mr. Boskoski the information he
10 conveyed to me as well, which I already elaborated, regarding the
11 situation in the area of Radisani and the possibility of radicalisation
12 and escalation of the, so to say, protests or attacks that could escalate
13 into an interethnic clashes between civilians of the Republic of Macedonia
14 of Macedonian and Albanian ethnicities, and that in the interest of
15 calming the situation down, in the interest of the following day's signing
16 of the Framework Agreement which was of extreme significance at that
17 moment for quieting the crisis which had occurred in the Republic of
18 Macedonia, the president ordered Mr. Boskoski to go there and with his
19 authority to calm down the crowds and to forbid them from going into the
20 village of Ljubanci.
21 Q. And were you able, or were you aware at that time, where
22 Mr. Boskoski was when you managed to contact him?
23 A. I cannot know where he was.
24 Q. And are you able, even if approximately, to recall what time of
25 the day it would have been, approximately, when you managed to make phone
1 contacts with him?
2 A. As I said, this happened prior to the meeting I had scheduled with
3 the sector for the security of the president, with the whole team. I
4 believe this was before 12.00.
5 Q. And can you recall now what you did for the rest of the day, the
6 12th of August of 2001?
7 A. As I had previously mentioned, during that day, I was working on
8 the preparations of all the guests that were due to arrive the following
9 day for the signing of the Ohrid Framework Agreement, including VIPs from
10 the international communicate such as Mr. Javier Solana, Mr. George
11 Robertson, Mr. Leotard, Mr. Pardew, several ambassadors, and about 200
12 journalists from various media that had announced their presence, and the
13 leadership of the Republic of Macedonia who were to be the guests of the
14 president, so to say, because this was due to take place at the residence
15 of the president.
16 This is a very major activity. I presume you can assume the scope
17 of this event, both from a security and from a protocol point of view.
18 MR. METTRAUX: Your Honour, it seems that we are all encountering
19 some problems with the transcript. We will just carry on. If there is a
20 problem perhaps with our colleague or yourself, we will be happy to stop
21 if instructed by you. But at this stage, I'm able to continue.
22 JUDGE PARKER: We have one source of transcript but not the other.
23 I don't know what.
24 MR. METTRAUX: The problem, Your Honour, is I believe I am the
25 only one among the three of to us have access to the transcript. I'm able
1 to carry on, if Your Honour wishes, but my colleagues are not able to log
2 on their transcripts.
3 JUDGE PARKER: I think we should press on. Thank you.
4 MR. METTRAUX: Simply for the transcript, at page 6, line 10,
5 "Leotard" would be L-E-O-T-A-R-D.
6 Q. Did you know or do you know, Mr. Keskovski, where the president
7 was during the rest of the day, the 12th of August, 2001.
8 A. From the morning hours, the president was in his office, up until
9 the late evening.
10 Q. And can you recall where your phone was at the time, or whether it
11 was at all times with you, your mobile phone?
12 A. After the whole team arrived at the residence, the president
13 requested one of the mobile phones to make calls which were standard on a
14 daily basis. This is something that happened not just on that day but
15 every day.
16 Q. And yourself, Mr. Keskovski, do you recall whether during that
17 day, the 12th of August of 2001, you've made -- you've had any call or
18 made any attempt to contact Mr. Tarculovski. You've indicate already that
19 when discussing with the president you made a number of attempts to do so.
20 Can you recall now whether you made any such attempts at other times
21 during that day?
22 A. When I was seeing the president, I attempted to reach
23 Mr. Tarculovski; however, I was not able to establish contact with him,
24 and on that day I had no contact with Mr. Tarculovski.
25 Q. I'd now like to ask you about a different time. Do you recall
1 when, approximately, Mr. Tarculovski came back to work after these events?
2 A. You mean after the 12th of August?
3 Q. That's correct.
4 A. Mr. Tarculovski returned to his work duties. Immediately after
5 escorting the first lady, he continued with his regular tasks and duties.
6 Q. And at that time, Mr. Keskovski, did you have any reason to
7 believe that Mr. Tarculovski had done anything illegal or criminal?
8 A. There are no reasons for me to suspect anything of this kind.
9 Q. And are you able to say whether, upon his return, Mr. Tarculovski
10 reported to the president; do you know that?
11 A. I do not know.
12 Q. And later in time, did you learn or did you learn at any point
13 that, from any source, that there were allegations that Mr. Tarculovski
14 had taken part in the action? Did you hear those stories later?
15 A. I learned about this after ten months after this event. When this
16 case began to be scrutinized by the public, I learned this from the media.
17 Q. And upon learning this, did you ask Mr. Tarculovski about those
19 A. These were not reports. These were information which were
20 disseminated in the public at that moment. I asked him on one specific
21 occasion whether what the papers were saying was true. He told me that
22 these were speculation and that they were untrue.
23 Q. And do you know if the president asked Mr. Tarculovski about
25 A. No. We were together when I asked him. I'm not sure whether he
1 knew about this previously or what he knew, but we were together when I
2 asked him.
3 Q. And when you say, "We were together," do you mean to say that when
4 you asked Mr. Tarculovski, the president was also present?
5 A. Yes. Not officially. This was in regular movement as we were
6 walking. This wasn't a special call for Mr. Tarculovski. This wasn't a
7 special meeting so that I could ask him about these matters.
8 Q. And did the president at any stage give you an indication that he
9 wished or wanted this matter to be looked into?
10 A. No, not once.
11 Q. I have one last question, I believe, or one last set of questions.
12 Are you aware of any case or cases of police officers being
13 amnestied for crimes committed during the crisis; and, if so, how did you
14 learn about that?
15 A. Yes. I heard about one member of the Ministry of Interior who was
16 amnestied. I met him personally.
17 MR. METTRAUX: Your Honour, at this stage, I have no further
19 Q. Thank you, Mr. Keskovski.
20 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you very much, Mr. Mettraux.
21 Mr. Apostolski.
22 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Good morning, Your Honours. I
23 have several questions for this witness. I would ask the Court for a few
24 minutes of patience so that I may prepare myself.
25 [Trial Chamber confers]
1 Cross-examination by Mr. Apostolski:
2 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, Witness Keskovski.
3 A. Good morning.
4 Q. My name it is Antonio Apostolski, and together with my colleague,
5 Jasmina Zivkovic, we are the Defence counsel of Mr. Johan Tarculovski.
6 Before I begin with my questions, I would like to turn your
7 attention to the fact that you and I speak the same language and are able
8 to easily understand each other. However, I would ask you to pause and
9 wait for the interpretation of my questions, as well as your answers, so
10 as to enable the Trial Chamber and all present in the courtroom to follow
11 my questioning and your testimony in an easier fashion.
12 Do you understand what I have said to you?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Yesterday, you mentioned that, as chief of security of President
15 Boris Trajkovski, you were privy to a lot of information related to the
16 security of the security forces and of the terrorist group NLA.
17 Do you recall this?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Also, yesterday, you indicated that upon the order of President
20 Trajkovski, you were in several areas where the Macedonian security forces
21 carried out activities for eliminating the terrorist group NLA. You said
22 you mentioned Vaksince, in the area of Tetovo, and in Aracinovo.
23 Do you recall this?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Is it correct that following the activities of the Macedonian
1 security forces for eliminating the terrorist group NLA in Tetovo in
2 March, on the 25th and 26th of May in Vaksince, the members of the NLA in
3 uniforms disappeared and they intermixed with the local Albanian
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Is it correct that this was part of the tactics of the terrorist
7 group NLA?
8 A. I presume this is so.
9 Q. Is it correct that after this it was necessary to -- for the
10 police to have paraffin glove tests to establish whether these persons
11 were terrorists or civilians?
12 A. I did not take part in this and the testing of the terrorist
13 groups, whether or not they took part in the activities. This was work of
14 the regular police forces that were specialised in this area.
15 Q. While you were in these areas you mentioned earlier, did you have
16 the authorisation to issue orders to the Macedonian security forces?
17 A. No. I was sent to report from the areas about the situation and
18 the activities for elimination and everything else related to the
19 operations of the security forces of the Republic of Macedonia.
20 Q. When the president sent Johan Tarculovski to Ljubanci and
21 Ljuboten, did you give him or have you heard that he gave him the
22 authorisation to issue orders to the Macedonian security forces within
23 this region?
24 A. No. I haven't heard him give him the authority to issue orders.
25 I only heard that he gave him the order to inform him about the situation
1 in the region. This is what I heard.
2 Q. Very well. Thank you. Is it correct that, in July and August
3 2001, the terrorist group NLA systemically carried out ethnic cleansing in
4 the areas populated with Macedonian and Serbian ethnic population and
5 especially in the Tetovo, Kumanovo, and Skopje regions, which resulted in
6 murders, beating, and kidnapping of non-Albanians and some them are not
7 found until the present day?
8 MS. ISSA: Your Honour.
9 JUDGE PARKER: Ms. Issa.
10 MS. ISSA: I believe that calls for speculation on the part of the
11 witness, Your Honour.
12 JUDGE PARKER: Well, you haven't established any foundation of
13 knowledge for such wide-sweeping question, Mr. Apostolski. If the witness
14 has personal knowledge about any of these matters, you need to bring that
15 out first, before you can ask him to answer a question of that nature.
16 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I asked this
17 question since the witness was a direct witness to the events of 2001 in
18 the Republic of Macedonia. So I thought that he would be able to answer
19 the question.
20 JUDGE PARKER: Well, the fact that he was living and involved in
21 some respects with events in 2001 isn't enough to qualify him to speak
22 about the matters you have asked about, which are extremely wide-sweeping.
23 If you want to get from him particular knowledge about any of the matters
24 dealt with in your question, you need to have him establish his knowledge
25 and the source of it.
1 Thank you.
2 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Very well, Your Honour. I will
3 then put it differently. I will reframe the questions.
4 Q. Yesterday, in your evidence, you stated that it was the president
5 himself, Boris Trajkovski, who requested that some individuals were
6 involved in his entourage [as interpreted]. Do you remember that?
7 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction: Security.
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
9 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation]
10 Q. Is it correct that irrespectively of his ask, you, yourself, made
11 the assessment of the individuals who were to take care about the security
12 of the president and his family?
13 A. That is a regular procedure in the Ministry of Interior; and, of
14 course, it is only natural to check the persons who will be responsible
15 for the security of the president by -- checked by all security structures
16 who have data and are able to make such assessment.
17 Q. Did you do that also with regards to the individual Johan
19 A. I did this with regards to all individuals, with no exception, so
20 that included Mr. Johan Tarculovski as well.
21 Q. Did Mr. Johan Tarculovski have a criminal background?
22 A. He couldn't have had. If he has had one, he wouldn't have been
23 included in the security of the president.
24 Q. Did you check on his psychological and physical fitness, or was
25 there any committee taking care of that?
1 A. This is done at the moment the employment is entered into with the
2 Ministry of Interior. All members and authorised officials of the
3 Ministry of Interior go through a regular procedure of test of
4 psychological and physical fitness, and a certificate on that is issued so
5 that they are able and to the conclusion that certificate is that the
6 individual is able to perform the duties within the Ministry of Interior.
7 It concerns authorised officials.
8 Q. So my conclusion that Johan Tarculovski was selected for the
9 security based on the personal wish of the president Boris Trajkovski and
10 that he met all the prerequisites necessary for that post would be
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Is it correct that Johan Tarculovski was in charge of the security
14 for the first lady also during her official and private trips abroad?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Do you know whether he speaks the English language?
17 A. Yes. I believe he does, since several times I have sent him
18 together with the first lady abroad. Since it is the minimum
19 prerequisite, the employee needs to speak at least one foreign language to
20 be able to communicate with other security services that need to welcome
21 you and escort you in the country where are you travelling and you need to
22 cooperate with them.
23 Q. Is it correct that before the trips abroad, the trips of the first
24 lady abroad, you had contacts with the foreign services that, together
25 with her personal security, would be responsible for her security and
2 A. Yes. This is the standard procedure.
3 Q. Is it correct that you have never received any criticism with
4 regards to the work of Johan Tarculovski by the foreign services, security
5 services, that you cooperated with?
6 A. I have never received any criticism with regards to the work of
7 Mr. Johan Tarculovski.
8 Q. Is it correct that when travelling abroad to provide for the
9 security of the first lady, Mr. Johan Tarculovski carried weapons on him?
10 A. If the host country, in its regulations allows that, yes, since
11 the different states have different regulations; but, generally speaking,
13 Q. Johan Tarculovski also travelled with Mr. Boris Trajkovski during
14 the trips abroad when the first lady was accompanying the president.
15 Is that correct?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Is it correct that Johan accompanied the president and the first
18 lady to Italy, when the president had a meeting with the Pope?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Is it correct that Johan Tarculovski also travelled to Norway when
21 President Trajkovski received the peace award?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Is it correct that Mr. Johan Tarculovski went to China with the
24 president and the first lady, when the President Trajkovski visited China?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. And within one question, I will enumerate several states where
2 Mr. Johan Tarculovski had travelled with the first lady only, when he
3 escorted her during her trip. We have here Great Britain, Germany, Italy,
4 Croatia, Bulgaria, and Greece.
5 Could you confirm this?
6 A. Yes. I had the list of all such trips where he performed duties
8 Q. And, so, none of these states, or rather, the agencies, services,
9 security services, had any complaints against the work of Mr. Johan
11 A. As I stated already, no, they haven't had.
12 Q. Is it correct that Johan Tarculovski was involved in all major
13 operations to secure meetings in the Republic of Macedonia as well, where
14 the organiser was the president, Boris Trajkovski? Could you please tell
15 us about that, if you are aware of that.
16 A. I would correct this. This is not meetings; these are summits.
17 Yes. In all major operations organised by the security service of the
18 president and in coordination with all the other security services an
19 agencies in the Republic of Macedonia, we've had several events where we
20 had more than 15 heads of states as guests.
21 This is how they're called because somewhere the president is the
22 head of the state, but somewhere the prime minister is the head of the
23 state. And in all these operations, Mr. Tarculovski had his tasks and he
24 performed them successfully.
25 Q. Could you tell me whether it's correct that the residence of the
1 president, Boris Trajkovski, is located near PSOLO; that is, the Police
2 Station for Security of Individuals and Facilities?
3 A. The residential part of President Trajkovski was and still is at
4 the moment the residence of the president of the Republic of Macedonia,
5 and it shares the same garden with the villa. This is how it is called in
6 Macedonia. It shares the same complex with the residence of the prime
7 minister of the Republic of Macedonia and the guest residence. This is
8 one complex of high-level state facilities, and it is set some 300 to 400
9 metres away from the PSOLO station and it is strategically designed to be
10 like that.
11 Q. Did you have any requested made of PSOLO as head of the security
12 service for Boris Trajkovski?
13 A. We were in communication with PSOLO. It was standard
14 communication within the standard framework because PSOLO was guarding the
15 entrance to that complex, the gate - how should I call it? - the entrance
16 into the complex.
17 Q. You're referring to the gate of the residence?
18 A. Yes, the entrance gate into the entire complex of residence. I'm
19 now speaking about the residences of both the president and the prime
20 minister. They are within the same complex. They shared the same garden.
21 Q. Is it correct that PSOLO also secured the parliament building
22 where the office of the president of the state is?
23 A. PSOLO is a police station for security of persons and facilities
24 and diplomatic and consular representative offices. It means that it is
25 in charge of external physical security of all those facilitates within
1 the territory of the Republic of Macedonia. So it secured the parliament
2 building as well, the government building as well, and the residential
3 part of the villa in Ohrid that is the president's villa, and all the
4 other vital facilitates in the Republic of Macedonia.
5 Q. Would that mean that the employees in the President Boris
6 Trajkovski's security needed to frequently visit the PSOLO police station?
7 A. Maybe, if they needed to have contact with the polices station
8 with regards to this part of physical security of the residential part,
9 and possibly the cabinet. This is among the standard daily activities.
10 They don't have or they need a precise order for this. These are everyday
11 activities, regular, standard. They're not special activities. They are
12 standard activities, every day.
13 Q. So it is your evidence that it could be a daily activity of a
14 member of staff to visit this police station?
15 A. If the security inspector, if a member of the security feels the
16 need and believes that he needs to get in touch with PSOLO and feels that
17 there is a need to have a higher level discussion at PSOLO regarding the
18 security that they provide, then, yes, by all means.
19 Q. Thank you. I would now move to deal with another topic.
20 Yesterday, you testified that the president of the Republic of
21 Macedonia issued an order on the 5th of August, 2001, and he ordered,
22 among other things, that the road between Tetovo and Jezince be mopped up
23 from the NLA terrorists. Do you remember that?
24 A. I don't remember that I spoke about it yesterday, but I remember
25 the event.
1 Q. Do you know about this event?
2 A. Yes. I know about this event, even the public learned about there
4 Q. So my next question was to be: Is it correct that this order was
5 disclosed to the media by one of the high military officers and was
6 published at the national television, A-1, and this is why it was
7 impossible to follow this order?
8 A. I know that it was published at the A-1 television. But who
9 disclosed the information to the A-1 television, I really couldn't know.
10 I can only tell you that the order of the president reached the chief of
11 the General Staff; and, after that, I don't know what the procedure is to
13 Q. Do you have information that the president of the Republic of
14 Macedonia was greatly disturbed and angry because of this, or after this,
15 since, if I could put it like this, this information leaked to the media?
16 A. Yes. Of course, he was, because any information that is strictly
17 confidential, of course an official would be upset if that leaked to the
19 Q. You stated, yesterday, that after the events at Karpalak, the
20 president of the Republic of Macedonia dismissed chief of the General
21 Staff, Pande Petrovski on the 9th of August, 2001.
22 Do you remember that?
23 A. Yes.
24 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Could the witness please be shown
25 65 ter 726.
1 Q. Do you see, in the screen in front of you, the Official Gazette of
2 the Republic of Macedonia? Do you see it?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Is reads Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia.
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. The date is Friday, 9th of August, 2001. And beneath it, it is
7 written, "Decree number 38," and it is written there: "On the basis of
8 Article 18, paragraph 1, line 18 of Defence Law, General
9 Lieutenant-Colonel Pande Alekso Petrovski is dismissed from the duty of
10 the chief of the General Staff of the army of the Republic of Macedonia."
11 Then it continues: "The dismissal from duty took place on the
12 9th of August, 2001. This decree is to enter force immediately," and it
13 is signed by the president of the Republic of Macedonia, Boris Trajkovski.
14 Does this corroborate your evidence that General
15 Lieutenant-Colonel Pande Petrovski was dismissed from the office of the
16 chief of the General Staff of the Republic of Macedonia on the 9th of
17 August, 2001?
18 A. Yes. I said this yesterday during my testimony.
19 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Your Honours, could I seek to
20 tender this document into evidence?
21 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.
22 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit 2D84, Your Honours.
23 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation]
24 Q. Do you have information that the president received information
25 all the time from the intelligence sector of the army of the Republic of
2 A. That is the standard procedure.
3 Q. Did he use those to make decisions?
4 A. Also security structures, including those within the Ministry of
5 Defence and of the Ministry of Interior, the intelligence agency and
6 external friendly services that were active in the Republic of Macedonia
7 sent information to the President Trajkovski, information of various
8 nature; and on the basis of all those information, the president,
9 analysing those, undertook measures and made decisions.
10 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Could the witness please be shown
11 2D42, Exhibit 2D42. Page N002-4321-0129, that is the Macedonian version;
12 and the English page is 2D05-0386.
13 Q. That is a daily log of information received on the 10 and 11 of
14 August, 2001, of the army of the Republic of Macedonia, security sector.
15 A. Could I just have it shown on the -- on my screen, or actually,
16 could I have only the Macedonian version on my screen because it is tiny
17 and I can't read it.
18 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Could we zoom on the Macedonian
20 Q. Do you see number 13, on the 10th of August, at 1655, G-2 has
21 recorded that information was received that a group of around 100
22 individuals need to start from the region of village of Matejce towards
23 the villages of Ljubanci, Ljuboten, Brodec, and Kodra Fura in order to
24 attack the positions of the defence security forces?
25 Would the president have this information at his disposal?
1 A. Of course. These are primarily intended for the president.
2 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Could we show the Macedonian page
3 N002, of the same document, N002-4321-0125; English page 2D05-0383.
4 MS. ISSA: Sorry to interrupt. I wonder if perhaps we could show
5 the English page so the Prosecution can follow along.
6 JUDGE PARKER: The witness needs document in Macedonian. It
7 should be possible for the witness to have one screen display and others
8 to have another.
9 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Just in case, I will read it for
10 the transcript so that we know what it written here. It is the same
11 log-book, just a different page of it.
12 Q. You see in line starting with 8?
13 A. Yes, I see it: "10 of August, 1645."
14 Q. Yes. The information comes from the MOI, Mirkovci police
15 station. It is a telegram on the 10 August, 2001.
16 "At 1530, a patrol of Mirkovci police station, stationed above the
17 village of Ljuboten, and the authorised official, Todorov Dusan, informed
18 us that in the village of Ljuboten, at the sweep between the school and
19 the graveyard on the left-hand side of the road, in the in the houses of
20 Zendelovski family, they noticed three individuals wearing black uniforms
21 and armed with automatic weapons."
22 A. Yes, I see it.
23 Q. Would the president have this information at his disposal as well?
24 A. Well, this is a telegram sent to all organs dealing with the
25 security issues. I said, previously, that he received information. We
1 received in general information from all security services active on the
2 territory of the Republic of Macedonia. We received them continuously.
3 Q. Thank you.
4 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I have no further
5 questions of this witness.
6 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you, Mr. Apostolski.
7 Ms. Issa.
8 MS. ISSA: Yes, Your Honour. If I may have one moment of your
10 Cross-examination by Mr. Issa:
11 Q. Yes. Good morning, Mr. Keskovski.
12 A. Good morning.
13 Q. My name is Antoinette Issa, and I represent the Prosecution today.
14 Now, Mr. Keskovski, you testified in your examination-in-chief
15 that in December of 1999, you became the head of the Macedonian security
16 sector for the president. Is that right?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. And in -- on 28 May 2001, you were promoted to senior inspector
19 for the security of the president, and you were given an increase in your
20 salary by the Ministry of Interior. Is that correct?
21 A. No. This is not a promotion. This is a new systemization of
22 2001. They're the same work posts with new titles, so to say.
23 Q. Okay. But you were given an increase in your salary. Is that
25 A. Yes, a small increase.
1 Q. And this was shortly after Ljube Boskoski became the minister of
2 the interior, right?
3 A. Yes. This is correct, because there was when the new
4 systemization was passed.
5 Q. And you stayed in that position until 7 June 2002. Is that right?
6 A. Yes, this is right.
7 Q. And, at that point, you were, once again -- or I should say, at
8 that point, you were given a promotion to the -- a position of deputy
9 assistant of the minister of the interior for security matters, right?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And then, on 13 August of 2002, which is approximately two months
12 later, you were then assigned to the post of the assistant to the director
13 for the DBK by Minister Boskoski. Is that right?
14 A. Yes, this is right.
15 Q. But then, on the 5th of November, 2002, you went from being the
16 assistant director to the DBK to being reassigned as inspector regarding
17 Islamic fundamentalism. Is that right?
18 A. No, this is not right.
19 Q. You weren't -- wasn't there a decision made by then-Minister
20 Hari Kostov to reassign to you a position of independent inspector on
21 prevention from Islamic fundamentalism and religious extremism in the
22 department of the DBK in Tetovo?
23 A. No, this is not correct. This is an error in his procedure.
24 Sometimes, wishes are greater than reason. According to the labour law, I
25 was as of 10th of August, 2002 up until 31st of January, 2003; and
1 according to the labour law, heads do not have the authorisation to give
2 reassignment decisions for a person who has been on leave or who is on
3 vacation. If you look at my dismissal note, you will see that I was given
4 a note of dismissal at the position of assistant to the minister for the
6 Q. Well, Mr. Keskovski --
7 JUDGE PARKER: Before you develop the question, Mr. Mettraux.
8 MR. METTRAUX: Simply, I believe a word or a couple of words have
9 been missed in page 25, line -- it should probably be in line 5, where we
10 understand Mr. Keskovski says where he was or what he was doing between
11 10 August and 31st of January, but I think he specified that later in the
12 answer. Just for the record, Your Honour.
13 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you. Sorry, Ms. Issa. Carry on.
14 MS. ISSA:
15 Q. Well, Mr. Keskovski, regardless of whether the decision was in
16 conformity of the labour law, wasn't there a decision made by Minister
17 Hari Kostov at the time to reassign to you that position of inspector on
18 prevention for Islamic fundamentalism to take effect on November 5, 2002?
19 A. I did not receive any decision of this kind.
20 Q. Okay.
21 MS. ISSA: Perhaps, if we can distribute the Prosecution binders
22 at this stage, Your Honour.
23 Q. All right. Now that the binders have been distributed, I would
24 ask you to please turn to page 31.
25 MS. ISSA: It should be -- and I would ask that this perhaps be
1 pulled up on e-court, please. It is page 31. It should be 31 in e-court
2 in the English and Macedonian, and the ERN number is N006-7461 for tab 50,
3 65 ter 1139.
4 I should have said what the 65 ter number was first for Madam
5 Registrar. I apologise.
6 Q. I would ask you, sir, to go to your second binder.
7 MS. ISSA: Thank you, Mr. Usher.
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Number? Tab number?
9 MS. ISSA:
10 Q. Tab 50, please. I would ask to you turn to page N006-7461, which
11 should be at page 31 of the hard copy.
12 MS. ISSA: Perhaps, if I might ask the assistance of Mr. Usher to
13 the witness, if needed.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I've found it.
15 MS. ISSA:
16 Q. Okay. Now you see there, Mr. Keskovski, there's a decision that
17 is dated November 5, 2002. What it says is that: "Zlatko Keskovski," if
18 you look at the first paragraph underneath the word "decision," "who,
19 until now, was employed as assistant to the director for operational
20 matters and coordination in the cabinet of the director of the UBK at the
21 Ministry of Interior, is assigned to a place of duty, independent
22 inspector on prevention from Islamic fundamentalism and religious
23 extremism, in the regional department of the UBK commencing as of the date
25 Do you see that?
1 A. Yes, I see it.
2 Q. And if you turn the page, you see that that's a decision that was
3 made by then-Minister Hari Kostov, right?
4 A. Yes, this is right.
5 Q. And, Mr. Keskovski, you tendered your resignation on 7 November
6 2002, two days after this decision was made. Isn't that right?
7 A. I tendered a request to resign on the 7th of July, 2002 [as
8 interpreted], and this -- this is a decision of the 5th of May [as
9 interpreted]. But as one can see from the document, there is no signature
10 on this document signifying that I received this document, which is an
11 obligatory procedure in the ministry when receiving a new decision for
12 reassignment to a new workplace.
13 Q. Well, if we're looking at the e-court copy, Mr. Keskovski, it
14 appears that, just to clarify the record, there is a signature on the
15 document, and it is signed by Minister Hari Kostov with the ministry's
16 stamp, right?
17 A. Yes. I was speaking about my signature, a signature signifying my
18 receipt of this document.
19 Q. So it's your evidence that you didn't receive this document, that
20 you were -- despite the fact that you were supposed to start in this new
21 position on the 5th of November; and then you resigned on 7 November,
22 2002, but you say you never received this document. Is that your
24 A. Yes, this is correct. And I'm looking at this for the first time.
25 Q. Can you please turn to page 28 of that same document, the same
1 exhibit, which is N006-7458 for e-court purposes.
2 Do you see that? Are you there?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Now, isn't that your request for your resignation from the
5 ministry, which is dated 7 November 2002? Isn't that your signature
6 there, Mr. Keskovski?
7 A. Yes, this is correct. And, as you're able to see, it says
8 "assistant director in the UBK." Therefore, I was still at that
9 position, and I'm seeking a resignation from the post of assistant to the
10 director in the directorate for security and counter-intelligence.
11 Q. But that was, nevertheless, two days after the decision of
12 Minister Hari Kostov was to take effect. Isn't that so?
13 A. This is not so, because Hari Kostov, for the first time, entered
14 the Ministry of Interior on the 7th of November, 2002. When I was
15 tendering my resignation, his wish was not taken into consideration that
16 he issue me a new decision for reassignment. You can see this in my
17 resignation, again signed by Hari Kostov who gives permission to my
18 resignation from the position of assistant to the director of the UBK [as
20 This means that he has invalidated his own signature and is
21 allowing me now to leave from the position of assistant director in the
22 directorate for security and counter-intelligence. This is the same
23 minister in question.
24 Q. Well, Mr. Keskovski, that was only two days after the initial
25 decision was made by Hari Kostov. Are you suggesting that when you
1 resigned two days after this decision was made that was a mere coincidence
2 and it had nothing to do with Hari Kostov's decision?
3 A. My decision was submitted prior to Mr. Kostov requesting that I be
4 reassigned because it's his first day at work; and on his first day of
5 work, he immediately distributed such decisions. I had tendered my
6 resignation previously.
7 Q. And when you say "on his first day at work, he immediately
8 distributed such decisions," that's because when a new minister comes into
9 office and perhaps does not have the same political affiliations with
10 certain members of the previous ministry, he may demote people. Isn't
11 that right?
12 A. You'd have to clarify what you mean by this term.
13 Q. The term "demote," is that the term you're referring to,
14 Mr. Keskovski?
15 A. To replace means that an assistant director, such as my position,
16 you can be the head of a directorate; but to demote, or as translation
17 goes degrade, can indicate something else. It could mean political
18 vindication, perhaps. This is something altogether different.
19 Q. Well, perhaps I'll use a different description then,
20 Mr. Keskovski. It's possible that when a minister, a new minister comes
21 into office, he transfers individuals or members of the previous ministry,
22 such as yourself, to positions that were of lower rank, or grade perhaps,
23 than the position than you used to be in. Isn't that right?
24 A. It is possible, but two to three levels at maximum.
25 Q. And when you resigned from the ministry, you knew that you would
1 be demoted, didn't you?
2 A. This is not so. I tendered my resignation due to moral reasons,
3 without any knowledge that I would receive another decision.
4 Q. So the two-day gap between your -- Hari Kostov's decision and your
5 resignation was a mere coincidence, right?
6 A. Mr. Kostov signed the decision on the 5th; while on the 5th, he
7 did not step even into the Ministry of Interior. You can establish this
8 if you speak with various structures in the Republic of Macedonia who can
9 verify this with valid documents.
10 Q. Okay.
11 MS. ISSA: Your Honour, I'm conscious of the time, and I was about
12 to move into other area.
13 JUDGE PARKER: Very well. We will have the first break.
14 We will resume at 11.00.
15 [The witness stands down]
16 --- Recess taken at 10.29 a.m.
17 --- On resuming at 11.04 a.m.
18 JUDGE PARKER: The Chamber is informed there is a procedural
20 Ms. Issa.
21 MS. ISSA: Yes, Your Honour. As it's clear, I am obviously in a
22 position to begin my cross-examination today. However, in light of the
23 additional material that we received yesterday and just in passing, there
24 was some additional material that came out in the cross-examination that
25 was carried out by Mr. Apostolski. We will, of course, use this afternoon
1 to attempt to prepare as much as possible for the continuation tomorrow.
2 However, I didn't -- I wanted to inform the Chamber that there is a
3 possibility that we would be asking for an extra session to assist in our
4 preparation to perhaps obtain additional material that we may need to add
5 to our exhibit list in light of all of this new material that has come out
6 during the direct examinations.
7 I wanted to advise the Chamber of that at the start of my
8 cross-examination, but I didn't want to do it in front of the witness.
9 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you for that, Ms. Issa.
10 Do I understand correctly that you're planning to proceed now and
11 able to do so, but it may happen in the course of the day that you have to
12 seek an adjournment over until tomorrow --
13 MS. ISSA: Yes --
14 JUDGE PARKER: -- to enable to you prepare more adequately.
15 MS. ISSA: Yes, Your Honour, that's correct.
16 JUDGE PARKER: Very well. Thank you for letting us know that in
17 anticipation. It may not emerge, of course, but we will proceed now and
18 you will judge whether you reach the position you're anticipating.
19 MS. ISSA: Yes, Your Honour. Thank you.
20 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.
21 Could the witness be brought in.
22 [Trial Chamber confers]
23 [The witness entered court]
24 JUDGE PARKER: Ms. Issa.
25 MS. ISSA: Thank you.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours. Your Honours.
2 I wish to apologise for the last paragraph I said in the previous
3 session to the Prosecutor's office. I remembered during the break about
4 the activities during that time, that I was questioned about. So I can
5 confirm that, if memory serves, Mr. Kostov started performing his office
6 on the 5th of November, 2002, since for five years I didn't have the need
7 to remember this event. But during the recess, I refreshed my memory and
8 I remembered that Mr. Kostov started performing the office on the 5th of
9 November, and this is why I wish to apologise for the mistake that I have
11 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.
12 MS. ISSA: All right. Thank you.
13 JUDGE PARKER: Now, Ms. Issa, you're ready to move on.
14 MS. ISSA: Yes.
15 Q. Now, Mr. Keskovski, I would ask you to please go to page 12 of the
16 same document we were dealing with earlier, which is 65 ter 1139, your
17 personnel record.
18 MS. ISSA: And for the e-court, it's page 12, and the ERN is
20 Q. Now, on the 5th of November, after that decision was made by Hari
21 Kostov, you were asked to return some equipment and a weapon that were
22 issued to you by the Ministry of Interior. Is that correct?
23 A. I haven't received this request or a reprimand.
24 Q. Okay. I would ask you, then, Mr. Keskovski, to turn, please, to
25 page 17, ERN number N006-7447.
1 This is a document dated 14 October 2003, where the Ministry of
2 Interior is still looking for you to return your official identification.
3 Is that right?
4 A. What I see here is what is written. I haven't received this
6 Q. Well, as a member of the Ministry of Interior, Mr. Keskovski,
7 didn't you know that you were required to return the property of the
8 ministry upon your resignation?
9 A. Yes. We have mutual obligations. I have obligations towards the
10 ministry, and the ministry has obligations towards me.
11 Q. And if you turn, please, to page 12 in your document, which is
12 N006-7442 -- actually, if I can ask you to turn to page 13, N006-7443,
13 there's a further letter that says that -- which is dated the 29th of
14 June, 2005, requesting and obliging you to -- or, actually, that's a
15 letter from you requesting your material or your booklet, right?
16 A. It is correct. The booklet is requested so that I can exercise my
17 constitutional right, rights guaranteed by the constitution of the
18 Republic of Macedonia. As it is indicated, it is my request to exercise
19 my basic human rights guaranteed by the Republic of Macedonia, and I quote
20 to the Article of the labour law.
21 Q. So, clearly, at that time, Mr. Keskovski, at least in 2005, you
22 were clearly aware of the obligations, at least in respect of how it
23 pertained to the ministry's obligations to you. You asked for your
24 property back, didn't you?
25 A. Since I phoned the Ministry of Interior several times before, I
1 indicated that we had this problem with regards to my exercising of basic
2 human rights, right to employment and social insurance, for me and my
3 family. At that point in time, my child was three years old. I was
4 informed that the Ministry of Interior will not return me the employment
5 booklet up until we fully reconcile our relations, but this reconciliation
6 or restoration of obligations is the competence of Basic Court I.
7 The Ministry of Interior does not have the right, regardless of
8 any need they might have, to hold on to my employment booklet. Without
9 it, I couldn't exercise basic human rights guaranteed with the
10 constitution of the Republic of Macedonia and also by several
11 international legal instruments.
12 Q. Did you feel the right to hold on to the ministry's property then,
13 Mr. Keskovski?
14 MR. METTRAUX: Your Honour, I apologise for objecting. But I
15 think if my colleague wants to put that question to the witness, she
16 should first time inquire whether, in fact, he held on to any such
18 JUDGE PARKER: I'm sure the witness will be able to answer that,
19 if that is the position, Mr. Mettraux.
20 Carry on, Ms. Issa.
21 MS. ISSA:
22 Q. Did you feel that you had a right to hold on to property that
23 belonged to the ministry, Mr. Keskovski?
24 A. What are you referring to precisely?
25 Q. Well, let's go to page 9 of your personnel record, number
1 ERN range -- or ERN N006-7439.
2 There's an information which is dated 11 July 2005, one month
3 after you sent the letter to the ministry demanding your booklet to be
4 returned, which states that you still hadn't returned the property of the
5 ministry, and it describes the nature of the property that hadn't been
7 Do you see that?
8 A. I need to read it, if I may.
9 Q. Well, perhaps we can go through it together.
10 It relates to a request which was dated 30th June 2005 that was
11 submitted by you, and then it deals with the list of items which are
12 described as technical means and equipment of employees of the ministry;
13 and that you were informed to return this property and you hadn't returned
15 And if we see here, the nature of the property includes the
16 official ID of the ministry, mobile telephones, automatic rifle,
17 handcuffs, ammunition for a couple of revolvers, a pistol. And if you
18 turn the page, it refers to a bullet proof jacket, for example, and so on.
19 Do you see that?
20 A. Yes, I see it.
21 Q. And in the body of the letter, it says, on the second page, at
22 page 10 in your hard copy: "We would like to inform that already we had
23 sent a warning before charges on returning the official ID dated 14
24 October 2003."
25 Do you see that?
1 A. Yes, I see it.
2 Q. And it is signed by the assistant to the minister, Vesna Dorevska.
3 Do you see that?
4 A. I see that as well.
5 Q. As a member of the ministry, Mr. Keskovski, weren't you required
6 to uphold the law?
7 A. With regards to the list indicated in this document, and I will
8 say again, this is a document that I see for the first time now, because
9 you omitted this part which states that all delivery notes had returned.
10 The service was not proper. The ministry has not found me. So, before I
11 finish, I will say that these were all means or instruments that I had
12 during performing my duty as the head of the security for the president of
13 the state. And you can see here that I had two Nokia, to Ericsson mobile
14 phone, three Nokia chargers, holder for Nokia, holder for Ericsson, three
15 earphone sets, which meant that I had -- I was issued with them on behalf
16 of the entire group in charge of the security of the president.
17 With the administration of the group about the sector for the
18 security of the president in the presence of two inspectors, in July we
19 handed over all means that I owed to the Ministry of Interior with regards
20 to all means or equipment that I was owing, so to speak, the ministry in
21 order to equip the group.
22 As I said in my statement previously, when I was questioned by the
23 Defence, in the list of phones I was issued with, I have three or four --
24 there are three or four under my name, but it was not me using them. So,
25 obviously, this is improper management of the administration in the
1 Ministry of Interior; and, due to this reason, I can't return something
2 that I don't have the possession of.
3 And I said, precisely, in my request that you read out, that with
4 regards to all necessary documents and all equipment, I indicated what my
5 address was, what my ID card number was, my home number, and my mobile
6 phone number. These are data contained in my application. Never has
7 anyone from the Ministry of Interior gotten in touch with me with regard
8 to this data.
9 But if you read further, this letter that you are now present to
10 go me, please kindly read it out before the Chamber. Read the remaining
11 portion of the text, where it says that the ministry has no right to hold
12 on my employment booklet. So the Ministry of Interior was not upholding
13 the law, consciously Do you believe that the Ministry of Interior should
14 violate the law?
15 Q. Are you suggesting, Mr. Keskovski, that if the Ministry of
16 Interior held onto your booklet, then it was your right to hold on to
17 their equipment? Is that what you're suggesting by your last statement?
18 A. I said that a committee was established, and the equipment was
19 handed over to the sector for security of president in July 2002, June or
20 July 2002. The Ministry of Interior had records in the finance sector.
21 This means that they should present evidence that I was still owing this
22 equipment. This is not an evidence, this is not a proof that I was owing
23 the equipment, because an evidence should be enclosed, the issuance list
24 with my signature.
25 The Ministry of Interior could indicate that I-- I also owe a
1 hand-rocket launcher or a tank, but this would not be the truth. Due to
2 these reasons, I addressed them and I asked to reconcile our demands to
3 level that, but this hasn't been done. The only demand that I had
4 received were 400 or 600 dollars which are a contentious matter because
5 the ministry has sent a petition, but that was also disputed because we --
6 two Official Notes are not present, and they should be part of the
7 evidence there.
8 Q. Did you mention in your request to the ministry in June 2005 that
9 or did you tell them that you didn't have this equipment, Mr. Keskovski?
10 A. Could I turn the page, and let's read the letter. It is stated
11 there precisely.
12 Q. Well, the letter I'm referring to is your request in 2005. It's
13 at page 13 of your booklet.
14 A. I don't have it here in Macedonian. Could I be shown it on the
15 display --
16 Q. It's ERN --
17 A. -- so that I'm able to read it in Macedonian.
18 Q. Certainly.
19 MS. ISSA: It's ERN N006-7443, if we can please have that
20 displayed in e-court.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I have indicated precisely: "With
22 regards to any additional demand you have in relation to my case, please
23 inform me in a timely fashion at my personal address or the telephone
24 indicated here," and I have also given my mobile phone number, which means
25 I have not avoided any obligations that they believed I had.
1 I am speaking here, again, about their demands, not demands that
2 are realistic. I can't restore something that I haven't had. If I had an
3 automatic gun, the Ministry of Interior would find it illegal possession
4 of weapons. This is an incrimination under the Criminal Code of the
5 Republic of Macedonia. That would mean that the Ministry of Interior will
6 make a search of my premises and will move to have these weapons
7 confiscated. This is it not a request to restore a pen or a pencil, so
8 obviously they had problems with their demands.
9 JUDGE PARKER: Now Mr. Mettraux.
10 MR. METTRAUX: Thank you, Your Honour. I simply wanted to
11 indicate that, in our view, Your Honour, the question is quite unfair, at
12 least the way it was phrased, asking the witness whether he had referred
13 to that particular letter or request in his own letter. He has indicated
14 on a number of occasion that he did not receive that information, and it
15 is actually explicitly mentioned in the information itself. And if Your
16 Honour would turn to page 18 of this same file, there's a note or an
17 information which specifically states that the warning sent to inter alia
18 Mr. Keskovski were returned back as of the wrong addresses.
19 So, in our submission, Your Honour, the suggestion which the
20 Prosecution is making that Mr. Keskovski would have been aware of the
21 content of that information or request is inaccurate and wrong, based on
22 the information contained in this file.
23 JUDGE PARKER: The witness had already mentioned that he had not
24 received them, Mr. Mettraux.
25 MS. ISSA:
1 Q. My question, Mr. Keskovski, to be perhaps more precise, is when
2 you did finally -- when contact was finally made with the Ministry of
3 Interior, and you informed them of your cellular phone number and your
4 contact details, you didn't actually indicate in that letter that you
5 didn't have any property that belonged to the ministry, did you?
6 A. This is an application I'm making to have my employment booklet
7 back, and this is not meant to justify whether I have any property that
8 I'm holding on to. So there is nothing to respond to when they have not
9 requested anything from me. When I called them on the phone, they told me
10 that there is a petition against me, and that until this is resolved, they
11 will not give my employment booklet to me, and that is in breach of the
12 labour law.
13 So I conferred with my attorney, and we sent two such letters to
14 the Ministry of Interior where we cite to the labour law. I really am
15 presently involved in a court procedure which is the legal way of
16 communication between two parties that have a dispute regarding their
17 demands. A unilateral document could not be valid in trials, in hearings
18 in the courts of the Republic of Macedonia.
19 Q. Mr. Keskovski--
20 A. These are the reasons why I asked that my legal rights are
21 respected. Yes, please go on.
22 Q. I will stop you there because I think you have gone beyond
23 answering the question.
24 What did you mean earlier when you said that the Ministry of
25 Interior had to level and reconcile your demands? You and the minister of
1 the interior had to reconcile or level your demands, what did you mean by
3 A. Exactly this: For all your other requests or claims. They did
4 not inform me at all about their requests. They said that there was a
5 petition, and you can see this with the legal sector at the ministry. And
6 while the petition was ongoing, they would not return my employment
7 booklet. I did not receive personally any such claims. I did not sign,
8 nor was it submitted to me. It's the same as the decision which you showed
9 me. This is not one which I signed. My letter has my signature, and I
10 can attest to this.
11 Q. So your position, if I can put it in a nutshell, is that the
12 ministry, after having sent all these letters to you, demanding that you
13 return the equipment, is simply wrong in that you kept any of this
14 equipment. Right?
15 A. I cannot comment on anything which the ministry has undertaken. I
16 can comment about my actions. I do not have such things with me. There
17 is a commission; and, in the course of 2002, the reconciliation was made.
18 Q. Okay. Moving, then, on to another topic.
19 When you worked with the -- as the assistant to the DBK sector,
20 part of your duties were -- was to collect or gather information. Is that
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. And part of your duties was to write reports. Is that right?
24 A. No. My task was assistant director for operative works, which
25 means that I received information which I had to read to be on top of the
1 work and to be able to consult with the director.
2 If I had understanding of some kind, then these were with reports,
3 as well as all other employees at the Ministry of Interior. All employees
4 at the MOI have the task, when obtaining certain information, to send a
5 note about them, which will be further forwarded.
6 Q. So you reviewed the reports of other employees. Is that what
7 you're telling us?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. And in your review of these reports that related to operative
10 matters, as you say, you had to be as careful and as accurate as possible
11 in attempting to see whether or not all the relevant information was
12 placed in these reports, right?
13 A. One could say that, yes.
14 Q. And when you refer to operative works, Mr. Keskovski, are you
15 referring to matters that are of a criminal nature?
16 A. All knowledge regarding perpetrated crimes which pertain to the
17 domain of the directorate for security and counter-intelligence.
18 Q. So that would relate to serious matters or serious criminal
19 activity that was being investigated by the DBK, right?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. And, therefore, it would be important to be as careful, detailed,
22 and accurate in ensuring that the relevant information regarding a
23 particular investigation was made or was written in -- in the reports,
25 A. Yes. Prior to this coming to us, this would have to be done
2 Q. But you, as the supervisor, had the overall responsibility to
3 ensure the accuracy and detail in these reports, didn't you?
4 A. How can I know in my office whether these are relevant or not?
5 The relevance has to be established previously. This is information
6 gained on the ground.
7 Q. But this is information that you may receive from your
8 subordinates as to the -- what was being carried out in a particular
9 investigation and what may have seemed relevant in a particular
10 investigation of criminal activity; and you may have some input,
11 therefore, in the reports that your subordinates were preparing. Right?
12 A. I did not have subordinates at the Ministry of Interior while
13 working with the UBK [as interpreted]. Therefore, this is not control
14 over my subordinates. The UBK [as interpreted] had heads of sectors, and
15 they were directly responsible to the director of the directorate for
16 security and counter-intelligence. I was the assistant to the director,
17 which does not, in turn, mean that I had subordinates in the chain of
19 Q. Okay. But, nevertheless, you've told us that part of your job was
20 to review these reports, so you had some responsibility over their
21 content; and as assistant to the director of the DBK, that was a pretty
22 important position, wasn't it?
23 A. This position, generally speaking, is entitled "assistant" which
24 should be no the office of the director. It is not a very high-level
25 position, a very senior position in the UBK [as interpreted] because all
1 senior positions, according to the hierarchy, is in the hands of the head
2 of the sector who are directly responsible for the director. Therefore,
3 my competencies did not include subordinates. I only read the reports;
4 and if I had certain comment, I made comments on them with the director.
5 Q. But you were conscious and careful in your work, were you -- or I
6 should say, were you conscious and careful in carrying out your tasks?
7 A. I would say yes.
8 Q. Did you compile reports for the director based on reports that you
9 received from other members of the DBK?
10 A. This was not part of my work tasks.
11 Q. But when you received the reports from other members of the DBK,
12 did you read the reports carefully?
13 A. The reports which I received were also received by the director
14 of the directorate. I was not the filter.
15 Q. Mr. Keskovski --
16 A. Please.
17 Q. -- that wasn't my question. My question was: When you received
18 these reports, did you read them carefully. It's a very simple question.
19 A. What you're asking me now, the answer to this is yes. I read them
21 Q. Did you check the reports for problems or mistakes that needed to
22 be followed up weapon you read them?
23 A. I did not read many reports so that I can respond to you more
24 specifically on this question. I was on this position for a very short
25 period of time --
1 Q. Mr. Keskovski --
2 A. -- in which you're asking me about.
3 Q. -- that wasn't my question. My question was: The reports that
4 did you read, during the time when you were the assistant to the director
5 of the DBK, did you check the reports for problems or mistakes that may
6 have needed following up.
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Thank you.
9 MS. ISSA: If I can ask that 65 ter 1290, please, be displayed on
11 Q. And for your purposes, Mr. Keskovski, this would be at tab 1 of
12 the Prosecution binder.
13 A. Binder 1?
14 Q. Yes, binder 1.
15 MS. ISSA: Perhaps if I can ask the usher's assistance.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Please give me a moment.
17 I'm fine. Just please direct me to where I should be turning.
18 Please point out the tab which I should be looking at.
19 MS. ISSA:
20 Q. I will momentarily, Mr. Keskovski. Just one moment, please.
21 MS. ISSA: If I can just ask for 65 ter 1290, the OTP statement of
22 Mr. Keskovski, to please be displayed on the e-court screen.
23 Q. Now, Mr. Keskovski, if I can draw your attention to the document
24 that's displayed on your screen, which is also found at tab 1 in the
1 Is that your statement?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. And if you look at the very bottom of the page, that's -- is that
4 your signature on the bottom of the -- of the page?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. And that first page described your particulars. It has your name,
7 your date of birth, and it also indicates that the languages that were
8 spoken during the course of the statement include your language,
9 Macedonian, and English. Right?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And the language that was used was Macedonian and English. Is
12 that right?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. And you actually speak English pretty -- quite well. Is that
15 right, Mr. Keskovski?
16 A. Yes, one could say that.
17 Q. We saw a diagram that had you drawn earlier, and, in fact, you
18 draw the diagram in English, right?
19 A. Yes.
20 MS. ISSA: If I can please ask for the next page to be displayed
21 on the statement.
22 Q. Now, is that your signature at the bottom and your initials?
23 A. Yes.
24 MS. ISSA: If I can ask for the next page, please, to be
1 Q. And that's your signature as well, at the bottom of that page,
3 A. Yes.
4 MS. ISSA: If I can ask for the following page to be displayed,
6 Q. That's your signature as well?
7 A. Yes.
8 MS. ISSA: If I can ask for the following page, then, please.
9 Q. And that's your signature.
10 MS. ISSA: That is N001-4889, for the record.
11 Q. Right, Mr. Keskovski?
12 A. Yes.
13 MS. ISSA: And if we can show all the pages successively.
14 Q. Can you please identify your signature.
15 You have, in fact, perhaps to speed things up, you have signed
16 every page in this statement, haven't you?
17 A. Yes.
18 MS. ISSA: If we can please show the last page of the statement --
19 actually, if we can show the last signature page, it's N001-4898.
20 It's the previous page, Madam Registrar.
21 Q. Now, that's your signature dated 7 February 2005, and this is
22 signed at the bottom of the witness acknowledgment which reads: "This
23 statement, consisting of 15 pages, has been read over to me in the
24 Macedonian language and is true to the best of my knowledge and
1 "I have given this statement voluntarily and am aware that it may
2 be used in legal proceedings before the International Criminal Tribunal
3 for the former Yugoslavia for the prosecution of persons responsible for
4 serious violations of the international law committed in the former
5 Yugoslavia. I am also aware that I may be called to give evidence in
6 public before the Tribunal."
7 Do you see that?
8 A. Yes, I see it.
9 Q. And that's your signature at the bottom, right?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. When you gave your statement, Mr. Keskovski, did you try to be as
12 truthful and as accurate as possible?
13 A. I answered to all questions posed by the investigator, and I think
14 I was pretty elaborate in my answers. I did not refuse to answer any of
15 the questions I was asked.
16 Q. That wasn't my question, Mr. Keskovski. My question was: When
17 you gave this statement and you signed it, did you try to be as truthful
18 and as accurate as possible?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. You knew that the investigators were investigating a serious
21 criminal matter into the events in Ljuboten when they interviewed you,
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. You were careful in providing your answers to questions, were you?
25 A. Yes, about the questions which I was asked.
1 Q. And you didn't want to leave any important details out of your
2 responses or your answers, did you?
3 A. I had not forgotten anything on purpose. I feel that I have not
4 omitted anything or forgotten anything.
5 Q. And this statement was given in 2005, right?
6 A. Yes, in 2005.
7 Q. So the events in question would have been fresher in your mind at
8 that stage than perhaps they are today. Would that be fair?
9 A. For me, it is the same.
10 Q. Okay. Now, you mentioned in your examination-in-chief that Ljube
11 Boskoski was the best man at your wedding. Do you recall that?
12 A. Yes. He was the best man at my wedding.
13 Q. Being someone's best man, particularly in your culture, is very
14 significant, isn't it?
15 A. Yes, before the law.
16 Q. Well, it's also very significant on a -- from a personal
17 relationship perspective, isn't it?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. And you were quite close to Ljube Boskoski, which is why you
20 picked him as your best man, didn't you?
21 A. We knew each other well. We were not very close.
22 Q. Well, you say that you continue to have a relationship with
23 Ljube's family, don't you?
24 A. Since then onward, then one could say yes.
25 Q. So it would be fair to say that you're quite close to Ljube
1 Boskoski and his family. Right?
2 A. We have good relations -- a good relationship, yes.
3 Q. Well, in fact, you have a pretty important relationship, given
4 that he was your best man at your wedding, don't you?
5 A. Are you speaking now about Mr. Boskoski or his family? The
6 relationship between Mr. Boskoski and myself, or my relationship with his
8 Q. I'm referring to the relationship between Mr. Boskoski and
10 A. I have no contact with Mr. Boskoski because currently, or since
11 August 2004, he is in the prison in Scheveningen, of your Court, in the
13 I do have a relationship with -- with the family, of course with
14 the wife of Mr. Boskoski and three underaged children who are in Macedonia
15 alone. I contact with them from time to time to see whether they need
16 anything or how they're doing as a family.
17 Q. And you continued your contact and your relationship with
18 Mr. Boskoski's family because of your relationship and your friendship
19 with Mr. Boskoski. Isn't that right?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. You said that you picked Mr. Boskoski as your best man at your
22 wedding because you believed him to be an honest person. Do you recall
24 A. Yes, this is correct.
25 Q. Would you consider yourself, Mr. Keskovski, an honest person?
1 A. Yes. This is part of my code of behaviour which I have been
2 adhering to for the past 31 years.
3 Q. So, as an honest person, you wouldn't try -- you wouldn't lie or
4 attempt to evade questions that are being asked of you?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. I'd like to now move on to another topic.
7 In your examination-in-chief, you've explained that the sector for
8 security for the president was a unit within the Ministry of Interior.
9 Do you recall that?
10 A. Yes.
11 MS. ISSA: And if we can please display the diagram that the
12 witness drew and referred to yesterday, 65 ter 9.2, on to the e-court.
13 MR. METTRAUX: I apologise, Your Honour. I may be wrong; but if
14 the Prosecutor is trying to show, that must be the other diagram, I
15 understand, and it would be Exhibit 1D317, if my understanding is correct.
16 MS. ISSA: Yes. Thank you for the assistance. It should be
17 65 ter 9.1.
18 Q. Now, as -- now you drew this diagram which depicts, as you
19 explained, the organisation of your sector as it was organised in 2001,
21 A. Yes, this is right.
22 Q. And it was you, as head of the sector, who decided how the sector
23 should be organised. Isn't that right?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. And just so that we're clear, you, as the head of the sector,
1 assigned the two deputies. You picked them as your two deputies, as well
2 as assigned one of the members of the ARM as your assistant. Isn't that
4 A. As for the two deputies, this was done in consultation with the
5 president. These are the deputies who would follow the president in the
6 case of my absence. They would replace me in carrying out my duties. As
7 for the army, I have no right to request who would be the head from among
8 the rank of the army, because the army, in accordance with the law, the
9 ARM puts someone who was an acquaintance of the president to that
10 position, and I cooperated with him as my tasks obligated me to do.
11 Q. Well, we will come to that in a moment, Mr. Keskovski, but it was
12 you who decided which positions each person within your sector should be
13 posted to as the head of the sector. Isn't that right?
14 A. Not on each of these positions. I did not put them on -- in all
15 of these positions. There are some very sensitive tasks involved with
16 some of these positions, and these are sometimes of a private nature.
17 After all, this is the security of the president of his person and his
18 family. I was in constant consultation with the president about engaging
19 persons who carry out tasks of a sensitive nature.
20 For the most part, then, the answer is yes, but not all of them.
21 Not all of them were made on the basis of my personal decisions. In some
22 cases, I consulted with the president and I took into account his
23 considerations, which I think is a normal way of communicating.
24 Q. But, ultimately, it wasn't the president who decided how the
25 sector was to be structured, was it, despite your consultations with him?
1 A. With regards to the structure, I was personally responsible how
2 this will be organised, yes. I created it; I implemented it. We're now
3 discussing, and my previous answer pertains to, the appointment of a
4 persons. But with regards to the structure, yes. I appointed the
5 structure; I implemented the structure.
6 Q. And when you say you implemented the structure, that includes the
7 persons that were, for example, your deputies, doesn't it?
8 A. Are you referring to the appointment?
9 Q. I'm referring to the way in which you organised and the people
10 that you picked as your deputies within the structure of your sector.
11 A. The deputies as we have them here in the chart, as well all the
12 other individuals appointed, apart from the sensitive tasks. As I told
13 you, there were sensitive tasks within the functioning of this sector. We
14 had special training and selection, in cooperation with the American
15 Secret Service or the counter-terrorist training group. In cooperation
16 with them, we had selection, which also involved the president of the
17 state. Naturally --
18 Q. Well --
19 A. -- the selection was made and the two deputies were appointed.
20 They were members of the professional special unit Tiger.
21 Q. Okay. Now, you keep referring to "we," Mr. Keskovski. But in
22 fact, you, as the head of the sector, made the final decision, didn't you?
23 A. I, yes. I can make the final decisions, but still I need to tell
24 you and I have told you several times already. Regarding some issues, I
25 had consultations with the president, so that I can follow his requests.
1 Q. Mr. Keskovski, you mentioned that and I would ask you to please
2 answer my questions as directly and precisely as you can, okay?
3 Now you mentioned, Mr. Keskovski, that there were some sensitive
4 issues in dealing with the security matters of the president; and, in
5 fact, the job of security operation is actually a very complex matter that
6 involves more than simply ensuring the personal security of the president
7 as an individual. Isn't that so?
8 A. Do you want me to answer briefly or broadly?
9 Q. I would like you to answer briefly. I'd like to you answer my
11 A. Yes. The security for the president, as I stated answering
12 previous questions relating to this, is a complex matter, which
13 presupposes providing security for the president as institution, not an
14 individual only. It involves many tasks of various nature related to the
15 security and safety.
16 Q. And the reason that's it's a complex matter is, in part, this may
17 seem obvious, because the president was a very prominent figure in the
18 country, right?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. So with respect to other prominent figures, such as the prime
21 minister, for example, the organisation and the security relating to other
22 prominent figures is also a complex matter, isn't it?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. And the head of security for the prime minister was Vlatko
25 Stefanovski. Isn't that right?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. And the head of the president of the parliament security section
3 was someone called "Aco," right?
4 A. Yes, that's right.
5 Q. Do you recall Aco's last name?
6 A. I can't remember it at the moment. I knew him only as "Aco." I
7 had no contacts with him, as a colleague.
8 Q. The head of the security for the Ministry of Interior was Zoran
9 Trajkovski, right?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And because of the complexity of security relating to prominent
12 figures, such as the president, you, as the head of your sector, would
13 have regular communication with, say, the head of security for the prime
14 minister, for example, wouldn't you?
15 A. No.
16 Q. You've never communicated with the head of the security for the
17 prime minister?
18 A. Rarely, very rarely. When we had some joint official business or
19 events that we covered together, so to say. But very rarely.
20 Q. Well, when you had these joint official business or events that
21 you covered together, you needed to communicate with other heads, such as
22 the head of security for the prime minister or the head of the security of
23 Minister Boskoski, in order to ensure that your coordinated effort of
24 securing these prominent figures was effective. Isn't that so?
25 A. During any movement, we called that "movement," or during any
1 operation that needed to happen, when the president of the state was
2 present and the other state officials as well, the security was in charge
3 of the security of the state of the president. Any agreements between
4 various institutions and their security sectors took place between the
5 advances. This is the -- this is a professional expert matter. The
6 advance goes first; and, at the same place, the advance of the prime
7 minister and the advance of the president meet, and then they carry out
8 all tasks necessary for the operation.
9 If someone wishes to have personal contact with me, that would be
10 something else, but I have had never had questions or contacts related to
11 this issue.
12 Q. Well, in order for you to carry out what you refer to as advances
13 with -- that may relate to the prime minister, for example, meeting or
14 having -- going to a joint event with the president, surely you would have
15 to communicate with the head of security of the prime minister, wouldn't
17 A. There's no need. I explained, before every movement, the advance
18 team is at the location at the minimum of two or three hours in advance,
19 depending on the seriousness of the event and the location. It could be
20 that there they are there 48 hours in advance.
21 At the same time, sooner or later, the security of the prime
22 minister has its advance team that has its own tasks, and they coordinate
23 there on the spot between themselves. But, as I said also in the
24 statement previously, the security, if the president is present, the
25 security is in the hands of the security of the president, because the
1 Presidency is highest institution in the state. It could not be that the
2 security of the prime minister guarantees the security and the safety of
3 the president of the state, because the president is the highest
5 Q. But because the president is the highest institution, as you say,
6 you would receive and release information, perhaps, regarding other
7 prominent figures that may be present at a particular function or an event
8 that the president is -- is attending. Isn't that so?
9 A. That is a matter for the both protocols, and that is not within my
10 realm of competence. If you wish, I can explain precisely how the system
12 Q. Are you saying, Mr. Keskovski, that if another prominent figure
13 was present and attending the same function as the president, that you
14 wouldn't have to coordinate your efforts together with other security
15 services? Is that what you're telling us?
16 A. I told you already that if, at this location where we are now, the
17 president of the state needs to arrive, but at the same time the prime
18 minister of the state needs to arrive, this location here and now is
19 secured by the security, by the security sector of the president, with all
20 measures and necessary activities that need to be undertaken. All other
21 high officials present there at the meeting would be covered by those
22 security measure, regardless of whether they come from Macedonia or
23 abroad. I believe that I had already told you this.
24 Q. Well, Mr. Keskovski, wouldn't you be -- wouldn't have you to
25 necessarily communicate with, for example, the heads of these other
1 security services in order to make decisions regarding the security of the
2 president and other figures attending the same function?
3 A. Obviously, we don't understand one another.
4 I received information with regards to the security situation,
5 regardless of the location. I received information from all relevant
6 services who have been given the task of informing us. So, on the basis
7 of those information, we made decision regarding the strength and the
8 level of security that needs to be achieved at that spot. There was no
9 need for me to have contact with individuals in charge of security of
10 other high officials in the Republic of Macedonia, and that is a fact. I
11 can't tell you that I had contacts when I haven't had contacts.
12 Q. Would you -- when you say you receive information from all
13 relevant services, would those services include, for example, the local
14 police at an OVR or at the SVR level?
15 A. I said "other security services." I believe that the translation
16 was not proper.
17 With regards to the information on the security situation, we
18 received the information from services in charge of matters such nature,
19 UBK, intelligence agency, and the sector for security within the Ministry
20 of Defence. With regards to physical and in depth security to a given
21 area, we involved members of the Ministry of Interior, by the same time
22 also members of the Ministry of Defence, at various locations where there
23 was need of that.
24 Q. So is my -- is the answer to my question, yes, there are times
25 when you would involve members of the Ministry of Interior, depending on
1 the situation?
2 A. Yes. We did include or services from the Ministry of Interior,
3 the Ministry of Defence as well, when there was a need of that.
4 Q. Would you say that the -- the job of a security operation is a
5 creative job, Mr. Keskovski?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. And it's a job that, because it involves the protection of the
8 highest member of the state, it would unite other security structures and
9 institutions in the country, wouldn't it?
10 A. Yes, all of them.
11 Q. And because of the complexity of the security situation,
12 sometimes, in order to get the job done, leaders like the president had to
13 be creative and flexible. Isn't that so?
14 A. Could you please be more precise in your question?
15 What do you understand under flexible, that they need to be
17 Q. Well, for example, Mr. Keskovski, isn't it true that the reason
18 that your section was manned with men from the military units was because
19 the Ministry of Interior, at that time, was simply unable to provide the
20 manpower? Isn't that right?
21 A. I believe that, in my statement also given to the investigators, I
22 stated that we had a meeting between the higher instances of the
23 ministries of the interior; assistant to the ministry, Gacovski; and head
24 for security, at that time Dorevski; and the advisor for national security
25 of the president. The advisor requested that the number of security team
1 members within the sector is increased. The Ministry of Interior stated
2 that at the moment they were not able to fulfil this demand, and then the
3 reinforcement was sought from the army.
4 Is this what you wanted to ask me about?
5 Q. So the answer to my question, then would, have been "yes." Is
6 that right?
7 MR. METTRAUX: Your Honour.
8 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Mettraux.
9 MR. METTRAUX: Your Honour, We didn't object the first time round
10 to the question. I mean, Mr. Keskovski has asked for clarification of
11 what was meant by that. The basis of or objection also, Your Honour, is
12 that in the original question, which is at line 23 and 24 of page 58, the
13 Prosecutor put the question as "leader like the president." I think my
14 colleague should be more precise.
15 If she wishes to ask about the flexibility or creativity of the
16 president, we would obviously not object to this line of questioning. But
17 if she wishes to ask about other individuals and creativity, I believe the
18 basis should be established first to see whether Mr. Keskovski has any
19 knowledge of that.
20 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you, Mr. Mettraux.
21 MS. ISSA: Well, Your Honour, I don't believe that any of my
22 questions were improper, and I think that if Mr. Mettraux needs
23 clarification, he can certainly do so in re-examination.
24 JUDGE PARKER: Carry on, please.
25 MS. ISSA:
1 Q. Part of the reason, Mr. Keskovski, that your unit needed more men
2 in 2001 was because it was a complex security situation at that time.
3 Isn't that right?
4 A. Yes, that's right.
5 Q. And to get the job done, they pulled men from the ARM, or the
6 army, and placed them under your command. Right?
7 A. No. They were not employed. They were just retained or seconded
8 from the army. There was no new employment. They were placed under my
9 command, yes.
10 Q. So they were placed under your command, but, as you say, seconded
11 from the army, right? They were placed under your command for the purpose
12 of dealing with matters that related to your sector specifically, right?
13 A. Yes. That's right, with specific tasks related to the security of
14 the president of the Republic of Macedonia and the supreme commander of
15 the army of the Republic of Macedonia.
16 Q. So, with respect to tasks or with respect to, perhaps, tasks that
17 did not relate to the sector of the president, they, men from the ARM,
18 answered to their commanders within the army. Isn't that right?
19 A. I can't understand your question, because they were retained only
20 to provide security for the president. They had no other working tasks.
21 So there was no need for them to send reports that are not related to --
22 there was no task within the remit that is not related to the security of
23 the president.
24 Q. But they continued to be employed by the army, didn't they?
25 A. Yes, that's right.
1 Q. And they received their salary from the army. Isn't that so?
2 A. Yes, that's right. I believe that it is written in the order as
3 well, that that is the duty of the Ministry of Defence.
4 Q. So they were still under the army chain of command. Isn't that
6 A. If you think that they received orders from the army, then the
7 hierarchy line, no, that is not correct. They were part of the army, but
8 they were placed under the command of the head for security. This was the
9 request of the supreme commander, and it was strictly forbidden that any
10 army reports are sent to the higher structures of the army because of the
11 risk of leaking information that might be of complex nature, and there was
12 no need for the army to be aware of that from a political viewpoint.
13 That is one of the principles of this sector for security,
14 regardless of what members of it are concerned. We had members of the
15 security agency and UBK intelligence agency in order to better coordinate
16 the information relevant for the security and safety of the president of
17 the state, but this did not mean that they needed to send reports relating
18 to all events.
19 Q. Once again, I think that you are evading my questions, and I'd ask
20 you to be brief and precise and direct in your answers.
21 A. I believe that you did not ask the question correctly. So I would
22 kindly ask you to ask me more specifically, precisely, because your
23 question had sort of a double meaning. So ask the question specifically,
24 and I will answer anything that you wish to learn from me, and I don't
25 wish to avoid any of your questions.
1 Q. Weren't these men from the ARM ordered or the army ordered to go
2 to the Ministry of Interior by the army?
3 A. What do you understand under "going to the Ministry of Interior"?
4 Q. Well, they were ordered to go to work within your sector, which is
5 part of the Ministry of Interior. Isn't that so?
6 A. You can't say to go to work with the Ministry of Interior. A
7 person works where the contract specifies they work and where they receive
8 the salary from. They were retained by the supreme commander of the armed
9 forces through an order, and they belonged to the units where they
10 received their salary from, but they were placed under the command of the
11 person that the supreme commander specifies in the order.
12 Q. Mr. Keskovski, they were placed upped your command, and you were
13 part of the Ministry of Interior. Isn't that so? That is a very precise
15 A. That is true.
16 Q. Thank you.
17 A. But you said were they were going to the ministry, and that is a
18 different question.
19 JUDGE PARKER: We have reached time for the second break,
20 Ms. Issa. If the court officer could assist the witness out, please.
21 [The witness stands down]
22 JUDGE PARKER: Ms. Issa, we have waited with considerable patience
23 for the whole of that last session, an hour and a half. The Chamber is
24 concerned that a great deal of time is being spent with very little
25 effective productivity. Your questions need to be directed more to the
1 issues directly concerning this case, and the whole process needs to be
2 quicker or else we fear that this cross-examination could be very
3 considerably and unnecessarily prolonged.
4 If you would be good enough to take those comments under
5 consideration and attempt to simply move much more quickly and
6 effectively, we would be grateful.
7 Thank you.
8 We resume now at 1.00.
9 --- Recess taken at 12.32 p.m.
10 [The witness entered court]
11 --- On resuming at 1.02 p.m.
12 JUDGE PARKER: Ms. Issa.
13 MS. ISSA: Thank you, Your Honour.
14 Q. Mr. Keskovski, I'm going to move on to another topic now.
15 You mentioned, in your examination-in-chief, that Zivko Gacovski
16 was the chief of the security department in the Ministry of Interior,
18 A. Zivko Gacovski.
19 Q. He was, in fact, in charged of the security for, not just your
20 sector, but for VIP persons, the minister, the prime minister, and the
21 president. Is that right?
22 A. And for foreign delegation; yes, the foreign delegations as well.
23 Q. But you say that you didn't report to him. That was your
24 examination-in-chief, right?
25 A. Yes, this is right.
1 Q. And that is because you didn't have a good relationship with Zivko
2 Gacovski, did you?
3 A. No. This is not because of this.
4 Q. But you didn't have a good relationship with Zivko Gacovski, did
6 A. We didn't have good relations -- a good relationship from a
7 professional point of view, not from a private one.
8 Q. And Zivko Gacovski's superiors were the minister of the interior
9 and Goran Mitevski, right?
10 A. I believe, yes, but at a different time, in different positions,
11 according to the systemization. The first time, I believe, he was
12 appointed by the government and was responsible only before the minister.
13 So you have to ask me specifically about the time-frame, and then I can
14 give you a concrete answer.
15 Q. Mr. Keskovski --
16 A. Do you mean of 2001?
17 Q. Yes. I will be speaking about 2001 the entire time, and should I
18 change that I will tell you that the time-frame is different, but we're
19 only dealing with matters that relate to 2001.
20 So, at that time, those were Minister Boskoski and Goran Mitevski
21 as his superiors. Correct?
22 A. Yes, according to the new systemization in the second half of
24 Q. Now, although, you didn't communicate or report to Zivko Gacovski,
25 you did communicate, regarding matters that related to your sector, with
1 Minister Boskoski, didn't you?
2 A. Our requests from the Ministry of Interior, in regards to this, I
3 communicated with the director for public security, Mr. Goran Mitevski;
4 and in his absence, or when he was absent, I requested the assistance from
5 the minister, Mr. Ljube Boskoski.
6 Q. And, in fact, you had an excellent relationship or communication
7 with Minister Boskoski, a better one, perhaps, than the one had you with
8 the previous minister, Dosta Dimovska. Is that right?
9 A. Yes. This is right, and I think I made this statement before the
11 Q. Yes. And that's because Minister Boskoski was an effective
12 manager, wasn't he?
13 A. This is because, at the request of the president, we had a meeting
14 between the minister of the interior, the director for public security,
15 and myself to improve the security --
16 Q. Mr. Keskovski, my question was: Your relationship with Minister
17 Boskoski, relating to matters in your sector, was a very good one, had an
18 excellent communication, and that was because Minister Boskoski was an
19 effective manager, wasn't he?
20 A. I can respond "yes" to your question, but I have to elaborate why
21 this is so. You may have one; I have an altogether different opinion.
22 Q. Well, I'm only asking you to respond to my questions,
23 Mr. Keskovski. I appreciate that you may have different opinions.
24 Now, turning to another topic, in 2001, the Ohrid Framework
25 Agreement was scheduled to be signed on 13 August, 2001, right?
1 A. In Skopje, yes.
2 Q. To be signed in Skopje, that's correct. And the president spent a
3 month, from approximately the 25th or the end of July to 10 August, in the
4 course of negotiations regarding the Ohrid Framework Agreement, didn't he?
5 A. Yes, this is correct.
6 Q. And, initially, the president and his entourage, which included
7 you, went to Ohrid with the intention of staying a couple of days. Isn't
8 that right?
9 A. This is the right. We went in the middle of July with the intent
10 of staying three days. We stayed as long as you said we did.
11 Q. And that was, in part, because the president was under enormous
12 pressure from the international community to reach an agreement to
13 essentially avoid a civil war, wasn't he?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. And the president was personally, as far as you know, very
16 concerned about the success of the agreement, wasn't he?
17 A. Yes, this is correct.
18 Q. He worked very hard at ensuring that it was ultimately signed on
19 13 August, didn't he?
20 A. Yes, this is correct.
21 Q. Now, you've told us, yesterday, in your testimony, that, on the
22 10th of August, you received some information from Chief of Staff General
23 Stamboliski that an attack had been carried out on the Ljubotenski Bacila
24 mining incident, causing the death of eight soldiers, right?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. You said that at the time you were in the company of the
2 president, right?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. You also said that you passed the phone to the president and the
5 president spoke to General Stamboliski directly and issued him an order,
7 A. I handed the telephone over to the president, and the chief of the
8 General Staff conveyed to him what he previously conveyed to me.
9 Q. And --
10 A. I never mentioned anything about an order.
11 Q. Well, you said, Mr. Keskovski, that the president was angry
12 because, as you say - this is at page 60 of yesterday's transcript -
13 that: "We had Karpalak on the 8th where ten members of the Macedonian
14 army died."
15 Do you recall that?
16 A. Yes, this is correct.
17 Q. Then you said, at page 62 of the transcript, that the president
18 ordered General Stamboliski immediately to send immediate orders to
19 eliminate all terrorist groupations in Macedonia.
20 Do you recall that?
21 A. This was the position of the national security council which held
22 a session. At the same time, this is an order of the president for action
23 on the part of the army.
24 Q. So you're sure, Mr. Keskovski, that the president issued this
25 order to General Stamboliski in your presence?
1 A. Yes, this is correct.
2 Q. Now the Karpalak incident occurred on the 8th of August, isn't
3 that so, in 2001?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. And the Karpalak incident was essentially an incident where the
6 NLA killed ten soldiers that occurred as a retaliation for an operation
7 carried out by the Ministry of Interior forces on the 7th of August.
8 Isn't that right?
9 A. I don't know whether it was retaliation. I can only note that
10 this attack did happen and that the soldiers died, ten soldiers died.
11 Q. Okay. Well, I would ask you to please turn to tab 5 of your
13 MS. ISSA: It's 65 ter 314.1, for the record.
14 Q. Now, this is an article, Mr. Keskovski, titled "The Ohrid
15 Framework Agreement Negotiations," by Vasko Popetrevski.
16 MS. ISSA: And, for the record, it comes from a book called:
17 "Ohrid and Beyond," published by the Institute for War and Peace
18 reporting in 2002.
19 Q. I'd like you to turn to what is page N002-1350. It should be page
20 55 in your hard copy, and the second-to-the-last paragraph in this article
21 on this page refers to the August 7 incident.
22 It says: "The negotiations were finally over and the discussions
23 had moved to the signing protocol when the agreement would be signed,
24 whether it should be signed in Ohrid or Skopje. On August 7, violence
25 intervened. An operation was conducted in a Skopje suburb by the special
1 anti-terrorist unit of the Ministry of Interior."
2 Then it goes on and describes the operation.
3 At the end of that paragraph, it states: "What was immediately
4 obvious was that this incident placed the future of the Ohrid Agreement in
6 Do you see that?
7 A. I see it only in the English language, and I can hear the
8 interpretation to what you're saying.
9 Q. Okay. At the bottom of that page, it says that: "'The story was
10 given a full 15 minutes of air time,' said Popovski, adding that the SDSM
11 team were extremely anxious about what would follow.
12 "Within 24 hours," and this is the very last sentence that I'm
13 reading, "Popovski's fears were realised. The next morning, August 8, a
14 lightly armed Macedonian army convoy was ambushed near Karpalak on the
15 Skopje-Tetovo highway," and it describes that nine reservists were killed.
16 MS. ISSA: This is the following page at the very top at page 56.
17 N002-1351 is the ERN number, for the record.
18 Q. And then if we see at the very middle paragraph of that page, it
19 describes what took place which led to the initialling of the Ohrid
21 It says: "US Envoy Pardew presented the Albanian representatives
22 with a pen and urged them to initial the agreement. Xhaferi and Imeri were
23 reluctant, but Pardew then warned them that tragedy could ensue if they
24 refused. After consulting with the NLA headquarters in Sipkovica and
25 receiving a green light, the PDP and DPA representatives agreed to initial
1 the document.
2 "On the same day, VRMO-DPMNE announced that they were suspending
3 their participation in the dialogue. After the incident at Karpalak, the
4 parties spokesperson declared, 'We cannot be expected to participate in a
5 political dialogue while soldiers are being killed, civilians kidnapped,
6 and there are shoot outs in and around Tetovo.' But later that day, they
7 initialed the document along with the SDSM representatives, and the
8 signing was scheduled for August 13 in Skopje."
9 Do you see that?
10 A. Yes, I see it.
11 Q. So after, the violence of 7 and 8 August, which placed the Ohrid
12 Agreement in jeopardy, the agreement was finally initialed, and there was
13 a signing date scheduled of the 13th of August, and this was the day after
14 the Karpalak incident. Right?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. So wouldn't the president be concerned on the 10th of August that
17 further retaliatory action might jeopardize the signing of the Ohrid
18 Agreement, which was scheduled for two days later?
19 A. Yes, this is correct.
20 Q. I'd like you, Mr. Keskovski, to please turn to paragraph 32 of
21 your statement which is 65 ter 1290, and it's at tab 1 of the Prosecution
22 book of authorities -- or the Prosecution book of exhibits, rather.
23 We can display it on the screen, in you can't find it. It should
24 be at page N001-4892.
25 Do you have it there, paragraph 32 of your statement?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Now, when you were asked about returning from Ohrid by the
3 investigators, you said this: "On the 10th of August, 2001, we came back
4 from Ohrid some time in the morning, and the chief of General Staff of the
5 army, General Metodija Stamboliski, called me by phone and informed me
6 about the Ljubotenski Bacila mine incident. Later on, I have passed the
7 information to the president. I understood that, in the mine incident,
8 some soldiers were army got killed, and they were from Ljubanci village."
9 Do you see that?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. You agree now, Mr. Keskovski, that you've now told us, in your
12 testimony, that you passed the phone to the president, and General
13 Stamboliski directly provided this information to the president, and the
14 president subsequently issued an order to Stamboliski; but in your
15 statement, you say that you, later on, passed this information to the
16 president. Right?
17 A. I said that on the way from Ohrid, General Stamboliski called.
18 This means that we were together with the president, yes.
19 Q. Well, your statement seems to reflect, Mr. Keskovski, that it was
20 you that gave the information to the president, and the president did not
21 speak to General Stamboliski at that time, did he?
22 A. My statement is that the president directly received or heard the
23 statement made by General Stamboliski. The investigators asked a general
24 question, and I gave my response in a general manner about the 10th of
1 So the answer to your question is "yes"; but in the questioning
2 during these sessions, I was asked more specific questions.
3 Q. You would agree with me, Mr. Keskovski, that when you expressly
4 say, "Later on, I passed the information to the president," that's a
5 pretty specific statement, isn't it? There's nothing ambiguous about
6 that, is there?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. And the president, in fact, if we go to paragraph 34 of your
9 statement, expressed concern about this incident, and he said, according
10 to your statement: "I was present during the conversation with Johan
11 Tarculovski the afternoon of the 10th of August, 2001."
12 And at the bottom of your statement, you say: "I heard the
13 president asking Johan Tarculovski to call the next day and inform the
14 president about the situation in the village. The president was concerned
15 that if there was unrest in the village, it could postpone the signing of
16 the Ohrid Agreement, which was scheduled for Monday, 12 August 2001."
17 Do you see that?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Isn't that what really happened on that day, Mr. Keskovski, that
20 the president was concerned about the unrest as a result of the
21 Ljubotenski mining incident, that he asked for information because he
22 didn't want to delay the Ohrid Agreement? Isn't that what really
24 A. Yes. This is what I stated, and this is what I'm stating today.
1 Q. So the president never issued an order to General Stamboliski to
2 take any sort of retaliatory action, did he?
3 A. The position of the president, and also in the communication with
4 the chief of the General Staff of the Republic of Macedonia, was identical
5 of that -- of the national security counsel, as I said yesterday, to
6 retrieve the position of the 5th of July, as to facilitate the signing of
7 the Ohrid Agreement.
8 Q. Mr. Keskovski --
9 A. I said that yesterday as well.
10 Q. Mr. Keskovski, my question was: The president did not issue an
11 order to General Stamboliski, according to your statement, to take
12 retaliatory action on that day, on the 10th of August, did he?
13 A. The president issued an order to General Stamboliski, however, not
14 in the context to undertake retaliatory measures.
15 Q. There's nothing in your statement that says that on the 10th of
16 August, in the context of the Ljubotenski Bacila mining incident, that the
17 president issued an order, is there?
18 A. Are you asking me about the statement I made to the investigator?
19 Q. Yes. The statement that you signed, and you told us earlier you
20 tried to be as careful and accurate as possible. That's what we're
21 talking about right now.
22 A. The statement which I gave to the investigator was not specific
23 and concise. I responded in the same manner that I was asked. There were
24 no specific questions and, therefore, this is the statement I made and I
25 stand behind it still.
1 Q. Well, on page 70 of your transcript, and you just repeated today,
2 you said that when you were in the car on your way to Skopje from Ohrid,
3 that you immediately informed the president regarding the Ljubotenski
4 Bacila mining incident. That's what you said in your testimony, right?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Well, if you informed the president while you were in the car at
7 that time, why does it say here, at paragraph 34 in your statement, that,
8 "In the afternoon of 10 August 2001, the president approved the request
9 and asked me to call Johan Tarculovski. As I called him, the president
10 wanted to speak to him. I gave him the phone and I heard the president
11 asking Johan Tarculovski to call the next day and inform the president
12 about the situation in the village"?
13 It goes on to say how concerned he was about the unrest postponing
14 the Ohrid Agreement.
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. My question is: If that's what happened, why would the president
17 wait until the afternoon to call or just to mention this, if, in fact, you
18 immediately informed the president while you were in the car?
19 A. You're asking me about two different situations, one involving
20 Tarculovski and the other involves General Stamboliski. They are not one
21 and the same. The situation with General Stamboliski transpired in the
22 morning because the incident happened in the morning, and immediately the
23 president was informed.
24 With regards to Mr. Tarculovski, he phoned later. Of course, the
25 information took time to arrive to him, so it is not the same situation.
1 Q. Well, if that is the case and you informed the president while you
2 were in the car and the president spoke to General Stamboliski, why does
3 it say in your statement that, "Later on, I passed the information to the
5 A. "Later" denotes time. I immediately communicated the information
6 to him, and he immediately spoke to General Stamboliski. I was riding in
7 the car with him. I will repeat again.
8 Q. Mr. Keskovski --
9 A. I answered to the investigator's questions in the same fashion
10 that they were asked. They were not specific enough.
11 Q. You didn't tell the investigators at that time that the president
12 spoke to General Stamboliski and he issued General Stamboliski an order,
13 did you? It's a very specific question.
14 A. I answered as he asked me, and this is now the content of the
16 Q. The information that you gave Mr. Stamboliski [sic] is pretty
17 specific, though, isn't it? The information that you gave the
18 investigator about how you received the information and how you passed it
19 on to the president is quite specific, isn't it?
20 A. Such information came and were communicated to the president every
21 day. In this specific case, it is as I stated.
22 Q. That's not what I'm asking you. The information that you gave the
23 investigator in your statement, particularly at paragraph 32, as to how
24 you passed information on to the president or how you received it
25 regarding the mining incident, is specific, isn't it? That remembers a
1 "yes" or "no" answer.
2 A. Yes. I communicated the information to the president, but he also
3 spoke directly to the head -- to the chief of the General Staff.
4 Q. Well, first of all, I was asking about the information that you
5 communicated to the investigator, and now you're giving us a different
6 answer, aren't you? You didn't tell us before that you communicated the
7 information to the president. You said you passed the phone on to the
8 president, right?
9 A. It never happens when somebody informed me about something. I
10 briefed the president first, and then I passed the phone to him so that he
11 knew he was to talk about. This is standard. It happens every day.
12 This was not an isolated event. This is something that happens every
13 day. So in all cases, with information of this nature, but also with
14 information of ordinary nature, this is the procedure that I always
16 Q. I'm going to ask you this question one last time, Mr. Keskovski.
17 You did not give this information about the president speaking to
18 General Stamboliski to the investigator of the OTP when you gave your
19 statement, did you?
20 A. The president --
21 Q. Mr. Keskovski --
22 A. -- received such very --
23 Q. -- I am going to interrupt you.
24 A. -- delicate questions, personally. I just can't communicate those
25 to him.
1 Q. I'm not asking you about the president. I'm asking the
2 information you gave the investigator that is in your statement. I've
3 asked you that question several times now.
4 A. Would you kindly repeat the question once again.
5 Q. You did not --
6 JUDGE PARKER: Before you do that, Mr. Mettraux.
7 MR. METTRAUX: Your Honour, I'm grateful, and I know the dislike
8 of the Chamber to interrupt. But I believe at this stage the witness has
9 been asked several times the same question, and he has given a very clear
10 answer. Everyone can see for themselves that what is or is not in the
11 statement. I believe he has given the explanation as to why something
12 may or not be in them. I believe that asking him the same question
13 several times serves no purpose and could be unfair to him.
14 JUDGE PARKER: We are assured this is the last time, Mr. Mettraux,
15 so we will be a little more patient.
16 Carry on, please, Ms. Issa.
17 MS. ISSA: Your Honour, I'm just trying to get a clear answer from
18 the witness.
19 JUDGE PARKER: Well, there's a point when you can accept that
20 you're not going to get what you want and move on. We can discern what is
22 MS. ISSA:
23 Q. Can you answer that question for the last time, Mr. Keskovski,
25 A. I asked you to kindly repeat the question once again.
1 Q. The question was: You did not tell the investigator when you gave
2 your statement that the president allegedly gave an order to General
3 Stamboliski on the 10th of August after he received the information
4 regarding the mining incident, did you?
5 A. It is true. I answered the question I was asked and that alone.
6 Q. Thank you. Now, you also said, in your testimony, at page 70 from
7 yesterday's transcript, that you invited Johan to Skopje after he
8 requested time off because it was standard procedure to do so.
9 Do you recall saying that?
10 A. Yes, that is true.
11 Q. And you also said that the president ordered Johan to go to
12 Ljubanci to inform on the developments there, in page 72 of your
14 Do you recall telling us that?
15 A. I said that he gave him the order, when he went to use the leave
16 that he requested and was granted, to use that opportunity to inform about
17 the developments in the area of the village of Ljubanci.
18 Q. Didn't you specifically say, in your testimony, that he ordered
19 him to go to Ljubanci?
20 A. As I said yesterday, and I'm saying it again today, and it is also
21 part of my statement, Mr. Tarculovski requested leave of absence because
22 his close relative was killed, which meant that he would have gone to
23 Ljubanci at any rate. The president ordered him to inform him about the
24 situation and developments while he was already at Ljubanci.
25 Q. Where does it say, in your statement that you gave the
1 investigators, Mr. Keskovski, that you and the president invited Johan
2 Tarculovski to Skopje after he requested his leave to attend the funeral?
3 A. In my statement, I stated that Johan Tarculovski requested leave
4 of absence to go to a funeral of someone close to him, and that he
5 requested it, yes, on the 10th. In my statement to the investigator, but
6 also here, I say that the standard procedure used, not only in the case of
7 Mr. Tarculovski, but with all others, the president wanted to express
8 personal condolences to every member of his security staff who had lost
9 someone close to him, who have had someone close to him killed in the
10 crisis in 2001.
11 So, for this reason, Mr. Tarculovski was invited to the office.
12 The president personally extended his condolences. And during the
13 conversation - I said then; I'm saying it now - he gave him the task. He
14 ordered him, when going to the funeral, to be there and to inform him
15 about the situation, developments in the area of Ljubanci village.
16 And in the statement, I will repeat again, in the statement to the
17 investigator, I have answered the questions asked of me. The question was
18 not asked precisely. As it was asked, I answered it.
19 Q. So it's your evidence that the president met with Johan
20 Tarculovski and at that point told him that, when he goes out to Ljubanci,
21 to provide him with information as to the developments in the village. Is
22 that your evidence?
23 A. I will repeat it again because you're twisting my words.
24 The president expressed the condolences to Mr. Tarculovski. We
25 granted him leave of absence for several days so that he attends the
1 funeral at the village of Ljubanci, and he gave him the order to inform
2 him from there, from where he goes to the funeral, to inform him about the
3 situation on the grounds, what was happening in the area of village of
5 Is this the answer you're requesting from me?
6 Q. My question is, Mr. Keskovski: Did this take place when you say
7 the president met Johan Tarculovski in Skopje?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Well --
10 A. There were two --
11 Q. -- I think you have answered the question.
12 I'd like to draw your attention to paragraph 34 of your statement,
13 which is on the same page as paragraph 32. I think you have it in front
14 of you.
15 Now you see there it says: "In the afternoon of the 10th of
16 August, the president approved the request and asked me to call Johan
17 Tarculovski. As I called him, the president wanted to speak to him, so I
18 gave him the mobile phone. I was present during the conversation, and I
19 heard the president asking Johan Tarculovski to call the next day and
20 inform the president about the situation in the village."
21 You agree with me, Mr. Keskovski, that there's nothing in there
22 that says the president gave him this order in Skopje and that he met with
23 him personally, is there?
24 This is a very specific question, and I'd like a brief answer,
1 A. This is your comment on that. I'm saying here, previously, that
2 he gave him the task, and that would be an order, to Mr. Tarculovski, to
3 phone and inform him about the situation in Ljuboten; but, on the other
4 hand, they met twice. Actually, once they spoke on the phone and then
5 they met next. The president and Tarculovski spoke twice in the same day;
6 once over the phone and once in person.
7 MS. ISSA: I'm conscious of the time, Your Honour.
8 JUDGE PARKER: Very well. Thank you.
9 We adjourn now. We resume tomorrow at 9.00 in the morning.
10 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.49 p.m.,
11 to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 27th day of
12 February, 2008, at 9.00 a.m.