1 Tuesday, 9 September 2008
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness entered court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 9.05 a.m.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning to everyone.
7 Mr. Registrar, would you please call the case.
8 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. Good morning to
9 everyone in the courtroom. This is case number IT-04-84-R77.4, the
10 Prosecutor versus Astrit Haraqija and Bajrush Morina.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
12 Witness 2, I would like to remind you that you are still bound by
13 the solemn declaration you gave yesterday at the beginning of your
15 Mr. Dieckmann, are you ready to continue your cross-examination?
16 MR. DIECKMANN: Thank you, Your Honours, yes.
17 WITNESS: WITNESS 2 [Resumed]
18 [Witness answered through interpreter]
19 Cross-examination by Mr. Dieckmann: [Continued]
20 Q. Good morning, sir.
21 A. Good morning.
22 MR. DIECKMANN: First of all, I would like to inform the Chamber
23 that, with the excellent guidance of the Registry, we have been able to
24 produce a list of documents the Defence of Bajrush Morina intends to or
25 may use during cross-examination; and for easy identification of the
1 material, we would like to give every one of the parties one of the
2 copies, and I would refer to the ID on the this paper when I use
3 documents now.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
5 Mr. Dieckmann, may I also remind you that whenever there's any
6 need to go into private session in order to make the pseudonym effective,
7 that you immediately address me.
8 MR. DIECKMANN: Yes, Your Honour, I will. Thank you very much.
9 Q. Witness 2, good morning again. We finished yesterday talking
10 about an interview you have given to Bajrush Morina in the year of 2002.
11 MR. DIECKMANN: I would like to show the witness again this
12 article; and, therefore, I would like to go into private session again.
13 JUDGE ORIE: We turn into private session.
14 [Private session]
24 [Open session]
25 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're back in open session.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
2 Please proceed.
3 MR. DIECKMANN:
4 Q. Mr. Witness, are you aware that Bajrush Morina published several
5 critical articles about the party of Haradinaj in Bota Sot? Do you
6 remember this?
7 A. I didn't have access to those writings; however, I know that he
8 continuously described events and made efforts to objectively present the
10 Q. Thank you. Mr. Witness, you know Mr. Bajrush Morina as a
11 friendly person, a person of good character?
12 A. Yes, fully.
13 Q. Thank you very much. Now I would like to go to the first
14 interview you have given to the ICTY in August 2007. In this
15 interview - the Prosecution has already asked these questions, but I
16 would like to repeat it again - in this interview, you had the
17 opportunity to provide all information and facts you were aware and you
18 knew at this time; correct?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. And you signed this statement?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. And you were aware that with this signature, you declared that
23 this statement are the truth?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Due to this statement, you have been contacted on or about the
1 1st of July, 2007, by telephone by a friend?
2 A. Yes.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Saxon.
4 MR. SAXON: Your Honour, I believe the witness -- the statements
5 of the witness are in the first Prosecution binder. They're also
6 available in the Albanian language. Perhaps the witness could have that
7 made available to him in case he wants to refer to it.
8 MR. DIECKMANN: This would be excellent, yes. Thank you.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
10 Could then the first binder -- oh, it's already with the witness.
11 MR. SAXON: And this would be at tab 3 of the first binder.
12 MR. DIECKMANN:
13 Q. So, Witness 2, you have it in front of you?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. My last question was that I asked you that there have been a
16 telephone call by a friend on or about the 1st of July, 2007. This --
17 the brother of this friend was working for the Bota Sot, wasn't he?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. This friend who called you informed you that Bajrush Morina asked
20 for your mobile number; true?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. And the friend asked you if you had any objection to giving it to
23 him; true?
24 A. True.
25 Q. And you replied that you did not have any objection to give the
1 telephone number to Bajrush Morina; true?
2 A. This is true. I asked him what was that about. He said: "I
3 don't know. He just wants your number." And I said to him, "You can
4 give it to him."
5 Q. Thank you. You remembered immediately who Bajrush Morina was
6 when you received this call?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. So you were interested, you were curious what he really wants?
9 A. Since he wanted my telephone number and wanted to speak with me,
10 I was positive and I wanted to know what was that all about.
11 Q. You don't know if that friend told Bajrush Morina you were
12 travelling to The Hague
13 A. The friend didn't know anything at the time.
14 Q. Thank you. But it is true that during these days, you were
15 preparing for a trip to The Hague
16 A. True.
17 Q. Bajrush Morina called you back on 2nd of July, 2007; true?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. And he used the number you authorised in the call with your
20 mutual friend to use; true?
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Dieckmann, your question suggests calling back
22 that the witness called him first. Can we clarify whether that's the
23 case or did you misspeak?
24 MR. DIECKMANN: I'm sorry. I've misspoken.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So the question was about, Witness, whether
1 Bajrush Morina called you on the 2nd of July, not in return to any call
2 from your side.
3 MR. DIECKMANN: Thank you, Your Honours.
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There was no call from my side; it
5 was Bajrush who called me.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
7 MR. DIECKMANN: Excellent. Thank you.
8 Q. Bajrush Morina explained to you that he could not talk on the
9 phone more in detail, didn't he?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And he wanted to meet you the very next day?
12 A. He said to me that Minister Haraqija wanted to have a coffee with
13 me the following day because he had something important to discuss with
14 me. That's why he wanted a meeting.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Dieckmann, in the beginning, I thought you would
16 need an introduction for a question which is the type of question we
17 would expect in cross-examination; however, until now, you go through the
18 statement which is in evidence. So if you'd like to cross-examine the
19 witness, please refrain from repeating the whole of the statement.
20 Please proceed.
21 MR. DIECKMANN: Thank you, Your Honours.
22 Q. So your first reaction to this telephone -- to this telephone
23 call was not just to hang up or to interrupt the call.
24 My question is: Your reaction to this telephone call was not to
25 hang up and stop the conversation when you heard what he was want from
2 A. No. My intention was not to hang up. We did talk and I
3 explained that it was impossible to meet the following day.
4 Q. So you did not immediately say that you did not wish to speak
5 with anybody from Kosovo; you just said that you could not speak with him
6 in the next day. True?
7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Dieckmann, I invited you not to go through the
8 statement. Now you asked him whether he reacted by not having a
9 conversation. That's so obvious from the evidence we have now. So if
10 there's any reason to challenge that, please do so; but what we hear is
11 just a repetition and some, I would say, some notorious facts.
12 Of course, if you have a telephone conversation - and that's the
13 evidence - then you have not refused to have the telephone conversation.
14 That is clear, isn't it?
15 MR. DIECKMANN: Yes, Your Honours. I would like to pose some
16 questions just to see how the witness react in confrontation with this
17 call. Just --
18 JUDGE ORIE: What he did is he entered into a conversation with
19 the person who called him. That's in evidence, that's clear. If you
20 want to establish that, there's no need to do that because that is in
22 If there's any challenge to what the witness said, please come to
23 your point and focus on the issue you want to challenge.
24 Please proceed.
25 There's no need to emphasize matters in cross-examination. The
2 conversation and did not stop, and that he did not say, "I never want to
3 see you," but that he said "not tomorrow."
4 Please proceed.
5 MR. DIECKMANN: Thank you very much.
6 Q. Witness, do you agree with me that in this ICTY statement from
7 August 2007, you did not state that Bajrush Morina asked you during this
8 telephone call the question, "When are you going to The Hague"; true?
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Dieckmann, what is in the statement, the Chamber
10 can read it. It's here. All the members of this Chamber are
11 well-trained readers of statements. So, unless there's any reason, any
12 ambiguity in it -- but please let's use our time in court in an efficient
14 Please proceed.
15 MR. DIECKMANN: Thank you, Your Honours.
16 Then I will leave this statement from August 2007, and I would
17 like to show the witness in private session, with your leave, the notice,
18 Defence Exhibit number 4. This is notice of a police officer.
19 JUDGE ORIE: We move into private session.
20 [Private session]
11 Pages 131-140 redacted. Private session.
21 [Open session]
22 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're back in open session.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
24 Cross-examination by Mr. Khan:
25 Q. Witness, my name is Karim Khan, and I am representing
1 Mr. Haraqija. First of all, good morning.
2 A. Good morning.
3 Q. I have only four questions for you, so I'll be very short and
4 then you can go home. It's true to say that you have never met
5 Mr. Haraqija; that's right, isn't it?
6 A. Yes, that's true.
7 Q. It's true to say that you've never spoken to Mr. Haraqija; that's
8 right, isn't it?
9 A. I've never spoken to him ever.
10 Q. He has never threatened you in any way; that's right, isn't it?
11 A. Well, since I never spoke to him, I don't know how he could have
12 threatened me in any way; in other words, no, he didn't.
13 Q. In fact, Witness, you'll be glad to see there's only three
15 MR. KHAN: So I have no more questions at all, Your Honour. I'm
17 Q. Thank you for coming.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Khan.
19 Mr. Saxon, the Bench has at this moment no questions. Do you
20 have any need to put further questions to Witness 2?
21 MR. SAXON: A few, Your Honour, yes.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please proceed.
23 We are in open session, you're aware of that.
24 MR. SAXON: Thank you, Your Honour.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
1 Re-examination by Mr. Saxon:
2 Q. Good morning, Witness 2. My colleague Mr. Khan --
3 A. Good morning.
4 Q. You told my colleague Mr. Khan that you've actually never spoken
5 with Mr. Haraqija. Do you recall saying that a minute ago?
6 A. Yes, I just said that.
7 Q. But in July of last year, did you receive through Mr. Morina -- I
8 will rephrase my question.
9 When, if ever, have you received a message from Mr. Haraqija?
10 MR. KHAN: Your Honour, it's a small point, but perhaps it can be
11 added "if ever."
12 MR. SAXON: I believe that I added that in my question.
13 JUDGE ORIE: If you look in the transcript, it says "when, if
14 ever ..."
15 MR. KHAN: [Microphone not activated]
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I said clearly earlier that I never
17 contacted Mr. Haraqija and I was never contacted by him, but the messages
18 came through Bajrush. Now, whether he conveyed the opinion and messages
19 of Mr. Haraqija, that is clear, but I didn't have direct contact with
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Saxon, wasn't the matter not already perfectly
22 clear from the evidence in chief and the cross-examination, that although
23 Witness 2 never spoke to Mr. Haraqija, that he gave his statement about
24 messages and how he received them, et cetera. Is there any need
25 to repeat, because Mr. Khan will ask again whether he ever spoke to him,
1 and then it is like ping-pong rather than --
2 MR. SAXON: Thank you, Your Honour. I appreciate your point and
3 I will move on.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
5 MR. SAXON:
6 Q. Witness Number 2, you mentioned a few moments ago that after
7 investigators of the Office of the Prosecutor spoke with Mr. Morina, you
8 had a conversation with Mr. Morina and Mr. Morina expressed to you that
9 he feared for his security. My question, then, for you is: Who was
10 Mr. Morina afraid of?
11 A. I cannot state clearly of whom he was afraid. His health was in
12 very bad condition. He feared for his health. This is how I understood
13 it, but I cannot state clearly of whom he was afraid.
14 Q. And my last question or my last few questions concerns --
15 MR. SAXON: Actually, Your Honour, I will ask to move into
16 private session very briefly, please.
17 JUDGE ORIE: We move into private session.
18 [Private session]
14 [Open session]
15 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're back in open session.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
17 MR. SAXON:
18 Q. Witness 2, when Bajrush Morina tells you something, do you
19 believe in the truth of what he tells you?
20 MR. KHAN: Your Honour, how does this arise out of
22 MR. SAXON: I can explain that, Your Honour.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. It's a rather general question. Mr. Saxon, if
24 I would ask you whether you believe me when I tell you something, what
25 would be your answer, it depends on circumstances and what I tell you,
1 isn't it? It's kind of a question of such a general nature that I have
2 difficulties in understanding how it could assist the Chamber.
3 MR. SAXON: Then, if it won't assist the Chamber, I will withdraw
4 my question, Your Honour, and I have no further questions.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Saxon.
6 [Trial Chamber confers]
7 MR. KHAN: Your Honour, perhaps all this kerfuffle at the back is
8 to clarify a particular point. It could be done by translation services
9 at the end. But with your leave, perhaps I can just seek to clarify it.
10 It arises out of page 22, line 8, of the transcript; and if I can read
11 what the translation says, this is the witness speaking:
12 "I said clearly earlier that I never contacted Mr. Haraqija and I
13 was never contacted by him, but the messages came through Bajrush. Now,
14 whether he conveyed the opinion and messages of Mr. Haraqija, that is
15 clear; but I didn't have direct contact with him."
16 Your Honour, the clarification is whether or not the witness said
17 "that is clear," or whether, in fact, did he say "that is unclear."
18 JUDGE ORIE: We could ask the witness. Perhaps that is the
19 easiest way of resolving the matter.
20 MR. KHAN: I'm grateful.
21 Questioned by the Court:
22 JUDGE ORIE: Witness 2, when you said now whether he conveyed the
23 opinion and messages of Mr. Haraqija, then you added a few words. Could
24 you repeat those words to the extent you still remember.
25 A. I cannot see that part of the transcript, but I will try to say
1 it again. As I said earlier, I didn't have direct contact with Haraqija;
2 however, if the messages came through Bajrush, it was Bajrush who
3 conveyed those messages, when he was present at the meeting in the
4 country where I reside, then it is very clear that he conveyed those
5 messages through Bajrush but not directly to me through telephone or
6 direct conversation.
7 JUDGE ORIE: This clarifies the matter, I take it, Mr. Khan.
8 [Trial Chamber confers]
9 JUDGE ORIE: Witness 2, this concludes your testimony in this
10 courtroom. I would like to thank you very much for coming to The Hague
11 and for answering the questions that were put to you by the parties and
12 by the Bench. I wish you a safe trip home again.
13 Could the witness be escorted out of the courtroom. I think all
14 the curtains are down, so it would not in any way violate the protective
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I would like to thank the ICTY for
17 allowing me to participate in this session. I hope that justice will
18 prevail and those who are not guilty will be released. Thank you.
19 [The witness withdrew]
20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Saxon, is the Prosecution ready to call its next
22 MR. SAXON: Yes, it is, Your Honour.
23 JUDGE ORIE: And that would be Mr. Mitford-Burgess, is it?
24 MR. SAXON: No, Your Honour, that would be Ms. Angjelina
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I have, then, that Mr. Mitford-Burgess will
2 come at a later --
3 MR. SAXON: That is correct, Your Honour.
4 JUDGE ORIE: After that, yes.
5 MR. SAXON: And, Your Honour, I'm also prepared to read the
6 summaries of Witness 2's 92 ter statements into the record at a time that
7 is convenient to the Chamber.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Let's perhaps if the -- is Mr. Usher aware
9 that he should bring the next witness?
10 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
11 JUDGE ORIE: Perhaps, then, to use our time as efficiently as
12 possible, you read the summary of Witness 17, awaiting the arrival of the
13 next witness.
14 MR. SAXON: Thank you, Your Honours.
15 I would now like to read a brief summary of what is now
16 Exhibit P7, which is the ICTY witness statement of Witness 2 from the
17 14th of August, 2007.
18 In summary, Your Honour, on the 2nd of July, 2007, Mr. Morina
19 called Witness 2, and Mr. Morina told Witness 2: "I cannot talk with you
20 on the phone. The minister of culture, Astrit Haraqija, wants to come
21 and see you tomorrow."
22 Mr. Morina told Witness 2 that the matter was urgent and that he
23 wanted to talk with Witness 2 in the name of the Rugova family, knowing
24 that Witness 2 was a strong supporter and follower of the former
25 president, Ibrahim Rugova. Witness 2 told Mr. Morina that he would meet
1 him on the 10th of July. Mr. Morina agreed, and over the next several
2 days sent Witness 2 text messages to confirm that he, Mr. Morina, and the
3 Minister Haraqija would be coming on the 10th.
4 Witness 2 informed the authorities in the country where he
5 resides about the telephone call from Mr. Morina. The authorities were
6 concerned about Witness 2's security. Eventually, it was agreed that the
7 meeting would take place under strictly controlled conditions and that
8 the conversation would be recorded. Witness 2 met Mr. Morina on the
9 10th of July and the 11th of July, 2007. Both conversations were
11 With your leave, Your Honours, I will now read a summary of
12 Exhibit P8, which is the ICTY statement of Witness 2 provided on the
13 20th of September, 2007.
14 This witness statement describes many of the same events
15 described in Witness 2's earlier statement, Exhibit P7, but Exhibit P8
16 provides greater detail.
17 In the second telephone call which Witness 2 received from
18 Mr. Morina, Mr. Morina asked the witness when the witness was going to
19 The Hague
20 and his associates knew that Witness 2 would be a witness in the
21 Haradinaj trial. That upset Witness 2 very much and it also upset his
23 Witness 2 and Mr. Morina eventually agreed that Mr. Morina would
24 arrive in the witness's country of residence on 10 July. Minister
25 Haraqija would arrive on 11 July and they would depart on 12 July.
1 Mr. Morina asked Witness Number 2 to reserve two hotel rooms of a good
2 hotel, since the minister was of a certain rank and deserved a certain
3 level of luxury.
4 During the first meeting between Witness 2 and Morina on 10 July,
5 Witness 2 understood that Mr. Morina had come to see the witness and pass
6 on a message from Mr. Haraqija and a high-ranking official in UNMIK that
7 there were three persons, including Witness 2, who could save Ramush
8 Haradinaj by not testifying.
9 Minister Haraqija had directed Mr. Morina to visit Witness 2 and
10 pass this message to him. The goal of the message was to convince
11 Witness 2 to withdraw his evidence from the trial of Ramush Haradinaj.
12 Witness 2 told Mr. Morina that if he testified, he would not change his
13 evidence and he could not be bought.
14 Witness 2 met with Mr. Morina for a second time on 11 July.
15 Minister Haraqija had not arrived. Mr. Morina had informed the minister
16 that Witness 2 would not reconsider his decision to testify; and,
17 therefore, Witness 2 assumed that the minister saw no point in speaking
18 with the witness.
19 MR. KHAN: Your Honour, I'm grateful for that.
20 Perhaps I could have guidance, so that when it's my turn, do you
21 want whole statements to be read out, or are summaries sufficient, just
22 to guide my --
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. As a matter of fact, Mr. Saxon may not be so
24 familiar and so acquainted with the practice in the trials I'm presiding
25 over, that the summary could have been shorter. I mean, I think the core
1 of the information could have been in 15 to 20 lines at most, but I
2 didn't want to interrupt you.
3 And short summaries, just sufficient for the public to understand
4 what the testimony is about, rather than details as whether there were --
5 for example, the two hotel rooms and the quality of the hotel rooms are
6 details that are not necessary.
7 Apart from that, of course, they were elicited in chief which the
8 public could hear.
9 Are you ready to call your next witness, Mr. Saxon?
10 MR. SAXON: Yes, Your Honour.
11 JUDGE ORIE: With the assistance of the usher, perhaps we could
12 already first have the witness be brought into the courtroom.
13 [The witness entered court]
14 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning, Ms. Krasniqi.
15 Before you give evidence in this court, the Rules require you to
16 make a solemn declaration that you will speak the truth, the whole truth,
17 and nothing but the truth.
18 The text is now handed out to you by the usher. May I invite you
19 to make that solemn declaration.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will
21 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. Please be seated.
23 You'll first be examined by Mr. Saxon, who is counsel for the
25 You may proceed, Mr. Saxon.
1 WITNESS: ANGJELINA KRASNIQI
2 [Witness answered through interpreter]
3 Examination by Mr. Saxon:
4 Q. Good morning, Ms. Krasniqi.
5 A. [No interpretation]
6 Q. Ms. Krasniqi, you need to speak a little bit louder so that the
7 interpreters can hear you in the microphone. You might want to sit a
8 little bit closer to the microphone. You can move your chair closer if
9 you like.
10 MR. SAXON: Your Honour, before I proceed, this witness will be
11 providing evidence under Rule 92 ter. Would the Chamber prefer that I
12 provide a short summary of each statement as we move along or should I
14 JUDGE ORIE: For the public to understand the testimony, it is
15 preferred to have a short summary, not necessarily split up statement by
16 statement, but just in a couple of lines to explain what we find in the
17 92 ter statement. Of course, a 92 ter statement which - let me just have
18 a look - would be on your exhibit list as --
19 MR. SAXON: 18, 19, and 20, Your Honour.
20 JUDGE ORIE: -- 18, 19, and 20. All are already admitted into
21 evidence. I think the interviews are 18 and 19; 20 is in the exhibit
22 next to it.
23 MR. KHAN: Your Honour, I'm in your hands, but the suggestion I
24 would make is, as a matter of good practice, what I would respectfully
25 submit is that summaries perhaps should be read before the witness enters
1 or after the witness leaves. The reason for that is it seems to be a
2 little unfair that the Prosecution perhaps can cherry-pick parts and
3 summarize them. You've got the full statements before Your Honours. No
4 objections at all for the summary, of course, but perhaps it could be
5 done, if you're so minded, once the witness has left the courtroom after
6 the cross-examination.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But in order for the public to understand what
8 the testimony is about, to tell them at the end what they should have
9 learned at the beginning in order to appreciate what the witness is
10 telling is --
11 MR. KHAN: It's true. Your Honour's point is exceptionally
12 valid; but that's why my principal submission, and I should have raised
13 it earlier, is that summaries should be read in the absence of a witness
14 because it does -- whether the Prosecution are doing it or the Defence
15 are doing it, because otherwise it gives rise to the view that
16 cherry-picking can take place that may affect the results in
18 [Trial Chamber confers]
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I expect, as a matter of fact, the party
20 summarizing the evidence to do that in a balanced way so that the public
21 is informed. And if there's any complaint about that at any stage, I
22 would invite the parties to disclose to the other party the summary so
23 that comments could be made, Would you please include this, or leave that
24 out, or to be too much of detail.
25 MR. KHAN: I'm grateful.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Saxon, please read a short summary; and the
2 summary, of course, is not evidence, Mr. Khan, that may be clear.
3 MR. SAXON: I will speak with a broad brush, Your Honour.
4 Very briefly, this witness provided statements, two witness
5 interviews, and a written witness statement to investigators of this
6 office. The first one on the 7th of November, 2007.
7 And by the way, Your Honours, I misspoke before. These are
8 65 ter numbers 17, 18, and 19.
9 The second interview was on the 27th of May, 2008; and on the
10 same day, an ICTY statement was provided.
11 And in very broad terms, the witness describes how travel
12 arrangements and authorisations are made or were made within the Ministry
13 of Culture, Youth, and Sport when the witness worked there. The witness
14 also describes -- and that would have been 65 ter 18, Your Honour.
15 In 65 ter number 19, which is the ICTY witness statement of the
16 27th of May, the witness identifies two telephone numbers, one being hers
17 at the Ministry of Culture and the second telephone number is that of
18 Mr. Morina.
19 And 65 ter 17 is an interview given by the witness on the 27th of
20 May, 2008, in which the witness discusses a recorded intercept of a
21 telephone call between herself and Mr. Morina.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Saxon.
23 MR. SAXON: [Microphone not activated]
24 If I could ask the assistance of the usher, please, if the
25 second -- actually, no, the first Prosecution binder could be provided to
1 the witness; and if we could turn, please, if the usher could assist the
2 witness, if we could turn to what is tab 18, the Albanian version.
3 Q. Ms. Krasniqi, do you recall that two days ago, on Sunday, in my
4 office here in the Tribunal in my presence and the presence of an
5 interpreter and an investigator, you reviewed a statement that you -- an
6 interview that you gave on the 7th of November, 2007?
7 Do you recall that?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. And if you could turn, please, to page 4 of that interview.
10 MR. SAXON: And for those following along in English, this would
11 be page 3 in the English version.
12 Q. Do you have page 4 in front of you?
13 A. Yes.
14 JUDGE ORIE: I take it, Mr. Saxon, that you want this not to be
15 shown to the public?
16 MR. SAXON: Thank you very much, Your Honour. That's correct.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
18 MR. SAXON:
19 Q. And if I can direct your attention, Ms. Krasniqi, to line 27 of
20 page 4, and this is line 26 of page 3. And I'm going to read to you
21 several lines that go on to the next page, which would be page 5 in your
22 version and page 4 in the English version.
23 Starting at line 26 in the English version, the investigator
24 asks: (redacted)
5 JUDGE ORIE: We move into private session.
6 MR. SAXON:
7 Q. The question was --
8 [Private session]
11 Pages 157-158 redacted. Private session.
7 [Open session]
8 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're back in open session.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
10 MR. SAXON: This document is a written witness statement of
11 Ms. Krasniqi provided on the 27th of May, 2008.
12 Q. Ms. Krasniqi, do you recall reviewing this statement in my office
13 on Sunday afternoon?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. And does this statement accurately reflect your declaration?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. And does this statement accurately reflect what you would say if
18 you were questioned or examined orally?
19 A. Yes.
20 MR. SAXON: At this time, I would ask that this statement be
21 given an exhibit number, Your Honour.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
23 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this becomes Exhibit P11, under
25 JUDGE ORIE: The document was already admitted. Now the
1 attestation Rule 92 ter has been given; therefore, P11 is finally
2 admitted under seal.
3 Mr. Saxon, I'm looking at the clock.
4 MR. SAXON: Yes, Your Honour, and I have no further questions
5 for the witness.
6 JUDGE ORIE: You have no further questions.
7 Ms. Krasniqi, you just arrived, but we'll have a break first. We
8 will resume at five minutes to 11.00.
9 --- Recess taken at 10.31 a.m.
10 --- On resuming at 11.02 a.m.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Who will be the first to cross-examine the witness?
12 Mr. Dieckmann.
13 Ms. Krasniqi, you'll now be cross-examined by Mr. Dieckmann,
14 who's counsel for Mr. Morina.
15 Cross-examination by Mr. Dieckmann:
16 Q. Good morning, Ms. Krasniqi. My name is Jens Dieckmann. I'm
17 Defence counsel for Mr. Bajrush Morina, and I have just a few number of
18 questions to you. If you do not understand a question, just indicate and
19 I could repeat my question. Do you understand this?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. So, Madam, you have been deputy minister of culture in Kosovo;
22 it's true?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. From which period of time, in which period of time, you have been
25 in this position?
1 A. 2004-2007.
2 Q. Thank you. You're not a member of the LDK, aren't you?
3 A. No, I'm not.
4 Q. Could you explain to us which party you are belonging to at this
5 time as a minister?
6 A. I was a representative of the Demo-Christian Albanian party in
8 Q. Thank you. And Bajrush Morina worked for you as a political
9 advisor; true?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. But he's not a member of your party at this time?
12 A. No, he's not.
13 Q. He worked for you since spring-time 2005; is it true?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. You know him already before he started working for you; true?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Could it be that you know him since 2003/2004 election campaign?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. You know him as a political journalist for the Bota Sot; true?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Did you read frequently his articles in this newspaper during
22 this time when you have been minister and before?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Bajrush Morina has always been a supporter of the former
25 President Rugova and his party; isn't it true?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Bajrush Morina was never a member or in public a supporter of
3 Ramush Haradinaj and his party, true, as far as you know?
4 A. True.
5 Q. And as a journalist, he has frequently written critical articles
6 also against Ramush Haradinaj and his party; true?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Ms. Krasniqi, you know the family of Bajrush Morina?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. He's married?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. And he has -- he's the father of four children?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. And you know that he is also take care for his old and sick
15 parents; true?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. And as far as you know, he does not have any criminal record in
19 A. No, he hasn't.
20 Q. You know Bajrush Morina as a friendly man, a person of good
21 character; is it true?
22 A. Yes.
23 MR. DIECKMANN: I don't have any further questions. Thank you.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Dieckmann.
25 Mr. Khan.
1 Cross-examination by Mr. Khan:
2 Q. Good morning, Ms. Krasniqi. I have a few questions for you.
3 MR. KHAN: But perhaps first we can go into private session for
4 two minutes.
5 JUDGE ORIE: We turn into private session.
6 [Private session]
19 [Open session]
20 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're back in open session.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
22 MR. KHAN:
23 Q. And, Mrs. Krasniqi, you'll also be glad to know that, hopefully,
24 I won't take more than ten minutes or thereabouts.
6 MR. KHAN: Let me start again.
7 Q. Astrit Haraqija never mentioned to you that he planned to travel
8 to a third country; is that right?
9 A. That's correct. He never mentioned that.
10 Q. Astrit Haraqija never mentioned to you that he knew Bajrush
11 Morina was going to go to a third country; is that correct also?
12 A. That's correct. He never mentioned that either.
13 Q. You never saw a travel request signed by Astrit Haraqija seeking
14 himself to go to that third country; is that also the truth?
15 A. That's true.
16 Q. I'm grateful. And, similarly, it's true, is it not, that you
17 never saw any travel request or note signed by Astrit Haraqija
18 authorising Bajrush Morina to travel to that third country? That's also
19 the truth, is it not?
20 A. That's also truth.
21 Q. Bajrush Morina told you that he had the permission of the
22 minister to travel to that third country; is that correct?
23 A. Yes, correct.
24 Q. But at no time did you verify that such permission had been given
25 from any other source; is that right?
1 A. That's right.
2 Q. All travel approvals, all travel requests that are processed must
3 eventually be signed by Mr. Mon Zhubi, the permanent secretary; is that
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. And no authorisation is valid until such signature is appended to
7 a travel request; is that true?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. I'm most grateful. I have no further questions.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
11 Mr. Saxon, any need to re-examine the witness?
12 MR. SAXON: Yes. Thank you, Your Honour.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
14 Re-examination by Mr. Saxon:
15 Q. Ms. Krasniqi, you explained that Mr. Morina is married, father of
16 four children, and that he takes care of his sick parents as well. Back
17 in July of last year, approximately how much did Mr. Morina earn a month
18 as an advisor to you at the Ministry of Culture?
19 A. I don't know the exact figure, perhaps something around 400
21 Q. My colleague asked you if Mr. Morina was always a supporter of
22 the late-President Rugova and his party, and you answered yes. My
23 question for you is: Even today, is President Rugova still revered in
24 general by his supporters in Kosovo?
25 A. Yes, this is more than true.
1 Q. In response to a question of my colleague Mr. Khan, you agreed
2 that Mr. Morina had told you that before he travelled to the third
3 country in July of last year, that Mr. Morina had the permission of the
4 minister to travel. Do you recall that?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. When, if ever, did Mr. Morina tell you that he had been directed
7 by the minister to travel to the third country?
8 MR. KHAN: Your Honour, can I just make sure that this is
9 re-examination and, of course, it's not a licence for leading questions,
10 and a question is not rendered non-leading simply by the addition "if
11 ever." So I would ask that my friend exercise care.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Saxon, is there any basis at this moment already
13 in the evidence of the witness for leading the witness in this respect?
14 I invite you to explain where we find it; otherwise --
15 MR. SAXON: If you will give me one moment, please.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
17 MR. KHAN: You see, Your Honour, my real principal and my
18 principal objection is that when a party seeks to rely on 92 ter, the
19 statements and the transcripts that have been properly attested and
20 approved stand as examination-in-chief. It's not permissible for the
21 Prosecution to have its cake and eat it. That is part of the testimony
22 that's before Your Honours. If new matters arise out of
23 cross-examination, of course, clarification can be sought; but it's also
24 repeated on numerous occasions at page 2, page 8, page 13 of the 7th of
25 November statement that this witness is saying that permission was
1 granted. But, Your Honour, I don't see that it's --
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Khan, your objection was about leading in
4 MR. KHAN: Indeed.
5 JUDGE ORIE: And it now looks as if you add to that that the
6 matter did not arise from cross-examination.
7 MR. KHAN: Indeed, there's two matters, in fact. It's leading
8 which is the principal objection --
9 JUDGE ORIE: Well, the first one, I asked Mr. Saxon to find the
10 place where is the basis, so as to make the question a follow-up question
11 rather than a leading question.
12 MR. KHAN: I'm grateful.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
14 Mr. Saxon.
15 MR. SAXON: The basis, Your Honour ...
16 [Prosecution counsel confer]
17 MR. SAXON: The basis, Your Honour, can be found in what is now
18 Exhibit P10, page 10 in the English version, lines 14 to 18.
19 JUDGE ORIE: P10 is the statement --
20 MR. SAXON: From 27 May 2008
21 JUDGE ORIE: -- of 27 May, yes. We find that under tab 17, yes.
22 It's not very clear to me. Could you please rephrase your
23 question, Mr. Saxon.
24 MR. SAXON:
25 Q. You mention, Ms. Krasniqi, that the minister did not authorise
1 Mr. Morina -- did not authorise the travel of Mr. Morina to go to the
2 third country. Perhaps if I can put it more precisely, that -- that the
3 minister, Mr. Haraqija, did not issue travel authorisation for Mr. Morina
4 to go to a third country.
5 However, can you tell us, please, whether, if in any way, to your
6 knowledge, Mr. Haraqija was involved in Mr. Morina's trip to the third
8 A. Not in my presence, so I couldn't know. I just know from talking
9 with Bajrush that he was authorised by the minister, but not in my
10 personal presence. I wasn't there as a witness to it, so I couldn't -- I
11 can't tell you.
12 Q. Thank you.
13 MR. SAXON: Then I have no further questions.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
15 [Trial Chamber confers]
16 JUDGE ORIE: Judge Moloto has a question for you, Ms. Krasniqi.
17 Questioned by the Court:
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Just one question. When, if you do know, did
19 President Rugova die?
20 A. I don't remember the exact date.
21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
22 JUDGE ORIE: I would like to take you to part of what we find
23 under tab 11 of the binder.
24 Could the usher please assist the witness.
25 Not to be shown to the public.
1 Do you see the original and the handwriting at the bottom of this
2 document? Is that your handwriting?
3 A. Yes, it is.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Now, in your statement, you say that Mr. Morina
5 would travel to see a friend and that it was explained to you that it was
6 for private reasons. Did anything come into your mind when you saw this
7 document, where apparently a private visit to a friend is put in the
8 context of travelling together with the minister, which at least could be
9 considered to be something different from a private visit to a friend?
10 Did anything come into your mind when you saw this as far as the
11 reasons for the travel are concerned?
12 A. No, not at all.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Your testimony is that someone tells you that he'll
14 privately see a friend in a third country; and that, although against the
15 rules, permission is given for this travel to be funded, at least that's
16 what's told to you; and then you see this document wherein apparently the
17 minister accompanies the person on this private visit.
18 And this did not raise any further thoughts with you as to the
19 character of this visit?
20 A. No.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you for that answer.
22 [Trial Chamber confers]
23 JUDGE ORIE: Has the -- have the questions put to the witness by
24 the Bench raised any further need to put questions to the witness?
25 MR. KHAN: Your Honour, just for the record, in that case.
1 Further cross-examination by Mr. Khan:
2 Q. Ms. Krasniqi, that document is not approved by the permanent
3 secretary, is it?
4 JUDGE ORIE: I'm not asking whether it's this document on which
5 we find handwriting of Mrs. Krasniqi; I'm asking when she saw that
6 document whether that raised any thought.
7 MR. KHAN: No questions. Yes, I'm grateful.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Dieckmann.
9 MR. DIECKMANN: No further questions for Mr. Bajrush Morina.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
11 Ms. Krasniqi, this then concludes your testimony in this court.
12 I would like to thank you for coming to the Hague and to testify; that
13 is, to answer both questions of the parties and the Bench. I would like
14 to wish you a safe trip home again.
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you very much, Your Honour.
16 JUDGE ORIE: The witness is excused and may be escorted out of
17 the courtroom.
18 [The witness withdrew]
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Saxon, is the Prosecution ready to call its next
21 MR. SAXON: Yes, it is, Your Honour. At this time, the
22 Prosecution would call Mr. Peter Mitford-Burgess.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
24 Perhaps we could use the time that you read a short summary of
25 the witness so that the public is informed, and even the wish of Mr. Khan
1 it not to be read in the presence of the witness would be met.
2 Please proceed.
3 MR. SAXON: Thank you, Your Honour.
4 The statement of Mr. Peter Mitford-Burgess describes how he and
5 another colleague in the Office of the Prosecutor obtained several items
6 of evidence that are relevant to this case, both statements from
7 witnesses as well as documentary evidence. And in his statement,
8 Mr. Peter Mitford-Burgess produces this material for the Trial Chamber.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Saxon.
10 May the next witness be brought into the courtroom.
11 [The witness entered court]
12 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning, Mr. Mitford-Burgess.
13 Before you give evidence, the Rules require you to make a solemn
14 declaration. The text is now handed out to you by the usher. May I
15 invite you to make that solemn declaration.
16 THE WITNESS: I solemnly declare that I will speak the truth, the
17 whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Mitford-Burgess. Please be seated.
19 You'll first be examined by Mr. Saxon, who's counsel for the
21 Please proceed, Mr. Saxon.
22 WITNESS: PETER MITFORD-BURGESS
23 Examination by Mr. Saxon:
24 Q. Good morning, Mr. Mitford-Burgess.
25 MR. SAXON: Perhaps, again, with the usher's assistance, if the
1 first binder could be placed in front of Mr. Mitford-Burgess.
2 Q. And before we begin, Mr. Mitford-Burgess, I would simply ask you
3 to remember to take care not to reveal any identifying details of the
4 protected witness or the protected witness's residence.
5 If you can turn, please, to what is tab 5 in that binder.
6 MR. SAXON: Your Honours, this is Prosecution 65 ter number 5.
7 Q. Mr. Mitford-Burgess, this is a declaration.
8 MR. SAXON: And if this could not be published to the public,
10 Q. It's a declaration signed by you on the 16th of July, 2008
11 you recall that?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. And my question for you is: Will you attest that this written
14 statement accurately reflects your declaration?
15 A. Yes, it does.
16 Q. And will you attest that this written statement accurately
17 reflects what you would say if you were questioned or examined verbally
19 A. Yes, it does.
20 MR. SAXON: At this time, Your Honour, I would ask that this
21 exhibit be given an exhibit number as well as the associated exhibits,
22 which, if you'd like, I can read the 65 ter numbers of those exhibits
23 into the record, if you would like.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please do so.
25 MR. SAXON: The exhibits associated with this -- with the
1 statement of Mr. Peter Mitford-Burgess are 65 ter numbers 1, 2, 7 through
2 11, 13 through 16, 20 through 23, and 26 through 28. Pursuant to the
3 Trial Chamber's decision of 2 September 2008
4 admitted pursuant -- along with the written statement of Mr. Peter
6 Your ruling had been deferred on Exhibit -- 65 ter Exhibits
7 1 through 2 and 29 through 30, but it's the Prosecution understanding
8 that given the Trial Chamber's decision of last week not to exclude
9 exhibits -- 65 ter Exhibits 1 and 2, then it would be appropriate to
10 admit them at this time.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Could I hear from the Defence whether there are any
12 objections, objections which are not yet dealt with by motions to exclude
13 evidence, but for any other reason.
14 MR. KHAN: Your Honour, no. I'm most grateful.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Dieckmann.
16 MR. DIECKMANN: No objections for the Defence for Bajrush Morina.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
18 MR. SAXON: Your Honour.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
20 MR. SAXON: Just so I don't create confusion --
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please do not.
22 MR. SAXON: -- my colleague, Mr. Smith, has reminded me that
23 65 ter Exhibits number 29 and 30 were admitted yesterday.
24 JUDGE ORIE: As numbers P2 and P3, isn't it?
25 MR. SAXON: That is correct.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That's correct. Then, when you referred to
2 Exhibits 1 and 2, you included 1A, B, C, and 2A, B, C, isn't it?
3 MR. SAXON: Yes, Your Honour.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Then, Mr. Registrar, I don't know whether the 1A, B,
5 C need separate exhibit numbers or whether they can be taken together;
6 that is, transcript, audio-recording, and video-recording.
7 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
8 JUDGE ORIE: Then, for 65 ter 1A, B, C uploaded together,
9 Mr. Registrar, that would be number?
10 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that becomes Exhibit Number P12,
11 under seal.
12 JUDGE ORIE: P12 is admitted under seal.
13 2A, B, C would be?
14 THE REGISTRAR: P13, Your Honours, also under seal.
15 JUDGE ORIE: P13 is admitted into evidence under seal.
16 Now 65 ter number 7.
17 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
18 JUDGE ORIE: For all the associated exhibits, Mr. Registrar will
19 prepare a list assigning provisionally exhibit numbers, and then we'll
20 deal with them once we have that on paper.
21 I already draw the attention of you, Mr. Registrar, to the order
22 in which not 7 but 8 to 11, 13, and 15 are admitted under seal; and for
23 21, 22, and 23, it's also ordered that they would be admitted under seal.
24 We'll receive a list from Mr. Registrar and then we'll formally
25 decide on admission; but in the absence of any objections, the decision
1 to be expected is once numbers have been assigned, that they'll all be
3 Please proceed, Mr. Saxon.
4 MR. SAXON: Your Honour, I seek the Chamber's guidance very
5 briefly on a point of procedure. There are two exhibits on the
6 Prosecution's 65 ter exhibit list, which I could hypothetically tender
7 through this witness. One of them is Exhibit -- 65 ter Exhibit 31, which
8 is a confidential list that was filed in the case of Prosecutor versus
9 Haradinaj. The second exhibit would be 65 ter Exhibit 32, which was
10 another filing in the case of Mr. Haradinaj. It's a decision on the
11 Prosecution's application for protective measures.
12 However --
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please.
14 MR. SAXON: -- my first suggestion was that perhaps the Chamber
15 could simply take judicial notice of these -- of these court documents.
16 MR. KHAN: And, Your Honour, can I say as well, as a form of
17 concession, that, of course, the Witness 2 was a protected witness and
18 was subject to the relevant orders as contended by the Prosecution.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
20 Mr. Dieckmann, do you take the same position?
21 MR. DIECKMANN: Yes, I do.
22 JUDGE ORIE: So, then, it appears to be an agreed fact that
23 Witness 2 was a witness in the Haradinaj case and that his protection,
24 including not to reveal his identity, was ordered by the Trial Chamber.
25 That is now an agreed fact. Then I think that there's no need to further
1 tender through the bar table the documents appearing under numbers 31 and
3 Please proceed.
4 MR. SAXON: May I have the Chamber's leave, then, for several
5 minutes to tender -- to attempt to tender two more exhibits through
6 Mr. Mitford-Burgess?
7 JUDGE ORIE: Please do so.
8 MR. SAXON: Thank you.
9 Q. First of all, Mr. Mitford-Burgess, if you could turn please to
10 tab 11 in that binder in front of you. And, Mr. Mitford-Burgess, these
11 are a series of travel-related documents obtained from the Ministry of
12 Culture in Kosovo. If you turn to what I believe is the 12th page in
13 your version which has --
14 MR. SAXON: And if this please not be published to the public.
15 Q. You'll see an ERN number 06244292 in the upper right-hand corner.
16 Are you with me?
17 A. Yes.
18 MR. SAXON: Your Honours, can we please move -- I'm sorry, is the
19 Chamber with me?
20 JUDGE ORIE: Not yet as far as I'm concerned.
21 MR. SAXON: I see Judge Moloto is now with me. It should be
22 about the 12th page into this exhibit, Mr. President.
23 JUDGE ORIE: I look to my left and I'm familiar with the document
24 anyhow, so I'll find it, yes.
25 MR. SAXON: May we please move into private session, Your Honour.
1 JUDGE ORIE: We move into private session.
2 [Private session]
11 Pages 179-182 redacted. Private session.
23 [Open session]
24 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're back in open session.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
1 MR. DIECKMANN:
2 Q. Mr. Mitford-Burgess, did you receive the permission from the
3 police from this third country to use this material in further
5 A. I don't think it was a case of the authorities there giving us
6 explicit permission. I believe that in the receipt of the material, it
7 was envisaged that we would use it in any investigation we undertook.
8 Q. The use of this document, it was your own decision during this
9 interview to use this?
10 A. During the course of the interview, yes, it was.
11 Q. So you didn't get any order to use it from superiors?
12 A. No, sir.
21 MR. DIECKMANN:
22 Q. And the fact you have received information, could you briefly
23 illustrate what kind of information you received about the legal nature
24 of this material?
25 A. We received information from a police officer from that country,
1 who was responsible for the obtaining of this material, and that it was
2 obtained in accord with the laws of that country.
3 Q. So you have not been aware that, in fact, in this country, there
4 is no parliament law to govern the production of this kind of
5 recordings --
6 MR. SAXON: Your Honour.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Saxon, if we first allow Mr. Dieckmann to finish
8 his question, and then I'd like to hear your objection.
9 Was that the whole of your question, Mr. Dieckmann?
10 MR. DIECKMANN:
11 Q. These kind of recordings in the conduct of police activities,
12 police investigations.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
14 Mr. Saxon.
15 MR. SAXON: My objection is that within the question of my
16 learned colleague is a legal conclusion that I don't believe has been
17 established yet, Your Honour.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Of course, Mr. Dieckmann is asking for an
19 awareness of the non-existence of a particular law, isn't it?
20 MR. SAXON: That appears to be, yes, the question.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And that seems to be a factual question
22 whether a law exists or not, whether that law would apply. Whether the
23 non-existence of such a law would have an impact on the legal or illegal
24 character of what was undertaken is, of course, a different matter and
25 requires legal expertise. But awareness of the existence of a law
1 governing certain matter is a question of fact.
2 MR. SAXON: Thank you, Your Honour.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
4 MR. DIECKMANN:
5 Q. Mr. Mitford-Burgess, during the conduct of this interview, you
6 have been aware that Bajrush Morina was talking about an interview he
7 made with the Witness 2 in 2002 before you confronted him with the
8 material you received from the third country? Could you remember this?
9 A. Yes, I believe so.
10 Q. And --
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Dieckmann, I will not insist, but at least the
12 effect of the objection by Mr. Saxon is that your question has not been
13 answered. If that is what you wish, fine; if that's not what you --
14 perhaps that's what Mr. Saxon wished to achieve.
15 MR. DIECKMANN: I'm sorry.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Awareness of the existence of a law was your
17 question, Mr. Saxon opposed, the objection was denied, and then you moved
18 on to a next question, which is fine with me --
23 A. I'm not familiar with the laws of this country. All I can say
24 is and reiterate that I was told by a police officer from that country
25 that their activities were in accord with the law.
1 Q. Thank you.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Dieckmann, would you be so cautious when
3 referring to the country at page 64, line 17.
4 MR. DIECKMANN: Sorry, Your Honours.
5 Q. Mr. Mitford-Burgess, being informed that such an interview should
6 have taken place, did you conduct any further investigations after this
7 interview from the 26th of October, 2007, with regard to this interview?
8 A. No, sir.
9 Q. So, in fact, you completely ignored this interview in your
10 further investigations?
11 A. No, sir. I had no reason to dispute the fact that such an
12 interview had taken place between Mr. Morina and Witness 2.
13 Q. Thank you very much.
14 MR. DIECKMANN: I don't have any further questions.
15 [Trial Chamber confers]
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Dieckmann, could I invite you to read again page
17 65, line 1 and following, that question. Apparently, the witness
18 understood your question; I did not. But it may be that it has not been
19 transcribed accurately, I do not know; but could you perhaps rephrase the
20 question so that not only the witness but I also understand the question,
21 and then seek confirmation of the answer.
22 MR. DIECKMANN:
23 Q. Sir, my question on page 65, line 1 and 2 should be: Being
24 informed by Bajrush Morina that such an interview should have taken
25 place, did you start any kind of further investigations with relation to
1 this interview in your further investigation after the 26th of October,
3 A. In respect of confirming whether or not such an interview took
4 place between Mr. Morina and Witness 2 in 2002, I did not. We accepted
5 on face value from what he said that such an interview took place.
6 Q. So you --
7 JUDGE ORIE: Now I understand you. You did not further
8 investigate whether that interview took place or not?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, sir.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Dieckmann.
11 MR. DIECKMANN: Thank you.
12 JUDGE ORIE: I may have been misled by the word "interview"
13 because "interview" have several meanings in this context, journalistic
14 and investigative.
15 Mr. Khan, do you have questions for the witness?
16 MR. KHAN: With your leave, I do, Your Honours.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Mitford-Burgess, Mr. Khan is counsel for
18 Mr. Haraqija and he'll now cross-examine you.
19 Please proceed.
20 MR. KHAN: Your Honour, before I start the cross-examination,
21 with Your Honour's leave, perhaps I could go into -- we could go into
22 private session for two minutes.
23 JUDGE ORIE: We turn into private session.
24 [Private session]
11 Page 189 redacted. Private session.
20 [Open session]
21 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're back in open session.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
23 The ruling just given, of course, does not mean that to the
24 extent not necessary we could not respect the privacy of the person
1 MR. KHAN: Your Honour, I'm being rather dense, I do apologise.
2 JUDGE ORIE: The ruling is clear that there are no limits, but my
3 invitation is to not unnecessarily add to what might be not sought by
4 Mr. Saxon.
5 MR. KHAN: I'm grateful. I'll do my best, Your Honour.
6 Cross-examination by Mr. Khan:
7 Q. Mr. Mitford-Burgess, my name is Karim Khan and I'm counsel for
8 Astrit Haraqija. I have some questions for you.
9 It's correct, isn't it, that you are a very experienced police
11 A. Yes, sir.
12 Q. And prior to coming to the Yugoslav Tribunal in 2000, you were a
13 police officer in your native New Zealand; is that correct?
14 A. Yes, sir.
15 Q. How many years have you been a police officer?
16 A. Twenty-nine.
17 Q. And you were the officer in charge, the investigative officer in
18 charge, in this contempt case; is that right?
19 A. Yes, sir.
20 Q. You had overall supervision for ensuring that proper
21 investigative practices were implemented to ensure the integrity of the
22 proceedings; is that right?
23 A. Yes, sir.
24 Q. And also knowing that there was a duty to obtain the best
25 evidence for Their Honours to make an informed decision; that's right,
1 isn't it?
2 A. Yes, sir.
3 Q. On the 19th of December, 2007, you interviewed Steven Schook; is
4 that right?
5 A. Yes, it is.
6 Q. Mr. Schook held a high office in Kosovo; is that correct?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. In fact, he was the second-most senior United Nations official;
9 is that right?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. He was appointed directly by the special representative --
12 appointed directly by the Secretary-General of the United Nations; that
13 is correct, is it not?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. And you suspected that he was perhaps involved in contempt under
16 Rule 77 of the Rules of Procedure of this Tribunal; is that correct?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. And the basis of that was the hearsay evidence of the second
19 accused in this case; is that correct?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. And based upon that evidence, you required him to attend for
22 questioning, didn't you?
23 A. Yes.
24 MR. KHAN: Your Honours, perhaps I can show the officer an
25 interview and get him to verify that it's a true record of what
2 JUDGE ORIE: Please do so, Mr. Khan.
3 MR. KHAN: Your Honours, with the assistance of the usher, there
4 are copies for the Chamber. It's in the Prosecution's -- no, it's not.
5 And one for the witness, please.
6 Q. Witness, just glancing at that document is it correct to say that
7 that is a true and full transcript of the interview that you yourself
8 conducted with Steven Schook in December of last year?
9 A. Yes, sir.
10 Q. You can look at page 5 if you wish, but it's correct, isn't it,
11 that the deputy SRSG stated, unequivocally, that he never had any
12 conversation with anybody in respect of any witness in the Haradinaj
13 case. That's correct, is it not?
14 A. Yes, sir.
15 Q. You may wish to glance at page 10, but you will no doubt
16 recollect that he was emphatic when he said that he never instructed
17 anybody to seek an employee to speak with any protected witness relevant
18 to this case. You can see that?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. And that's what he said?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. And by that, of course, you know that he was denying that he ever
23 told Astrit Haraqija to speak with the -- sorry. Let me put that again.
24 By that, you know that he was denying that he ever told my
25 client, Mr. Haraqija, to tell Bajrush Morina to speak with the protected
1 witness in this case? You know that was his answer, don't you?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. He was emphatic that he had never told anybody at all that the
4 protected witness in this case should not come and give evidence?
5 He never tried -- he never conveyed a message to anybody that the
6 protected witness in this case should be persuaded not to give evidence.
7 That was his clear and unequivocal case, was it not? That was his
9 A. Yes, sir.
10 Q. Yes.
11 MR. KHAN: Your Honour, I would seek to tender that transcript of
12 interview as a Defence exhibit.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, the --
14 MR. KHAN: There's no objection --
15 JUDGE ORIE: -- name of Mr. Schook is on the witness list as well
16 as a 92 bis witness. Now, does it make sense -- I mean, now it's his
17 statement on paper without the attestations. Would it not be a better
18 idea to have it admitted under Rule 92 bis --
19 MR. KHAN: Well, Your Honour --
20 JUDGE ORIE: -- and then, of course, what we do know is that at
21 least now Mr. Mitford-Burgess said that this is the statement. Could the
22 parties agree that what has been shown to the witness at this moment is
23 exactly the same statement as the Defence tenders under 92 bis?
24 MR. KHAN: Your Honour, that would have been, of course, most
25 logical had we complied or been able to comply with the requirements of
1 92 bis. Unfortunately, we haven't been able to contact and find the
2 address of the witness. We sought it --
3 JUDGE ORIE: So you would say he's off the list --
4 MR. KHAN: He's off the list for now.
5 JUDGE ORIE: -- for 92 bis?
6 MR. KHAN: Indeed.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Then, of course, it makes sense.
8 Mr. Saxon, any objection against the admission of the statement
9 as an exhibit?
10 MR. SAXON: Well, yes, Your Honour, because it was the
11 Trial Chamber's decision that the statement of Mr. Schook could be
12 admitted if it was certified under Rule 92 bis, and we have not received
13 such a certification.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Isn't it true that the Defence has sought to
15 introduce the statement through Rule 92 bis, that they have failed to
16 comply with the requirements under Rule 92 bis, and that now - and
17 that's, of course, the issue, Mr. Khan - that you now seek to introduce
18 this same statement through the witness, Mr. Mitford-Burgess?
19 MR. KHAN: Well, Your Honour, I am rather surprised. No doubt,
20 it was my confusion. But my very clear recollection was that my learned
21 friend was not objecting to the interview of Steven Schook, but he was
22 objecting to the second interview that I recalled. But, Your Honour, be
23 that as it may, there are a number of points I could make.
24 The witness who took this interview is available for
25 cross-examination; he's the man in the dock. This document doesn't just
1 have external indicia of reliability. It has intrinsic indicia of
2 reliability because it's an interview, it was tape recorded; and, most
3 importantly, it was not taken by the party using it, it was taken by the
4 adversary party.
5 So, in my submission, it's very clear that this by any standard
6 must be admissible. Perhaps one could step back for a moment and wonder
7 under what basis does the Prosecution seek to exhibit the interviews of
8 my client. They're not taken under Rule 92 bis. They're taken because
9 there is a witness who conducted those interviews that presents them as
10 evidence in court.
11 In my submission, the same logic would pertain to the admission
12 in court now as an exhibit from the witness, from the investigator, who
13 conducted that interview. For the life me, I don't see how those issues
14 can be logically separated. There are intrinsic issues of reliability,
15 and, as I said, Your Honour, it's taken by the Prosecution, not by the
17 There are no -- there are a number of different ways to seek
18 admission under the Rules of this Tribunal. 89(C) is there of course.
19 There are other modalities. But this is not a statement, this is an
20 interview, which is verifiable, which was taken by the Prosecution, and
21 which was in their possession. So, in my submission it's probative, it's
22 relevant, and it's clearly admissible.
23 [Trial Chamber confers]
24 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber would not immediately decide on the
25 admission. We'd like to further consideration the situation where
1 several rules seem to be in play. The Chamber would like to take its
2 time to consider whether this is admissible evidence, yes or no.
3 Therefore, for the time being, Mr. Registrar, could you assign a
4 number so that the statement is marked for identification.
5 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this becomes Exhibit Number D1,
6 marked for identification.
7 [Trial Chamber confers]
8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Saxon, D1 is now marked for identification. You
9 briefly raised the matter of admissibility. Mr. Khan said quite a lot
10 about it. Mr. Dieckmann has not expressed himself yet on the matter.
11 MR. DIECKMANN: Yes, Your Honours. I would join the submissions
12 of my learned friend Mr. Khan.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
14 Now, Mr. Saxon, do you feel any need to offer further submissions
15 on the issues raised by Mr. Khan?
16 MR. SAXON: Your Honour, I believe I've expressed myself clearly
17 that the wholesale admission of this statement would be contrary to the
18 order of this Chamber, and that is because Rule 92 bis prescribes
19 specific criteria for admission; and in this case, the gentleman is not
20 available for cross-examination.
21 JUDGE ORIE: No. At the same time, Mr. Khan has explained why
22 under the present circumstances, even by not applying Rule 92 bis, that
23 nevertheless this document, not under Rule 92 bis but as a document
24 introduced through this witness, should be admitted. And I just wondered
25 whether you wanted to further respond to that.
1 MR. SAXON: Your Honour, I would respond this way. Suppose the
2 situation were reversed and the Prosecution sought permission to tender
3 the suspect interview of a witness with a great deal of inculpatory
4 information against an accused and that witness was not appearing here in
5 this court, the statement was not certified in any way under 92 bis, in
6 my respectful submission, that request by the Prosecution would be
7 summarily denied. So I believe we're in a similar situation here, Your
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Khan.
10 MR. KHAN: Your Honour, I'm not going to belabour the point as --
11 or engage in ping-pong, as Your Honour put it quite properly. But two
12 points that Your Honour had asked be carefully considered when deciding
13 this matter. The Rules under Rule 42 and 43 were complied with. The
14 Martic case makes it very clear that there's no absolute right to
15 cross-examination, and I'm not going to go into all the details about
17 In relation to the last point, my learned friend hasn't addressed
18 how this is logically distinguishable from the Prosecution putting in
19 suspect interviews either. But, Your Honour, I don't need to belabour
20 the point. I'll be happy with what Your Honours decide.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, the Chamber will decide on the matter and we'll
22 give a ruling on it.
23 Please proceed.
24 MR. KHAN: And, Your Honour, if you give me a moment just to try
25 and organize myself.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
2 Could we also ask you, Mr. Khan, how much time you would still
3 need for planning purposes? We are close to the moment where we usually
4 have a second break.
5 MR. KHAN: Your Honour, I think it will be about five or ten
6 minutes. I'll try to be less.
7 JUDGE ORIE: If it would be five were ten minutes, this would be
8 the last Prosecution witness, Mr. Saxon?
9 MR. SAXON: That's correct.
10 JUDGE ORIE: And, then, perhaps it's good to see whether you can
11 finish in five to ten minutes and then have the break, and then after
12 that hear the case presentation by the Defence.
13 MR. KHAN: Yes, Your Honour. I'll try to be -- I'll try to move
15 Q. Officer, it's correct, is it not, that no charges were brought
16 against Steven Schook? He hasn't been indicted by this court, has he?
17 A. No, sir, he has not.
18 Q. And you accept that the evidence that gave rise to the suspect
19 interview in relation to that gentleman was comprised of hearsay evidence
20 from the second accused in this case?
21 A. Yes, sir, it was.
22 Q. You conducted surveillance of his phone and there was no link of
23 any impropriety between him and my client; is that right?
24 A. Yes, sir, that's correct.
25 Q. You conducted searchs of UNMIK offices, looked at the computer,
1 and there was no evidence incriminating my client at all; is that right?
2 A. Yes, sir, that's correct.
3 MR. KHAN: Your Honour, I'll move on to another issue.
4 Q. On the 28th of October, 2007, it's correct, is it not, that you
5 interviewed Mr. Veli Bytyqi? Do you remember that?
6 A. Yes, yes, sir.
7 Q. You were present in that interview?
8 A. Yes, sir.
9 Q. And you spoke to him in relation to the investigation that you
10 were conducting; is that right?
11 A. Yes, sir.
12 Q. He states that he was present -- he told you that he was present
13 in Peja during the opening of a theatre. Do you remember that?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. You are of the view that my client incited the second accused in
16 this case during the opening of that theatre in Peja, that he incited him
17 to commit a contempt of this Tribunal; is that right?
18 A. Our information was that there was a discussion at a cafe in Peja
19 which a number of people were present, including Mr. Morina and
20 Mr. Haraqija, when this subject of which you're talking about was
22 Q. Yes. Let me just be rather plain in case there be any doubt.
23 You say that it was during that event in Peja that my client told the
24 second accused that he should interfere with a witness protected by this
25 Court. That's the case, isn't it?
1 A. That's our belief, sir, yes.
2 Q. Yes.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Khan, I have problems. I'm not aware that
4 Mr. Mitford-Burgess has any case to present here. So whether it's the
5 case in what he says or whether he reports on what he learned during
6 interviews is a matter to be clearly distinguished.
7 MR. KHAN:
8 Q. Witness, it's correct, is it not, that Veli Bytyqi says that he
9 was present in Peja and there was no mention that he heard -- he didn't
10 hear any mention of any protected witness. You remember him saying that,
11 don't you?
12 A. He said a number of things. Yes, I agree with you, he did say
13 that he didn't hear it, but he also said that it's possible that the
14 discussion could have taken place and he was not a party to it.
15 Q. Yes, of course. I'm not suggesting at all that Mr. Bytyqi is
16 omniscient and can hear everything; but it was very clear from what he
17 told you that he was sitting next to Mr. Haraqija during that event, he
18 was close to Mr. Haraqija, and he didn't hear any mention of any
19 protected witness. Do you agree?
20 A. He didn't exactly say where he was sitting. He said he was with
21 the group and he didn't hear such a conversation.
22 Q. And he didn't recall any mention of the ICTY or criminal
23 proceedings here; is that right?
24 A. No.
25 Q. Is that not right?
1 A. Yes, it's correct.
2 Q. I am right?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Thank you.
5 MR. KHAN: Your Honour, perhaps the witness can be shown the
6 interview of Veli Bytyqi. This is the interview that I understood the
7 Prosecution was objecting to.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
9 Could we first -- we know what the -- apart from the witness
10 looking at it, could we first hear the objection which are, I take it,
11 not related in any way to what this witness could tell us about it.
12 Mr. Saxon, we do understand that you would have objections
13 against admission of Mr. Bytyqi's interview.
14 MR. SAXON: Your Honour, yeah, I make the same objections, Your
15 Honour, because the Trial Chamber in its decision of 5 September 2008
16 said that it would admit this interview of Mr. Veli Bytyqi into evidence
17 if the witness would appear in court for cross-examination and any
18 questioning by the Judges, and that witnesses will attest that the
19 written statements or transcripts are accurate.
20 Now, that has not happened and it appears that that is not going
21 to happen with respect to this interview, this transcript of an
22 interview, with Mr. Veli Bytyqi, Your Honour.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Khan, at least there is a difference, I would
24 say, with the previous matter, which is that the Chamber ruled that the
25 statement of Mr. Bytyqi would be admissible under the condition that he
1 would appear and be available for cross-examination.
2 MR. KHAN: Your Honour, that is the case. Your Honour, the
3 difficulty is that I had information from Kosovo - I can't give
4 evidence - but he viewed himself as being a Prosecution witness. And
5 given the imminence of the trial, I couldn't get a letter from the
6 Prosecution, I didn't even try to get a letter from the Prosecution,
7 because by the time it came to my notice it was the weekend.
8 But, Your Honours, the arguments in addition to the points raised
9 earlier are that if one sees from the face of the document, this was
10 annex K to the Prosecution's papers that they submitted to His Honour
11 Judge Moloto to get the indictment confirmed.
12 It seems completely inequitable, in my respectful submission,
13 that the Prosecution, on the one hand, can use this evidence to haul my
14 client here to The Hague
15 forward by the Defence to exculpate their client. It seems to be a
16 rather unfortunate position, and one, in my respectful submission, that
17 is rather bereft in principle.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Saxon, the argument is, I would say, pretty
19 straightforward. How could you rely on this evidence to get the
20 indictment confirmed and now object against admission?
21 MR. SAXON: I certainly cannot deny, Your Honour, the fact that
22 the Prosecution has relied on this interview in the past, and I take my
23 learned colleague's point that there is an inconsistency in the
24 Prosecution's position.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Any further submissions?
1 MR. KHAN: Your Honour, no. I'm grateful.
2 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber will ...
3 [Trial Chamber confers]
4 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber will consider the admission of this
5 evidence together with the statement of Mr. Schook. At the same time, in
6 view of the exchange of arguments, the Chamber does not at this moment
7 prevent you from asking questions about the statement which will be
8 marked for identification.
9 MR. KHAN: Your Honour, I'm most grateful.
10 Before I forget, in relation to the first interview from the
11 UNMIK official that is going to be decided upon, I would just emphasize
12 that should you decide to grant the application to give it an exhibit
13 number, it should be under seal.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. It's good that you remind us.
15 Mr. Registrar, the document that is I think D1, marked for
16 identification, should remain under seal.
17 Then perhaps it would be most practical to ask Mr. Registrar to
18 assign an MFI number to this document as well.
19 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this becomes Exhibit Number D2,
20 marked for identification.
21 JUDGE ORIE: And also under seal, Mr. Registrar.
22 Then that's ...
23 [Trial Chamber confers]
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Khan, I'm again looking at the clock. If it
25 would take more than five to six minutes, we'll need to take the break
2 MR. KHAN: Your Honour, I do apologise. I think we ought to take
3 the break.
4 JUDGE ORIE: We'll have the break and we will resume at 1.00.
5 --- Recess taken at 12.39 p.m.
6 --- On resuming at 1.02 p.m.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Khan, you earlier indicated that you would need
8 five to ten minutes. Would you please stay within those limits.
9 Please proceed.
10 MR. KHAN:
17 Mr. Khan, in this way, minutes are --
18 MR. KHAN: Are lost. Indeed.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
20 MR. KHAN:
21 Q. Why did it take you until August of 2007, Witness, to seek to get
22 authorisation from a Trial Chamber in the ICTY to commence investigations
23 in this case?
24 A. I didn't come in --
25 MR. SAXON: Your Honour.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Saxon.
2 MR. SAXON: If my learned colleague is going to question the very
3 legal foundation of the OTP's investigation in this case, which really
4 means the very legal foundation of this entire matter, it seems to me
5 that this would have been more appropriate for a separate motion, and I
6 just don't know if that is the intent of my colleague.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Khan, would you please focus on facts in this
9 MR. KHAN: Your Honour, it has come up already in
10 cross-examination, and I also notified my learned friend, back in July,
11 about my position. Indeed, he was refusing to give me the date of the
12 Trial Chamber's order to commence investigations unless he asked -- and
13 he wanted to know the reason why. Let me put it more neutrally.
14 And I was very candid with him that one of the reasons why I want
15 the date is the legality of what has transpired. Now, this is the
16 officer who was in charge of the investigation. I don't see it's a
17 completely improper question. Your Honours, if you think it is, of
18 course, I'll move on.
19 MR. SAXON: And once the Prosecution had my learned friend's
20 reasons, the date was given to my learned friend immediately, and my
21 learned friend would have had time to have addressed this matter if he
22 had so chosen.
23 JUDGE ORIE: One second, please.
24 [Trial Chamber confers]
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Saxon, the objection is denied.
1 Mr. Khan, you may proceed.
2 MR. KHAN: Your Honour, I'm much obliged.
3 Q. So, Witness, could you answer, why did it take so long between
4 your suspicions being aroused and seeking authorisation from the ICTY
5 Trial Chamber?
6 A. I first became involved in this investigation on the 30th of
7 August of 2007, when I received instructions. What happened factually
8 and legally prior to that, I was not a party to.
9 Q. Is it correct that my client's mobile telephone was monitored, it
10 was under surveillance, in October 2007?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Is it correct that from that surveillance, you obtained no
13 evidence that was supporting -- capable of supporting the allegations
14 that my client was involved in a contempt of this court?
15 A. That's correct.
16 Q. Do you know why an order for surveillance was not done -- was not
17 sought in August or September of 2007?
18 A. No, I do not.
19 Q. You executed a search warrant on the department of which my
20 client was the minister; is that right?
21 A. Yes, sir.
22 Q. You were given cooperation during that search; is that right?
23 A. Yes, sir.
24 Q. Did you check my client's computer?
25 A. No, sir.
1 Q. Did you check the fax machine for incoming and outgoing faxes?
2 A. No, sir.
3 Q. Did you speak and interview the permanent secretary in charge of
4 that ministry?
5 A. No, sir.
6 Q. You are quite willing, it seems, to prefer an indictment against
7 my client based on hearsay evidence; that's a fair assessment, isn't it,
9 A. I presume that hearsay evidence is one of the ingredients of the
10 material that went to the Court seeking an indictment.
11 Q. And you were happy to prefer that hearsay evidence as a basis to
12 convict an innocent man, a man of previous good character; isn't that
14 A. Well, happiness is not an issue here.
15 Q. You felt professionally satisfied that you could in good faith
16 submit a case based on hearsay evidence, despite the fact you didn't
17 conduct a very thorough investigation. Would you agree with that or
18 would you disagree with that?
19 A. I agree and disagree. By all means, we used hearsay evidence,
20 but I don't agree that it was an unthorough investigation.
21 MR. KHAN: Your Honour, perhaps the witness can be shown tab 11.
22 It's the document under seal, with the manuscript writing on the bottom.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
24 Mr. Mitford-Burgess, did you find it? It is the first document
25 under tab 11, first binder, and the handwriting Mr. Khan was referring to
1 is found in the original.
2 MR. KHAN:
3 Q. Officer, where did you obtain this document?
4 A. I understand this was provided to us by the Witness Krasniqi.
5 Q. Do you know where she got that document?
6 A. I presume it was part of the records in her office.
7 Q. Do you know whose writing is on the bottom of that document?
8 A. I believe it is hers.
9 Q. The same day a second -- a search warrant was executed at the
10 ministry offices in Pristina; is that right?
11 A. Yes, sir.
12 Q. Various documents were seized; is that right?
13 A. Yes, sir.
14 Q. This document was not amongst them, was it?
15 A. No, sir.
16 Q. Officer, you were told by the second accused in this case when
17 you interviewed him, that the reason he went to the third country was
18 because he wished to check the veracity of an article he had written back
19 in 2002. Do you remember him saying that at the outset of the interview?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Have you ever read that article?
22 A. No, sir.
23 Q. In fact, it's fair to say that the Prosecution didn't even have
24 possession of that document until it was given by the Defence; isn't that
1 A. That's quite possible.
2 Q. You were quite content with your theory of the case, that this
3 meeting was all about witness intimidation and the involvement of Astrit
4 Haraqija, and you didn't even seek to explore other possibilities; isn't
5 that right?
6 A. The witness said, initially, that he had gone to the third
7 country to discuss the article that he had written in 2002. Later in the
8 interview, he conceded that that was not the case, that his real
9 intention in going to the third country to see Witness 2 was a directive
10 from his supervisor.
11 Q. Yes. Officer, that, of course, was after you confronted the
12 second accused with the surveillance that was conducted in the third
13 country; isn't that right?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Is it a rare occurrence in your professional experience, in New
17 that is confronted with an inconsistent account to run back and seek
18 refuge in that previous different account?
19 A. Are you meaning that, from the outset, he gave us one story and
20 then when we confronted him with the facts, he changed the story?
21 Q. Well, the evidence, is it not, officer, is that he went back to
22 an account that was consistent in broad terms to what was recorded?
23 That's what happened, isn't it?
24 A. I don't quite understand what you're getting at.
25 Q. You didn't try and allow the second accused to develop his
1 account before you confronted him with the surveillance evidence, did
3 A. I still don't understand what you're getting at.
4 Q. Let me try it again. It's my fault. Please do bear with me.
5 You did not explore in interview or at any time the second
6 accused's statement in interview that the primary reason he went to the
7 third country was to do with journalism? Is that clear enough, officer?
8 A. Yes. And, yes, we did explore with him the reason he went to the
9 third country.
10 Q. And is it a rare occurrence in your professional experience that
11 when an individual is confronted with a recording that is different from
12 the account that they give, that sometimes they seek refuge in the
13 previous recorded account, whether it's true or not? It happens, doesn't
15 A. I can only speak on this occasion about the facts of this matter.
16 Q. Well, officer, I'm asking you in your professional experience as
17 somebody well-versed and well experienced in investigating criminal
19 A. My only answer is that the accused had the opportunity to give us
20 an account of his activities; after doing so, we confronted him with a
21 tape-recording of a conversation, after which he gave us another account
22 of his activities.
23 Q. Officer, I'll move on. I don't want to belabour the point. I
24 think Their Honours have got the point that I was trying to make.
25 You knew that Mr. Morina was a journalist; is that correct?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. You knew that he was in strait and financial circumstances; is
3 that correct?
4 A. No.
5 Q. You knew that he wrote an article about the third country; is
6 that correct?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Did you think he did that out of the goodness of his heart, or
9 did you think it was part of his professional activity as a journalist?
10 A. I can only presume it was part of his professional activity as a
12 Q. Did you, at any time in your investigations in this case, explore
13 and investigate any other motive that the witness -- that the second
14 accused could have had to go to the third country? You didn't, did you?
15 MR. SAXON: Excuse me, Your Honour.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Saxon.
17 MR. SAXON: I'm very sorry to interrupt, if my learned friend
18 could simply clarify who he is referring to by the second accused.
19 JUDGE ORIE: I take it that he's referring to Mr. Morina because
20 he would not refer to his own client as the second accused, and there are
21 only two. That is how I understand your questions, Mr. Khan.
22 MR. KHAN: Your Honour is spot on.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please proceed.
24 MR. KHAN:
25 Q. Officer, you didn't investigate any other possibility in this
1 case except that this was a contempt of court from start to finish.
2 Isn't that right?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. And the reason for that is you were having hellish problems in
5 the Haradinaj case, weren't you?
6 A. I wasn't involved in the Haradinaj case.
13 MR. KHAN: I'm most grateful.
14 Q. Are you aware that under Rule 77 of the Tribunal, the OTP is
15 required to get permission from a Trial Chamber before they can initiate
16 investigations into contempt? Are you aware of that, sir?
17 A. Yes.
22 MR. KHAN: That's the last time, Your Honour. I'm tremendously
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That's what happens if you go beyond your five
25 to ten minutes.
1 MR. KHAN: Your Honour, it's also what happens when I'm try to
2 rush to finish in the five to ten minutes.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
4 MR. KHAN:
5 Q. Officer, were you seeking to use the investigative agencies of
6 the third state to conduct investigation by proxy?
7 A. No, sir.
8 MR. KHAN: Your Honour, I have no further questions.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Khan.
10 Mr. Saxon, any need to re-examine the witness?
11 MR. SAXON: Yes, please, Your Honour.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Could you give us an indication how much time you
13 would need?
14 MR. SAXON: I believe I can do it in 15 minutes, Your Honour.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Please do it as quickly as could be reasonably
16 expected from you.
17 Please proceed.
18 MR. SAXON: I will, Your Honour.
19 Re-examination by Mr. Saxon:
20 Q. Mr. Mitford-Burgess, a few minutes ago my learned colleague
21 Mr. Khan asked you about the interview that you carried out with
22 Mr. Morina back in October of last year, and you described how,
23 initially, Mr. Morina told you that he had gone to a third country - to
24 the third country in this case - to have a meeting related to an article
25 because he needed to discuss an article that he had published.
1 Do you recall that?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. And then you explained that later, however, when Mr. Morina was
4 confronted with some of the recording of one of those meetings,
5 Mr. Morina explained that actually he had been directed by his supervisor
6 to go to that third country for the meeting. That was your evidence;
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. And are you -- are you familiar with the contents of the recorded
10 meetings in the third country?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Now, can you tell us, please, is there -- to your knowledge, is
13 there anywhere in these -- any indication in these recordings of those
14 two meetings that Mr. Morina's purpose in going to that third country and
15 meeting with the protected witness was to discuss an article published
16 back in 2002?
17 A. No, not that I'm aware of.
18 Q. Okay. My colleague -- if you could turn to tab 11. I don't know
19 if you still have that in front of you. And if you turn to the first
20 page of tab 11, and my colleague asked you some questions about this
21 document. It's document from the Ministry of Culture dated the 6th of
22 July, 2007. And my colleague referred you to --
23 MR. DIECKMANN: Excuse me, Your Honour.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Dieckmann.
25 MR. DIECKMANN: Your Honours, I'm sorry. I have to object
1 because I think this is -- the question was misleading regarding the
2 content of the conversation on the 10th and 11th of July, 2007, because,
3 in fact, in the revised transcripts, you find parts where my client was
4 talking about the interview with the Witness Number 2 --
5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Dieckmann, reading the question, Mr. Saxon
6 refers to tab 11, asked whether the witness still has it in front of him,
7 directed him to the first page, and --
8 MR. DIECKMANN: Sorry, the question before. I'm sorry.
9 JUDGE ORIE: The question before.
10 MR. DIECKMANN: Yes, I'm sorry.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. You're, of course, supposed to object when the
12 question has not been answered and not after the next question.
13 MR. DIECKMANN: Sorry.
14 MR. SAXON: Your Honour, I believe --
15 JUDGE ORIE: Apart from that, whether any indication is found in
16 the recordings, of course, the Chamber can read as well. So whether
17 there is any indication or if there would be any specific indication, we
18 would have expected you to raise the matter.
19 MR. DIECKMANN: I refer --
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
21 MR. DIECKMANN: -- you to page 92, line 17.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
23 MR. DIECKMANN: "Now can you tell us, please, is there -- to your
24 knowledge, is there anywhere any in these -- indication in these
25 recordings of those two meetings that Mr. Morina's purpose in going to
1 that third country and meeting with the protected witness was to discuss
2 an article published in 2002?"
3 JUDGE ORIE: If you read, your speed of speech goes up.
4 MR. DIECKMANN: Sorry.
5 JUDGE ORIE: That was the question.
6 MR. DIECKMANN: Yes. And due to my information from the --
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But the question was put to the witness. The
8 witness answered that question. You can object against the way in
9 which -- apparently you are criticising the witness's answer because you
10 say what is put to him and what he answered.
11 Let's move on, Mr. Dieckmann. First of all, you're late; and
12 second, I don't think it's a valid objection you are raising.
13 MR. DIECKMANN: Thank you.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Saxon.
15 MR. SAXON:
16 Q. If we can look at the first page again of what is 65 ter 11, this
17 travel document from the 6th of July, you had told my learned friend in
18 response to a question that this particular page was not amongst the
19 documents that were seized on the day -- the date of the search warrant.
20 Do you recall that?
21 A. Yes, sir.
22 Q. Can you explain why that was?
23 A. No, I can't explain why that is the case.
24 Q. In addition, my learned colleague asked you some questions about
25 the fact that Mr. Morina's telephone in Kosovo had been under
1 surveillance in October of 2007.
2 Do you recall that?
3 MR. KHAN: Your Honour, I do correct, I was talking about my
4 client's telephone. Of course, both phones were monitored but it was my
5 client's phone. I'm representing the first accused.
6 MR. SAXON: Then I stand corrected. I misunderstood.
7 Then I have no further questions, Your Honour.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Saxon.
9 [Trial Chamber confers]
10 JUDGE ORIE: Judge Moloto has one or more questions for you.
11 Questioned by the Court:
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Just for my own edification, sir, who did
13 Mr. Morina say his supervisor's name was when he told you that he had
14 been ordered by his supervisor to go to the third country?
15 A. Mr. Haraqija.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you. And what was the date of the search of
17 the Ministry of Culture offices?
18 A. I can't recall offhand, Your Honour. It was -- no, I can't
19 recall that.
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Was it before or after the authorship of the
21 letter -- of this document dated the 6th of July, 2007?
22 A. It was after.
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
24 [Trial Chamber confers]
25 JUDGE ORIE: Since there are no further questions from the Bench,
1 may I take it that the questions of Judge Moloto have not triggered any
2 need for further questions.
3 Mr. Mitford-Burgess, thank you for appearing and thank you for
4 answering the questions put to you by the parties and by the Bench. I
5 usually wish witnesses a safe trip home again. I'm confident that you'll
6 be able to make it safely home again.
7 THE WITNESS: I will. Thank you.
8 [The witness withdrew]
9 JUDGE ORIE: Before we continue, I would like to give the reasons
10 for the decision as I announced yesterday. The reasons for the denial of
11 Astrit Haraqija's and Bajrush Morina's joint request for certification
12 for appeal of Trial Chamber's decision on Bajrush Morina's request for a
13 declaration of inadmissibility and exclusion of evidence dated the 28th
14 of August, 2008, I refer to that as the motion for certification.
15 The reasons are the following: On the 4th of September, 2008
16 the joint Defence submitted the motion for certification, requesting
17 leave to appeal the Trial Chamber's decision on Bajrush Morina's request
18 for a declaration of inadmissibility and exclusion of evidence, the
19 impugned decision.
20 In support, the Defence argues that: A, the Trial Chamber erred
21 in failing to realize or failing to properly consider that the correct
22 translation of the suspect interview with the accused Morina is an area
23 of clear dispute between the parties; B, the Trial Chamber erred in
24 concluding that the corrected, more prejudicial version was the correct
25 version without its own independent verification thereof by appointing an
1 independent translator to listen to the audio recording of the suspect
2 interview and review written transcript for accuracy; C, the
3 Trial Chamber applied an incorrect standard in respect of the required
4 voluntariness of the waiver of the right to the assistance of counsel.
5 According to the Defence, these issues would significantly affect
6 the outcome of the trial as well as the fair conduct of the proceedings.
7 It argues that the Trial Chamber's errors clearly constitute a ground of
8 appeal post-judgement which can possibly be avoided if the issue is
9 resolved now.
10 Finally, the Defence also points out that since the trial is due
11 to be held only during this week, an immediate resolution by the Appeals
12 Chamber may materially advance the proceedings.
13 On September the 5th, 2008, the Prosecution filed its response
14 opposing the motion for certification. The Prosecution submits that the
15 Defence never disputed the accuracy of the revised translation prior to
16 the issuance of the impugned decision, nor that it had sought
17 verification of the translation by an independent interpreter.
18 Moreover, the Prosecution argues that the Defence has not
19 explained how the Trial Chamber misapplied the law applying "an incorrect
21 The Prosecution concludes that the Defence has not demonstrated
22 that the fairness and expeditiousness of these proceedings would be
23 served by certifying this appeal, which is the first prong of the
24 requirements under Rule 73(B).
25 The Chamber notes that a proper request for certification is "not
1 concerned with whether a decision was correctly reasoned or not. That is
2 a matter for appeal, be it an interlocutory appeal or one after final
3 judgement has been rendered. Rule 73(B) concerns the fulfilment of two
4 criteria, after which the Trial Chamber may decide to certify an
5 interlocutory appeal."
6 Accordingly, according to Rule 73(B) of the Rules of Procedure
7 and Evidence, "decisions on all motions are without interlocutory appeal,
8 save with certification by the Trial Chamber which may grant such
9 certification if the decision involves an issue that would significantly
10 affect the fair and expeditious conduct of the proceedings or the outcome
11 of the trial and for which, in the opinion of the Trial Chamber, an
12 immediate resolution by the Appeals Chamber may materially advance the
14 The fair and expeditious conduct of the proceedings or the
15 outcome of the trial.
16 The Chamber concurs with the Prosecution that a thorough reading
17 of the Defence submissions made prior to the impugned decision reveals
18 that the Defence did not submit that it took issue with the accuracy of
19 the Prosecution's revised translation, in particular as regards the
20 expression "maybe later," nor has the Defence on a prior occasion
21 requested that the revised translation be verified by an independent
23 Footnote 2 of the Defence submission of the 4th of August, 2008
24 reads: "The Defence has as of yet been unable to verify whether this
25 corrected version is, indeed, an accurate transcription and translation
1 of the audio of the interview. If the translation is in dispute, it may
2 need to be submitted to an independent interpreter for verification.
3 Nonetheless, even assuming that the language in the latest English
4 transcript is correct, the Defence submits that the ambiguity of the
5 language of Mr. Morina's purported waiver remains unchanged." This is
6 the end of the reading of footnote 2.
7 Moreover, the Chamber finds that the Defence has not sufficiently
8 substantiated its claim that the Chamber applied an incorrect standard in
9 its impugned decision. Therefore, the Chamber is not satisfied that the
10 Defence has demonstrated that the impugned decision suffers from such a
11 flaw in its factual or legal reasoning that the fair and expeditious
12 conduct of the proceedings or the outcome of the trial has been called
13 into question.
14 I now move to materially advance the proceedings.
15 Having found that the first of the two requirements under
16 Rule 73(B) has not been met and considering that an application for
17 certification must satisfy both requirements cumulatively, there would be
18 no need for the Chamber to address the issue of whether immediate
19 resolution by the Appeals Chamber would materially advance the
21 Nevertheless, the Chamber finds that the Defence has also failed
22 to satisfy this requirement. The certification motion was filed two
23 working days prior to commencement of the case and about one week before
24 its conclusion. It is, therefore, difficult to conceive how resolution
25 by the Appeals Chamber could materially advance the proceedings. On the
1 contrary, in the Chamber's view allowing an interlocutory appeal at this
2 time would cause an unnecessary delay in concluding the proceedings in
3 the present case.
4 This concludes the reasons for the denial of the certification
6 We have five minutes left. I think it would not be very wise to
7 invite the Defence to start --
8 MR. KHAN: Your Honour --
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
10 MR. KHAN: -- perhaps the Prosecution want to be invited to close
11 their case.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That's how I understood the present situation.
13 Mr. Saxon, have I understood it well or is there any --
14 MR. SAXON: If you'll just give me five seconds to review my
15 trial plan. Yes, Your Honours, that is the Prosecution's case.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And I take it that we have not forgotten any
17 of the exhibits on the list? I have not checked it. I leave it up to
19 MR. SAXON: The Prosecution is not -- does not plan to tender any
20 additional --
21 JUDGE ORIE: -- any further exhibits.
22 MR. SAXON: -- exhibits.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
24 MR. KHAN: Your Honours, for the sake of formality, I will say --
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
1 MR. KHAN: -- and I speak on behalf of my learned friend as well,
2 there's no Rule 98 bis application at this stage.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Apart from whether that would apply in the present
4 case, you know that sometimes the proceedings are a bit adapted, and I
5 would like to discuss this with the parties as well. For example, final
6 briefs are usually not presented in contempt cases. Unless I hear from
7 any of the parties that there is a wish to do so, and then have oral
8 submissions, the final submissions after that, the Chamber would like to
10 MR. KHAN: Your Honour, I think the starting point, I'll just say
11 it for the record, my view is that under Rule 77, parts 4 to 9 of the
12 Rule do apply mutatis mutandis; but, of course, there is adaptability
13 within your overall discretion.
14 As far as the closing briefs are concerned, I think the matters
15 are well -- have been well put before Your Honours. And if my learned
16 friend agrees, I think closing speeches will be sufficient in this case
17 to expedite matters, and I don't think there will be any loss of clarity,
18 I hope.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Saxon.
20 MR. SAXON: In the great spirit of cooperation between the
21 parties, Your Honour, the Prosecution agrees.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Dieckmann, may I --
23 MR. DIECKMANN: I can only join the other submissions. Thank
25 JUDGE ORIE: Of course, the Rules fully apply, Mr. Khan, I'm
1 fully aware of that. At the same time, for example, there was no
2 Pre-Trial Conference in this case, which is often not done because
3 contempt cases, of course, are a bit of a different character; although,
4 of course, the fundamental matters are the same as always.
5 Then I would like to proceed. The Prosecution's case closed, no
6 98 bis applications.
7 If I look at your witness list, Mr. Khan, I have two viva voce
8 witnesses, one scheduled for 90 minutes, another for 60 minutes.
9 MR. KHAN: Your Honour, at this stage - and I will speak to the
10 witnesses beforehand - but I am inclined now that the Prosecution has
11 closed to call three witnesses: The accused himself --
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
13 MR. KHAN: -- I think, at the moment, that's the way we're going.
14 It may change tomorrow, but I think that's the way things are going; the
15 second witness will be Eddie --
16 What's the surname?
17 JUDGE ORIE: Kuqi.
18 MR. KHAN: -- Eddie Kuqi; and the third is Mr. Kasapolli.
19 These are the witness I would call, and then close the case.
20 JUDGE ORIE: That means that Mr. Zhubi is not on the list
22 MR. KHAN: No. And, of course, there is the 92 bis witness
23 statement --
24 JUDGE ORIE: Of Zija Isa Rugova, according to my list.
25 MR. KHAN: Indeed. And also of the wife of the client which is
1 going to be redacted, in accordance with Your Honour's order, some time
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That's paragraph 3 and 4 that I am thinking
5 MR. KHAN: Indeed.
6 Your Honour, the other matter, I hope you don't mind me raising
7 it, Your Honours are, of course, seized of an application for
8 reconsideration. And the only thing I would say in relation to that is
9 there's no objection at all, and it's a matter you don't need any
10 permission for anyway, if Your Honours wish to listen to that part of the
12 And I can say for the record I'm completely satisfied in
13 accepting whatever Your Honours wish, because the words "maybe, maybe"
14 are in English, and I'm completely happy to accept as definitive Your
15 Honours' own determination as to what he said in relation to that
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Dieckmann, would the same be true as far as you
18 are concerned?
19 MR. DIECKMANN: Yes, I join the submissions of my colleague.
20 JUDGE ORIE: So that means that the Chamber can form its opinion
21 on that portion --
22 MR. KHAN: Indeed.
23 JUDGE ORIE: -- of the conversation which is in English, and
24 then, of course, make its own evaluation on the basis of the whole of it.
25 MR. KHAN: Indeed. And Your Honours' determination will be
1 definitive on that issue.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Let's then be very practical. Could you give
3 us an estimate on how much time it would take if the accused takes the
5 MR. KHAN: Your Honour, I don't intend to be more than 40 minutes
6 with him. I'm going to be a little bit more generous with myself, so I
7 don't fall into the mire that I fell into before. I'll say maximum 40
8 minutes for examination-in-chief. I'll try to be as brief as I can.
9 Mr. Kuqi, Eddie Kuqi, he's a 92 ter witness, so very brief; but,
10 basically, he'll be tendered for cross-examination, and, again, a
11 discrete issue.
12 JUDGE ORIE: So the 45 minutes which we find on your list could
13 be reduced to ten minutes?
14 MR. KHAN: Yes.
15 JUDGE ORIE: So that makes close to one hour for chief, and then
16 we still have Mr. Kasapolli.
17 MR. KHAN: Your Honour, I do hope I don't misspeak, but my
18 intention would be all the witnesses in chief would be no more than an
19 hour and a half.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
21 Then Mr. Dieckmann.
22 MR. DIECKMANN: Your Honours, up to now, the Defence of Bajrush
23 Morina still does not intend to call any witness, and we indicated that
24 we would very briefly be posing questions in cross-examination.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
1 Mr. Saxon.
2 MR. SAXON: Just one question, Your Honour. Given the expected
3 speed which these proceedings may travel tomorrow, could the Chamber
4 inform the parties whether we will be expected tomorrow to provide
5 closing arguments.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, of course, I'm looking at that. If I'm
7 optimistic - and I am by nature an optimistic person - then I think the
8 three witnesses could be dealt with in two sessions. Globally, one and a
9 half hours for you, Mr. Khan; further questions, cross-examination, most
10 likely not more than one and a half, which would lead us to the
11 conclusion of the presentation of evidence by the second break.
12 Next question, of course, closing arguments, I think matters are
13 relatively clear where the issues are.
14 How much time would you need, Mr. Saxon?
15 MR. SAXON: Maximum one hour, Your Honour.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Khan.
17 MR. KHAN: Your Honour, I will also ask for no more than an hour.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Dieckmann.
19 MR. DIECKMANN: Same as me.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That means that we could not conclude. Let me
21 just see.
22 [Trial Chamber confers]
23 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber urges the parties to see whether they
24 can make their closing arguments in half an hour. That's for you,
25 Mr. Saxon; that's for you, Mr. Khan; and for you, Mr. Dieckmann. Please
1 consider this very seriously.
2 The Chamber gains the impression that most of the issues in this
3 case are both on the basis of the pre-trial briefs; and in view of what
4 we've heard until now - of course, we will still hear evidence from the
5 Defence - that the issues are relatively clear and that it is also a
6 matter of efficiency and proceeding in such a way that we do not lose any
7 time unnecessarily.
8 Yes, Mr. Saxon.
9 MR. SAXON: I'm sorry. Just to clarify, Your Honour, but will
10 the parties be expected to present their closing arguments tomorrow then?
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, at least to start. We'll proceed as quickly as
12 possible; and from the invitation to reduce it to half an hour, you may
13 understand that if we could conclude this trial by tomorrow, the Chamber
14 would prefer to do that.
15 We stand adjourned and we resume tomorrow, Wednesday, the 10th of
16 September, 9.00 in the morning, Courtroom II.
17 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.51 p.m.
18 to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 10th day of
19 September, 2008, at 9.00 a.m.