1 Thursday, 31 May 2007
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness entered court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 2.20 p.m.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Good afternoon to everyone.
7 Madam Registrar, would you please call the case.
8 THE REGISTRAR: Good afternoon, Your Honours. This is case number
9 IT-04-84-T, the Prosecutor versus Ramush Haradinaj et al.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
11 Mr. Harvey, before I give you the opportunity to continue your
12 cross-examination of Mr. Krasniqi, I'd like to remind you, Mr. Krasniqi,
13 that you're still bound by the solemn declaration you've given at the
14 beginning of your testimony, that is, that you'll speak the truth, the
15 whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
16 Mr. Harvey, please proceed -- yes, Mr. Kearney.
17 MR. KEARNEY: Just a very brief matter, Your Honour. You asked
18 the Prosecution yesterday to give a time estimate of the re-direct.
19 Obviously I gave it at the time when only one and a portion of the second
20 Defence attorney had spoken, and I may ask for a little more time
21 depending on the extent of the further cross.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Unforeseen circumstances always could change
23 the situation.
24 Please proceed, Mr. Harvey.
25 MR. HARVEY: Thank you, Your Honour.
1 WITNESS: JAKUP KRASNIQI [Resumed]
2 [Witness answered through interpreter]
3 Cross-examination by Mr. Harvey: [Continued]
4 Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Krasniqi.
5 A. Good afternoon.
6 Q. I'd like to come back to an issue that you discussed yesterday,
7 perhaps rather theoretically, with the President of the Court, and that
8 was on the question of the word "collaborator." I'm looking back at your
9 testimony in the Limaj trial at page 3491 when you were asked this
11 "Q. During the various pronouncements that were made by the
12 General Staff during 1998, and I included communiques, speeches, political
13 declarations, and interviews that you gave, was any such definition of a
14 collaborator ever provided by the General Staff?"
15 To that question you then answered: "No," and do I understand
16 that your answer would be the same today, sir?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. You were asked further by the Prosecutor in the Limaj trial.
19 "Q. Did the General Staff ever communicate procedures that should
20 be followed to determine who is a collaborator during 1998?"
21 And again, to that question, you answered: "No."
22 Do I take it that again, sir, your answer would be the same today?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Thank you. Understanding, sir, that we're dealing with the
25 time-frame from March through September of 1998, do I understand your
1 evidence correctly, sir, that there was during that time-period no
2 effective hierarchical structure to the KLA? And if I can be a little bit
3 more precise in that question, as Mr. Kearney would obviously like me to
5 There were -- for instance, there was no KLA police, correct, no
6 KLA military police?
7 A. The military police was consolidated after the summer offensive.
8 It could be the month of October 1998.
9 Q. Thank you. There were certainly no courts or judges operating
10 under the aegis of the KLA during that period?
11 A. No, there weren't.
12 Q. You were also asked this question during the course of the Limaj
14 "Q. Were you ever a part of, or a party to, any conversation or
15 meeting with any KLA colleague in which a system, a plan, or the
16 organisation of detentions or arrests of innocent civilians was
18 And to that, sir, you gave the answer: "No. There has been no
19 meeting of such a nature and we never dealt with such things."
20 MR. HARVEY: Your Honours, I'm at page 3449 of the Limaj
22 Q. Mr. Krasniqi, do I understand that -- do you agree, first of all,
23 that you gave that answer in that case?
24 A. Yes, I do.
25 Q. And does your answer remain the same today, sir?
1 A. Yes, the answer remains the same.
2 MR. HARVEY: Your Honours, those are all the questions that I
4 Q. Thank you very much, Mr. Krasniqi.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Harvey.
6 Mr. Guy-Smith.
7 Mr. Krasniqi, Mr. Guy-Smith is Defence counsel for Mr. Balaj and
8 will now cross-examine you.
9 MR. HARVEY: Your Honours, I'm sorry, I just scrolled through a
10 piece of transcript that I had meant to put to the witness. Would
11 Your Honours give me that indulgence. I apologise.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, if Mr. Guy-Smith would. Please do so.
13 There will be another question or a few questions by Mr. Harvey,
14 Mr. Krasniqi.
15 MR. HARVEY:
16 Q. Mr. Krasniqi, just one more issue. You were asked in the Limaj
17 case --?
18 MR. HARVEY: And, Your Honours, I'm at page 3458 of the
19 transcript, at the very bottom.
20 Q. -- whether you were suggesting that the Belgrade regime infiltrated
21 into the ranks of the KLA. You gave an extensive answer there. I'd like
22 you to give your own view of that matter today, and I'm talking
23 particularly, obviously, of the indictment period that we're dealing with
24 here, from March until September of 1998. Is it your opinion, based on
25 your experience and your knowledge of the KLA at that time, that the Serb
1 regime did infiltrate the ranks of the KLA?
2 A. Yes, this is what I said then and I can repeat it today. There
3 were, and I mentioned several cases, when members of the KLA or those who
4 helped the KLA fell victims and lost their lives as a result of these
5 infiltrations into the KLA ranks.
6 Q. Do you regard the Serb secret service at that time as a very
7 professional organisation?
8 A. The Serb secret service was not only a secret service, but at that
9 same time it was an executive service. It was a secret criminal police.
10 Q. In your view, does that secret service still seek to destabilise
11 the progress of the freedom of Kosovo?
12 MR. KEARNEY: Objection as to relevance.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. --
14 MR. HARVEY: I will come to my reason for that immediately in that
15 case. I understand the objection.
16 JUDGE ORIE: The objection is denied.
17 Please proceed, Mr. Harvey.
18 MR. HARVEY:
19 Q. Are you aware, sir, of any pressure that is brought to bear today
20 on the citizens of Kosovo by the Serb secret service that might cause
21 them, the citizens of Kosovo, to come forward to a Tribunal such as this
22 and tell lies in order to defame the KLA?
23 MR. KEARNEY: Objection. Your Honour, without further foundation
24 that calls for speculation on behalf of this witness.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Harvey, as with your previous question when you
1 referred to the bottom of page 3458 and looking at the answer on the top
2 of 3459 in the Limaj case, you're invited to ask specifics to the witness
3 and not whether he knows that -- your question is phrased in very general
4 terms. Of course, if you expect the answer to be yes and then go into the
5 details, then of course you could wonder whether we had to -- whether we
6 needed to hear the answer to that. Let's try to get facts as much as
7 possible. Please proceed.
8 MR. HARVEY:
9 Q. Returning, Mr. Krasniqi, then to the indictment period of March
10 through September of 1998, what forms of pressure did the Serb secret
11 service bring to bear on the supporters of the KLA during that time-frame?
12 A. The forms of pressure that the secret or the intelligence service
13 of the Serbian regime exercised were of different sorts. During that
14 time, the police and the entire repressive apparatus in Kosova had set up
15 many check-points where all the citizens who were travelling in and out
16 different zones of Kosova were stopped and checked. Many people in
17 different forms were subjected to pressure exercised by the police. I
18 believe that in the Limaj case many witnesses gave statements, first to
19 the Serbian police and then to the OTP and then became witnesses in the
20 Limaj case. So they were subjected to different sorts of pressure during
21 the war and after the war. So the influence of the Serbian regime in
22 Kosova did not stop with the war in Kosova; it continued.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Krasniqi, would you please refrain from giving
24 judgements on whether witnesses testified due to pressure. If you know of
25 any specific facts relevant for answering the question put to you by
1 Mr. Harvey, of course you can give facts, but many people in different
2 forms are subjected to pressure exercised by the police, I believe that in
3 the Limaj case many witnesses gave statements, and then you interpreted
4 this as statements given under pressure.
5 Again, if you have facts to your knowledge relevant for answering
6 the question put to you by Mr. Harvey, please tell those facts, but would
7 you please refrain from general statements about witnesses giving
8 statements or testifying under pressure.
9 Mr. Harvey.
10 MR. HARVEY:
11 Q. Mr. Krasniqi, are there any specific facts that you would like to
12 point out to the Trial Chamber based on your personal knowledge of such
14 A. That the pressure that the Serbian regime exercised was huge and
15 had an impact on capturing people, started as of 10th April, 1998, in
16 Slatine, municipality of Fushe Kosova, Hafir Shala, a doctor, was
17 kidnapped and to this date we don't know anything about his fate. Later
18 on during July or August in Pristina as well, with the help of the
19 informants and the collaborators with the Serbian intelligence service,
20 Xhavit Haziraj was arrested who was an activist in the organisation for
21 the defence of human rights and freedom, and his whereabouts are not known
22 to this date.
23 Also during the offensive in September in the Rahovec
24 municipality, two commanders of the KLA were killed and two other soldiers
25 as well. This was also result of the activities of those people who were
1 infiltrated in the ranks of the KLA by the secret service of Serbia.
2 Therefore, I'm claiming that this secret service has prepared many other
3 evidence just in order to accuse members of the KLA and to bring down the
4 just war that the KLA waged. I think that I put forward some facts that I
6 JUDGE ORIE: You started with facts, and then you continued with
7 opinion. I asked you not to give judgements or opinions.
8 Mr. Emmerson.
9 MR. EMMERSON: Your Honour, we are travelling some distance away
10 from the evidence which this witness has been called to give by the
11 Prosecution. I have objected when the Prosecution has, without laying a
12 proper foundation, sought to elicit either opinions or generalities or
13 endorsements of factual statements which the witness is, on analysis, not
14 in a position to give a basis for. And out of consistency, I would take
15 the same position in respect of this line of questioning.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Thank you, Mr. Emmerson.
17 Mr. Harvey, I had to intervene twice where the witness started
18 giving opinions rather than -- and also invited you to be very specific in
19 your line of questioning, especially I refer to page 3458 and 3459.
20 Because I see more or less the same, I would say, the same general
21 sweeping statements about matters, although I do not see that there, there
22 was any intervention but that's a type of evidence I would avoid to have
23 elicited from this witness at this moment.
24 MR. EMMERSON: I think if I may say so, there was examination for
25 the basis of it at a later stage in the transcript, and it transpired that
1 much of the comment was without foundation, which is one of the reasons
2 why I object.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Harvey -- Mr. Kearney --
4 MR. KEARNEY: And, Your Honour, even the facts that this witness
5 has given, for instance, the killing of Xhavit Haziraj, he claims -- he
6 just gives his opinion that that was a result of some type of
7 infiltration. We still don't have any facts about that basic foundation.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kearney, of course if there's no further
9 foundation laid, then what you're drawing our attention to goes, I would
10 say, without saying for this Trial Chamber.
11 Mr. Harvey.
12 MR. HARVEY: Your Honour, I adduced those facts because they were
13 adduced in the Limaj case and they appeared to me to have some relevance.
14 I am not planning to pursue them any further with the witness. And I'm
15 grateful for the Court's indulgence.
16 Q. Thank you, Mr. Krasniqi.
17 JUDGE ORIE: I take it the Defence teams would not adopt the
18 position as adopted by this witness, that if someone disappears or is
19 kidnapped and never heard of again, that that is evidence or at least
20 sufficient for an opinion --
21 MR. HARVEY: Your Honour, on its own that is totally insufficient
22 for a basis of drawing such a conclusion.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Then there seems to be no disagreement on that.
24 Mr. Guy-Smith.
25 Cross-examination by Mr. Guy-Smith:
1 Q. Good afternoon. I'd like to clarify a very quick matter with you
2 and then move into two areas. First of all, when you gave the statement
3 to the OTP in 2004, I believe, do you recall that when you gave that
4 statement you gave that statement to Mr. Whiting, Mr. Di Fazio, and
5 Mr. Black of the Office of the Prosecutor? Do you recall that?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Do you recall that there was an investigator involved in the
8 taking of that statement, who I think was tasked with tape-recording that
9 interview, that the tape-recording failed and that was a gentleman by the
10 name of Quiroz?
11 A. I don't remember his name, but I remember that there was
12 tape-recording going on.
13 Q. Very well. You've told us that during 1997, if I'm not mistaken,
14 you were acting in a clandestine manner and I'd like to explore that with
15 you for a moment and see if I understand what you're referring to and see
16 if we can be of any assistance to the Chamber. During 1997, you were a
17 member of the LDK, were you not?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. And during that time in 1997, when you were a member of the LDK,
20 you were pursuing publicly on behalf of the LDK a position of what I would
21 call, if it's accurate, a non-violent resolution of the problems that
22 existed in Kosovo?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. As a matter of fact, during 1997 there was a spirited and open
25 debate in Kosovo concerning the best way of resolving the difficulties
1 that existed; and by "difficulties that existed," I mean the fact that
2 Kosovo had been living under a system of apartheid for some period of
3 years. Is that true?
4 A. Yes.
5 MR. KEARNEY: Your Honour, that is a rather grand generalisation
6 by the -- Mr. -- my colleague which is without factual foundation. I'm
7 going to ask that this --
8 MR. GUY-SMITH: That's --
9 MR. KEARNEY: -- opinion evidence by the witness be stricken.
10 MR. GUY-SMITH: Let me see if I can tie that up.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. If you can do so we'll see if the objection
13 MR. GUY-SMITH:
14 Q. By 1997, the autonomy of Kosovo which had previously been
15 recognised under the former Yugoslavia had been abolished; true?
16 A. It was abolished in 1989.
17 Q. Thank you.
18 A. In March 1989.
19 Q. The financing of Albanian schools had been stopped, and the staff
20 was not being paid by the Serbian government; true?
21 A. Yes, it is true.
22 Q. Education during that time was, I believe the term is
23 rationalised, and by that there were 6.000 places for some 36.000 Albanian
24 children who had finished primary school to go into secondary school;
1 A. Yes, true.
2 Q. Faculty professors at the secondary school level, at the
3 university level, had been fired; correct?
4 A. Correct.
5 Q. The Mother Teresa Association, as early as 1993, as a result of
6 some of the activities of Belgrade, had been cooperated with the LDK in
7 supplying food and clothing to some tens of thousands of Albanians who
8 were living under sub-subsistence standards as a result of the fact that
9 they had neither work nor any support from the government; true?
10 A. Yes, it is true, but Mother Teresa also helped in the health care.
11 Q. I was going to get to the issue of health care. As a matter of
12 fact, by that time there were volunteer hospitals and clinics that served
13 the Albanian Kosovar population because the doctors, the Albanian doctors,
14 could not practice in the general hospitals; true?
15 A. Yes, correct.
16 Q. Nor could the nurses?
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kearney, Mr. Re, to what extent is it in dispute
18 that the system in place in the years prior to -- well, let's say in
19 the -- starting in the early 1990s, that the government - well, to say it
20 frankly - was not without discriminatory approaches on social matters?
21 MR. KEARNEY: Your Honour, we understand that there was ethnic
22 tension during that time-period in that decade in Kosovo, but I -- I've
23 been allowing my colleague to pursue this line of questioning. Frankly,
24 the Prosecution just does not see the relevance of social welfare in the
25 early 1990s to this trial and the events alleged in this indictment.
1 MR. GUY-SMITH: I was responding only to the issue of apartheid,
2 and the Prosecution's objection to the use of the word "apartheid." I
3 believe that historically if we were to look at other places, specifically
4 South Africa, we would find that legislative disenfranchisement of a
5 people is the definition of apartheid. I am more than happy to move on
6 from this position because I believe that the Prosecution and all parties
7 are well aware of the status of Kosovo up until 1997 and certainly in
8 terms of 1998. I was only mentioning those particular facts because I had
9 been criticised for raising the issue of apartheid in the absence of any
10 factual predicates upon which such an assertion could be made.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
12 MR. KEARNEY: Your Honour, my problem with that entire line of
13 questioning is the word "apartheid" has a legal definition. I don't
14 believe this witness -- first of all, it's not relevant but this witness
15 is in a position to answer this effectively.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Well, let's -- Mr. --
17 MR. EMMERSON: I simply don't wish to sit silently if there could
18 be the prospect of a ruling about the relevance of the decade before 1998
19 to the issues on this indictment. There are direct potential relevance
20 questions concerning the state of animosity between communities which may
21 go correctly to responsibility for certain offences, but I don't --
22 JUDGE ORIE: That's of course -- I mean, the relevance of, I would
23 say, ethnic tensions, social developments, prior to a conflict, we're not
24 even talking about an armed conflict, but a conflict breaking out is not
25 easily denied. That's exactly the reason why I tried to find out whether
1 this was in dispute. The Chamber heard evidence about measures taken at
2 schools, what was allowed -- no, Mr. Krasniqi, I'm speaking.
3 We heard evidence about that which, at least gives some clues as
4 to how the government at that time dealt with these kind of matters. And
5 I'm wondering whether an objection against the word "apartheid," of
6 course, which is a very specific word and could easily suggest that
7 everything that was included in the apartheid system in South Africa would
8 be exactly similarly be applied. But that's the reason why I chose other
9 words to see whether there is dispute about these matters.
10 Mr. Kearney, if we take distance from the word "apartheid" and if
11 we focus on evidence that we heard from the system in the schools, is
12 there any real dispute about tensions and -- well, let's say
13 administrative measures which at first sight would seem to fuel such
14 tensions rather than to quiet them down.
15 MR. RE: I don't believe there is. I rise to answer this because
16 of --
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
18 MR. RE: -- my overview of the agreed facts negotiations. The
19 Prosecution has proposed to the Defence to accept the adjudication of a
20 series of facts from the Limaj trial judgement which go towards many of
21 the issues which my learned colleague Mr. Guy-Smith is questioning the
22 witness on at the moment. I don't believe there's going to be any dispute
23 about the general background of the relationship between the Serbian
24 government authorities and the Albanian population. The dispute of the
25 trial is the factual matters that occurred in 1998.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
2 MR. RE: The objection at the moment, as my learned friend
3 Mr. Kearney says, is to the use of the word "apartheid" which has a very
4 specific legal definition under international law. We believe the matter
5 can be resolved.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Let's resolve this matter now.
7 Mr. Guy-Smith, the objection was mainly about the use of the word,
8 and it now seems, although the Chamber is not aware of the progress made
9 in the adjudicated facts discussions -- the agreed facts discussions, of
10 course, the Chamber still hopes that in view of the function of agreed
11 facts that the agreement will be there before the Appeals Chamber has
12 finally decided, if it ever comes to that, this case. Could you please
13 proceed and I will not allow you, in view of what has just been said by
14 the Prosecution, to explore in detail the social welfare.
15 MR. GUY-SMITH: I'm done.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
17 MR. GUY-SMITH:
18 Q. During 1997 and 1998, to your knowledge did all weapons possessed
19 by Kosovar Albanians have to be registered with and reported to the
20 Serbian police departments?
21 A. The Serb authorities during 1997 and 1998 launched a campaign for
22 the collection of weapons by exercising violence and repression on the
23 citizens without any distinction. This was a systematic violence that the
24 Serb regime used or exercised several times after --
25 Q. Mr. Krasniqi --
1 JUDGE ORIE: You now seem to engage not in answering the questions
2 put to you but in giving your opinion and your assessment of, at that
3 time, the situation. The question simply was whether to your knowledge
4 all weapons possessed by Kosovar Albanians had to be registered with and
5 reported to the Serbian police departments, whether -- if you know, please
6 tell us; if you don't know, please tell us as well.
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, a little earlier I
8 accepted the call, an appeal from the Prosecution, about the
9 word "apartheid" that was used here --
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Krasniqi, you are invited to answer the question
11 put to you by Mr. Guy-Smith; that is, whether to your knowledge all
12 weapons possessed by Kosovar Albanians have to be registered with and
13 reported to the Serbian police departments. Please answer that question.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I answered the question and there
15 was violence and repression --
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Krasniqi, you have not answered the question.
17 You have told us about a campaign launched for the collection of weapons,
18 violence, and oppression. Did they have to be registered?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
20 JUDGE ORIE: And was this -- because that's one of the issues, was
21 this specifically for Kosovar Albanians or for the whole of the
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Only for Albanian citizens of
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
1 Please proceed, Mr. Guy-Smith.
2 MR. GUY-SMITH: Thank you, Your Honour.
3 Q. And thank you, Mr. Krasniqi. I'm going to ask you about a series
4 of names. If you know these names, you may wish to give your opinion
5 about them. I'm not asking for your opinion about those names, but simply
6 whether or not you know the name and whether or not you know the status
7 that that name might have. If you would be so kind as to do that, confine
8 your answer to that, I would appreciate it.
9 I'm specifically speaking about individuals who were part of the
10 Serbian State Security Service in Kosovo. Do you know the name of
11 Milan Lakovic, also known as Misku?
12 A. No.
13 Q. Have you heard the name Zoran Dragovic, in your capacity as either
14 a member of the LDK or your involvement with the KLA as an individual
15 involved in counter-espionage in Kosovo?
16 A. I have heard about him.
17 Q. Marko Milosevic, reputed to be involved in the detection of
18 terrorism and investigation of persons involved in politics?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. With regard to Marko Milosevic, to your knowledge, based upon
21 information you may have received, was this gentleman involved in
22 operations including assassinations, arrests, and staged scenes of
23 individual -- of crime involving -- involving Serbs as against Albanians?
24 MR. KEARNEY: Your Honour --
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kearney
1 MR. KEARNEY: -- I'm going to object to the form of the question.
2 First of all, there is no specification as to time. And secondly, just
3 the words "have you heard" does not give us a proper foundation for --
4 JUDGE ORIE: I expected the next question of Mr. Guy-Smith to be:
5 What was the information that you may have received in this respect.
6 MR. GUY-SMITH: Precisely, Your Honour.
7 JUDGE ORIE: But time, if you could include a time-frame, then
8 that would be appreciated. Please.
9 MR. GUY-SMITH: Surely.
10 Q. Taking my colleague's concern in mind and the Judge's admonition,
11 the time would be 1997. Did you obtain information that Marko Milosevic
12 was involved in operations including assassinations, arrests, and staging
13 scenes of crimes? Assassinations and arrests being of Albanians in 1997.
14 A. No, I don't.
15 Q. Very well. Are you aware of the Serb security forces being
16 involved in the assassinations of Mr. Pajaziti, Mr. Zejulaahu, and
17 Mr. Hoxha in 1997?
18 A. I did not hear the names properly. If you could repeat them.
19 Q. My apologies. It's probably my bad pronunciation. Mr. Pajaziti,
20 which P-a-j-a-z-i-t-i; Mr. Zejulaahu, which I have spelled as
21 Z-e-j-u-l-a-a-h-u; and Mr. Hoxha, which I know is spelled H-o-x-h-a. And
22 I do apologise if my spellings are incorrect or my pronunciation is
24 A. I don't remember.
25 Q. Did you ever receive any information in 1997 of plans to
1 assassinate individuals associated with or supportive of the KLA in 1997,
2 including Hidajet Hyseni; Rexhep Qosja, which is spelled Q-o-s-j-a; Sabri
3 Hamiti; and Naim Maloku?
4 A. Yes. For example, I remember the case of Naim Maloku, who was a
5 former officer in the Yugoslav Army and that was reported in the media so
6 that means there was a plan.
7 Q. That's where you obtained your information, from the media. Apart
8 from the media did you obtain your information from any other sources with
9 regard to Naim Maloku?
10 A. I can't remember.
11 Q. Did you, during the time that you were a member of the
12 General Staff in 1997, receive information, any intelligence, with regard
13 to who the members of the Black Hand were?
14 A. That there was such groups, yes, but this was not an area of my
16 Q. And finally, were you aware of a group by the name of the Red
17 Berets who came from Serbia who had as their objective the assassination
18 of Rexhep Selimi, Hashim Thaqi, Adem Jashari --
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. -- in 1997?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Thank you.
23 MR. GUY-SMITH: I have no further questions.
24 JUDGE ORIE: In view of the previous question, could you tell us
25 how you became aware of that group by that name and how you became aware
1 that their objective was the assassination of the persons mentioned by
2 Mr. Guy-Smith.
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We learned this also from their
4 concrete actions on the ground and the attacks they launched against
5 several citizens, especially the attacks in Likoshan, Qirez, and Prekaze.
6 The attacks of these Berets and these police units that were combined,
7 police units and paramilitary units were in Prekaze in -- on the 20th of
8 January, 1998.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Thank you for that answer.
10 Mr. Kearney, any need to re-examine the witness?
11 MR. KEARNEY: There is. Thank you, Your Honour.
12 Re-examination by Mr. Kearney:
13 Q. Mr. Krasniqi, good afternoon. Mr. Krasniqi, I want to just ask
14 you briefly about something you just mentioned when Mr. Harvey was
15 questioning you. He was asking you -- he asked you a question and you
16 gave a response listing the death of Xhavit Haziraj, in part by members of
17 Serbian intelligence but also aided by collaborators. Now, that was a
18 response you gave just ten minutes ago; do you remember that response?
19 A. Yes, I remember that response, but I have to say that this was not
20 a killing, it was a kidnapping and we don't know to this day about the
21 fate of that person.
22 Q. Nevertheless, this was an action that occurred in 1998, is that
23 correct, this kidnapping?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. How do you know, Mr. Krasniqi, that collaborators were involved in
1 that kidnapping?
2 A. But there were Albanians as well in the Serb intelligence service.
3 Q. Mr. Krasniqi, please listen to my question, if you could, and
4 answer it. How do you know that there were collaborators - and from your
5 testimony yesterday we know in your mind or your definition that
6 collaborators in Kosovo, by definition, were Albanian - how do you know
7 that Albanian collaborators were in part responsible for the kidnapping of
8 Mr. Haziraj?
9 A. I gave my answer, and the answer was that Albanians were involved
10 in the Serb secret service and the Serbs -- for the Serbs it was very
11 difficult to follow the movement of persons, of Albanian persons. They
12 had to help -- have the help of Albanians in order to do that.
13 Q. Sir, were actions taken by the KLA against these Albanian
14 collaborators who participated or aided in the kidnapping of Mr. Haziraj?
15 A. Xhavit Haziraj was abducted in Pristina, and the KLA did not have
16 time deal with collaborators at the time because it was the summer
17 offensive going on so no action was taken.
18 Q. You told us in your earlier answer today that it was 10 April
19 1998. Is that correct?
20 A. That happened to Hafir Shala, the doctor and humanitarian person.
21 MR. EMMERSON: Consistent with --
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. --
23 MR. EMMERSON: -- the position I took during evidence in chief and
24 in objection to the line of questioning taken by Mr. Harvey in respect of
25 these and related matters, the witness has been asked to give the basis
1 for his knowledge and so far as I can see in the transcript he's not
2 answered that question. And unless a proper foundation is laid for this
3 or any other matter from this witness, in my submission the questions
4 should cease.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kearney.
6 MR. KEARNEY: Your Honour, the witness clearly said that the Serbs
7 could not track the movement of persons -- of Albanian persons, they had
8 to have help, the help of Albanians in order to do that. That was his
9 answer in this regard, and I'm -- I'm prepared to move on to ask him -
10 this is in relation to his testimony from yesterday about -- and in fact,
11 if the witness could be asked to take off his earphones for a moment,
13 JUDGE ORIE: Could you take off your earphones for a second,
14 Mr. Krasniqi.
15 MR. KEARNEY: This witness said very clearly yesterday that he was
16 not aware of a single collaborator being killed by the KLA during the war.
17 I want to pursue this line of questioning because I believe it logically
18 will lead to a contradiction for this witness and that if the KLA is aware
19 of collaborators aiding in kidnapping and disappearances, then I think
20 it's a proper question to ask him what action, if any, the KLA took
21 against these suspected individuals.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson.
23 MR. EMMERSON: May I respond. First of all, I'd like Mr. Kearney
24 to identify which passage in the transcript he's referring to when he says
25 the witness gave evidence he wasn't aware of a single collaborator being
1 killed by the KLA.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kearney, perhaps we first deal with that because
3 that's the basis you're referring to --
4 MR. KEARNEY: Transcript page 5066.
5 JUDGE ORIE: 5066.
6 MR. EMMERSON: Could we have a line, please. Could we have a line
7 reference, please.
8 MR. KEARNEY: Yes, I'm somewhat hampered. I prepared my
9 cross-examination today based on the unofficial numbering.
10 JUDGE ORIE: If you give the words, then we can search for the
11 words. We have a quote --
12 MR. EMMERSON: I think I have the quotation. It's 5066, I thought
13 that might be the passage that Mr. Kearney had erroneously recalled. That
14 is a passage from this witness's interview with the OTP at paragraph 69 --
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. You're referring now to the line: "He
16 additionally stressed that to his knowledge no collaborators were arrested
17 and executed."
18 MR. EMMERSON: And next sentence.
19 JUDGE ORIE: "Some may have been killed but that would have
20 happened during battle at the front line, never after detention."
21 MR. EMMERSON: In other words, the foundation for Mr. Kearney's
22 question is a misremembered quotation from the transcript.
23 MR. KEARNEY: First of all, before we move on to Mr. Emmerson's
24 second point, I believe that's very clear what this witness is saying in
25 that regard.
1 JUDGE ORIE: If Mr. Kearney would like to put questions to the
2 witness which, in his expectation, would lead to an answer or at least
3 some embarrassment whether or not any collaborators were ever killed after
4 being detained, then he's entitled to do so.
5 MR. EMMERSON: Yes, I have no objection to that. But what
6 Mr. Kearney has just said is that the witness has given evidence that
7 there was never an instance of a collaborator being killed.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But I understood that to be not killed in a car
9 accident, not killed due to thunderstorms, but killed as a result of KLA
10 action in response to the fact that the person was a collaborator.
11 MR. EMMERSON: Yes. And again, there may be some difficulty of
12 understanding here, but the paragraph of the transcript that we've just
13 looked at doesn't say that. It says there may well have been
14 collaborators killed but they weren't killed after detention and
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but at the front lines, that is, in normal
17 combat activities, rather not as a revenge action by the KLA.
18 MR. EMMERSON: Yes.
19 JUDGE ORIE: That's how I understood that.
20 MR. EMMERSON: And may I pursue the second point briefly. The
21 issue is not how it was this witness deduced that collaborators must have
22 been involved in the process of kidnapping this named individual; the
23 foundation needs to be laid for the basis of the witness's knowledge of
24 the incident about which he's testifying, in other words, from where did
25 he acquire his information and how reliable is the source.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I would not disagree, but I noticed that,
2 perhaps not in full compliance with the traditional rules of the art of
3 advocacy, that sometimes the foundation is laid after the question has
4 been put in more general terms.
5 MR. EMMERSON: Yes --
6 JUDGE ORIE: I think that is -- and under certain circumstances is
8 I would now like to give an opportunity to Mr. Kearney to pursue
9 his line of questioning.
10 Mr. Kearney, please proceed.
11 MR. KEARNEY: [Microphone not activated] --
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, could you please put up your earphones again.
13 MR. KEARNEY:
14 Q. Mr. Krasniqi, when we left off we were talking about this doctor
15 on the 10th of April, 1998, who had been kidnapped and it was -- has since
16 disappeared. Could you please tell us what his name was again.
17 A. Hafir Shala.
18 Q. Now, you told us that it was your belief that Albanian
19 collaborators were in part responsible for his kidnapping and
20 disappearance. Please tell us, sir, if you know, what actions -- were
21 those collaborators ever identified, first of all, to your knowledge?
22 A. We couldn't, no.
23 Q. You told us yesterday that to your knowledge, not a single
24 collaborator was ever arrested and executed by the KLA during the war.
25 That was a quote from your original Limaj testimony which you adopted in
1 court yesterday. I want to ask you, sir, if -- if I'm understanding you
2 correctly. Is that your testimony that --
3 JUDGE ORIE: I think --
4 MR. KEARNEY:
5 Q. -- that no collaborator --
6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kearney, I take it it was paragraph 69 of the --
7 of the investigator's notes. Is that correct or were you referring to the
8 Limaj --
9 MR. KEARNEY: This is to the Limaj transcript, Your Honour, this
10 is the same page we were just dealing with, 5066.
11 JUDGE ORIE: I'm sorry.
12 MR. EMMERSON: Just to be clear Mr. Kearney is in error. It
13 wasn't dealt with in the Limaj transcript that passage, it was dealt with
14 in the transcript yesterday at 5066, and it's a reference to the
15 investigator's note, so he's not putting a passage from the Limaj
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kearney.
18 MR. KEARNEY: I stand corrected in that regard, Your Honour, and
19 I'll re-pose the question.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Paragraph 69, then talking about.
21 Please proceed.
22 MR. KEARNEY:
23 Q. Mr. Krasniqi, you testified yesterday you adopted a statement you
24 made in your interview notes. I'm just going to quote the sentence again.
25 You additionally stressed that to your knowledge no collaborators were
1 arrested or executed by the KLA during the war.
2 Sir, do you have that answer that you gave yesterday in mind?
3 A. Yes.
4 MR. EMMERSON: I'm sorry -- I'm sorry to keep rising but it is
5 important to get this right. Mr. Kearney has just put to the witness that
6 the answer he gave was that no collaborators was arrested or executed.
7 Now, just to be clear, we know what the passage says, it says arrested and
8 executed; in other words, as the following sentence makes clear, if people
9 died, it was not following arrest. Now, the way the question has been put
10 implies that the witness said in his interview, for example, and
11 separately, that no collaborator had ever been arrested. So if the matter
12 is to be put, it should be put accurately.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I -- Mr. Emmerson, I agree with you that
14 sometimes it could be more precise; at the same time, the -- where it's
15 not for the full hundred per cent precise, that creates no confusion here
16 I would say.
17 Mr. Kearney, would you please try to be as precise as possible,
18 preferably quoting literally and in context whatever you put to the
20 MR. KEARNEY: I'd be happy to read the line literally,
21 Your Honour.
22 Q. Mr. Krasniqi, once again, this is a statement from your interview
23 to the OTP that was talked about yesterday, specifically paragraph 69. In
24 that statement it was written: "He additionally stressed that to his
25 knowledge no collaborators were arrested and executed."
1 Do you remember being questioned about that yesterday in court?
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kearney, I asked you to put it in the context,
3 and context yesterday, the quote put to Mr. Krasniqi, but I'll now put it
4 to him.
5 Yesterday it was put to you that you gave a statement and the
6 statement read as follows: "Mr. Krasniqi stated that the General Staff
7 stressed frequently that the KLA must obey and respect the international
8 norms and not target civilians. He additionally stressed that to his
9 knowledge no collaborators were arrested and executed. Some may have been
10 killed, but that would have happened during battle at the front line,
11 never after detention."
12 Put the question you would like to put to the witness,
13 Mr. Kearney.
14 MR. KEARNEY:
15 Q. Is it your testimony, Mr. Krasniqi, that the KLA during the war
16 never arrested and executed a single collaborator?
17 A. That's what I said.
18 Q. Are you aware of any arrests of collaborators by the KLA during
19 the war?
20 A. The term that is being used very often here, "collaborationist,"
21 is not the proper term to be used for every case. Although it was not
22 within the sphere of my responsibility, I know of people who were stopped
23 and then released. I know of a case of two Albanians who were stopped and
24 then released. I don't know anything further than that.
25 Q. These two Albanians who were stopped and released, were they
1 suspected collaborationists?
2 A. They were suspected to have conducted propaganda against the war.
3 Maybe that's why they were stopped and then they were released.
4 Q. Mr. Krasniqi, by your own definition of collaborator that you gave
5 yesterday, I would presume that you would not characterise that activity
6 of giving propaganda against the war as collaboration; is that correct?
7 A. That's why they were treated the way they were treated. They were
8 released. Every time you stop someone could not have been treated as
10 Q. Mr. Krasniqi, please listen to my question. You just indicated
11 that there -- you were aware of only two Albanians who were stopped and
12 then released -- or you gave us that example earlier in your questioning.
13 You said the reason they were stopped is because they had conducted
14 propaganda against the war. I want to ask you, sir, if based on the
15 definition you gave to this Tribunal yesterday of what collaboration is
16 you would characterise as giving propaganda against the war as
18 A. Yes. To be against the war does not mean that you are a
20 Q. So, sir, those two Albanians that you just mentioned were, by your
21 own definition, not collaborators. Are you -- beyond those two arrested
22 Albanians who were released, are you aware of no other suspected
23 collaborators who were arrested by the KLA during the war?
24 A. No, I'm not.
25 Q. Mr. Krasniqi, in communiques issued --
1 MR. GUY-SMITH: Excuse me.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Guy-Smith.
3 MR. GUY-SMITH: Because we're dealing with such a sensitive issue,
4 the question last asked by Mr. Kearney is a mis -- is a potential
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes --
7 MR. GUY-SMITH: -- of the testimony --
8 JUDGE ORIE: What you say is those arrested Albanians were in the
9 testimony of the witness not qualified as collaborators, that's, I think,
10 is clear.
11 Mr. Kearney, I take it that you, when you said, "beyond those two
12 arrested Albanians" of other suspected collaborators that you certainly
13 you were aware that Mr. Krasniqi had testified that these persons were not
15 MR. KEARNEY: Certainly. And the reason I included those was they
16 were the answer that this witness gave to my initial question about
17 collaborators. But I think his answer now is clear, Your Honour. I'm
18 prepared to move on.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please do so.
20 MR. KEARNEY:
21 Q. Mr. Krasniqi --
22 JUDGE ORIE: Before you do so I would like to have one thing
23 straight. Earlier you were asked whether you knew, and I'll literally
24 quote -- you were asked: "Is it your testimony, Mr. Krasniqi, that the
25 KLA during the war never arrested and executed a single collaborator?"
1 Your answer was: "That's what I said."
2 I want you to be fully aware that there is a difference between a
3 positive statement that the KLA during the war never arrested and executed
4 a single collaborator and - and that's different - whether you know about
5 the KLA ever arresting and executing a collaborator during the war. So we
6 should clearly distinguish between whether you have positive knowledge
7 that it never happened or that you do not know about that it ever
8 happened. Now, which of the two, because in the last question you were
9 asked about your knowledge. Can you say for sure that the KLA never
10 arrested and executed a single collaborator? Or is your testimony that
11 you do not know of any case of the KLA arresting and executing a
12 collaborator? Which of the two is it?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] My answer is the following. I do
14 not know of any case during that period of a collaborationist, Albanians
15 collaborating with the Serbs, being detained and subsequently killed. So
16 my answer refers to my knowledge. I do not know of such cases and I have
17 not heard of such cases. This would be my specific answer to your
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
20 Mr. Kearney, you'll understand that this sheds a certain light on
21 the testimony I just quoted, that is, page 28, line 17.
22 Now, the next question: Did you ever hear of an arrest of a
23 collaborator without subsequential or subsequent killing of that person by
24 the KLA? So that is being detained for some time and then being released
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, I did not hear about that.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Did you ever hear about a collaborator being executed
3 by the KLA without previously being arrested and/or detained?
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. We've heard about this through
5 the communiques.
6 JUDGE ORIE: That means the KLA executing - and under executing, I
7 understand killing someone in this context for the reason that he had
8 collaborated and not just because he was at the front line as a soldier
9 but specifically aiming at that person because of his collaboration.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I will repeat myself yet again: My
11 knowledge never leave a space for me to understand or believe that the
12 KLA, having detained a collaborationist, subsequently killed him or her.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But my last question was about killing the
14 collaborationist without arresting and detaining him, whether you know of
15 any such a case.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] What we know is from the communiques
17 released in the name of the KLA General Staff.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
19 MR. EMMERSON: I wonder if the witness might remove his headphones
20 at this point.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
22 Could you please take your headphones of for a second,
23 Mr. Krasniqi.
24 MR. EMMERSON: I'm entirely in Your Honour's hands as to how far
25 this matter needs to be pursued at this stage. Obviously the use of the
1 word "execution" in the context of somebody who has not been detained
2 leaves open a number of possibilities about the circumstances. For
3 example, whether the target was armed or unarmed at the time; whether
4 they're properly to be classified as a combatant or noncombatant. These
5 are issues about which very detailed factual examination would be required
6 of the circumstances of the particular individuals concerned. And I think
7 the position of this witness is that he's not able to give detailed
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson, my exercise was mainly aiming at
10 seeking --
11 MR. EMMERSON: Yes, I understand.
12 JUDGE ORIE: -- to better understand what he testified and not
13 going into every detail.
14 MR. EMMERSON: I'm not complaining at all about Your Honour's
15 questions. I'm simply raising the fact --
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, of course, I'm aware that an execution could
17 take all kind of different forms and could be done under all kind of
18 different circumstances.
19 MR. EMMERSON: Or against a person who's armed at the time.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I'm not saying that -- I mean, if someone at
21 his door-step with an arm in his hands is killed by those - I just give an
22 example, not from this case - but by those who have rang at the door then,
23 of course, he could be armed.
24 MR. EMMERSON: I just noticed that whenever Your Honour used the
25 word "execution" in the question, the witness would respond with the word
1 "killing", as it came through in the translation. And it simply may be
2 that with this witness not knowing anything about the circumstances of the
3 incidents described, it's simply impossible to get to the bottom of
4 whether or not which side of the line a particular incident falls.
5 JUDGE ORIE: That's the reason I stopped when the witness referred
6 to the communiques as a source of knowledge.
7 MR. EMMERSON: Yes, thank you very much.
8 MR. KEARNEY: Your Honour, may I have one moment to confer with my
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please do, Mr. Kearney.
11 [Prosecution counsel confer]
12 MR. KEARNEY:
13 Q. Mr. Krasniqi, speaking of those communiques you just referred
14 to --
15 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Your headphones.
16 MR. KEARNEY:
17 Q. Mr. Krasniqi, speaking of those communiques we just referred to,
18 in 1997, the communiques - these are -- I'm referring to annex 1, 2, 4,
19 and 5, that's Exhibit 386 - those communiques issued by the General Staff
20 list name, village, and date of several collaborators being killed. Is
21 that correct? And I'm -- I'll say their names now. Hetem Dobruna in
22 Lozice village in May 1997; Ali Qullapeku, Q-u-l-l-a-p-e-k-u, from
23 Terstenik; Ramiz Leku from Glogovac; Qamil Gashi on 18 November, also from
24 Glogovac; Dalip Dugolli on 28 November from Petreshice. Are you familiar
25 with those names, sir, having read them in the communiques?
1 A. I learned about these names from the communiques as well.
2 Q. And I want to ask you a follow-up question. Based on your
3 experience, your long tenure with the KLA during the decade of the 1990s,
4 do you have any reason to doubt that information that was published in
5 General Staff communiques regarding those collaborators?
6 MR. EMMERSON: I'm sorry, I object to the question. No foundation
7 laid. Quite clear the witness doesn't know the basis of the information.
8 A question which seeks by negative to elicit the fact that the material
9 the witness is not aware of in contradiction is another way to ask the
10 witness to affirm that which he's not in a position to affirm.
11 MR. KEARNEY: These are communiques issued by his own
12 General Staff, Your Honour.
13 JUDGE ORIE: I'm -- the question was whether, based on the
14 experience of the witness, he had -- there were a few circumstances
15 specifically mentioned, Mr. Kearney, which suggest that they would put the
16 witness in a better position to doubt or not doubt that matter.
17 Now, however you are -- you are allowed whether the witness ever
18 learned of any circumstance that would make him doubt about whether the
19 content of the communiques was correct or not -- or was incorrect, as a
20 matter of fact.
21 Is there anything you ever learned which would make you believe
22 that the information contained in the communiques you just mentioned,
23 specifically in relation to the events mentioned in the question by
24 Mr. Kearney, was there ever anything you learned that created doubt in
25 your mind as to whether this was perhaps not correct information?
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think that the issue of 1997 has
2 been already covered on several occasions by me. For the cases mentioned
3 earlier, I learned about them from the communiques. The communiques at
4 that time were part of the operational department, and I really didn't
5 have any knowledge about those communiques and about these actions of the
6 operational department during 1997.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Nevertheless, the question was whether you ever
8 learned, not necessarily from the communiques, but from whatever source
9 any -- learn anything that created doubt as to the correctness of these
10 communiques in your mind.
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Simply, I didn't deal with this
12 issue. It was not my area of responsibility. I dealt with totally
13 different issues.
14 JUDGE ORIE: I understand the answer then to be that you never
15 learned any circumstance that -- that you didn't pay, perhaps, much
16 attention to these matters but -- because it was not in your
17 responsibility, but you can't say, I, at that time, learned this and this
18 and this which made me doubt whether it was correct what the communique
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I cannot say anything about this
21 because I didn't deal with this issue, as I said. I can't give you any
22 affirmative answer to this.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kearney, please proceed.
24 MR. KEARNEY: Your Honour, I'm informed by my colleague that the
25 books that we have been waiting for relating to this witness have just
1 arrived. I wonder if the Court would consider taking a break five, ten
2 minutes earlier at this time so we can disseminate these to counsel.
3 MR. EMMERSON: There's --
4 JUDGE ORIE: Would that mean that you have no further questions in
5 re-examination or --
6 MR. KEARNEY: No, I do have approximately 15 more minutes for this
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
9 MR. EMMERSON: If the suggestion is that somehow this witness's
10 testimony will start all over again once we've had an opportunity to
11 assimilate --
12 JUDGE ORIE: Let's not anticipate on the situation after the
14 MR. EMMERSON: Obviously we'd be grateful to receive it but
15 nobody's going to be in a position to assimilate this material whilst this
16 witness is still being examined.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Unless the books are very thin. Therefore I said
18 let's not anticipate on what's going to happen.
19 [Trial Chamber confers]
20 JUDGE ORIE: We'll have an early break. We'll resume at five
21 minutes past 4.00.
22 --- Recess taken at 3.40 p.m.
23 --- On resuming at 4.11 p.m.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kearney, I suggest to you and to the Defence that
25 I do not ask at this moment one single question about whether there is a
1 book, how many books there are, just let's first continue the examination
2 of the witness as matters stand -- stood until -- even if you don't ask
3 for matters, sometimes -- well, three, as a matter of fact. I'll put them
4 upside down. I suggest that we first finish the examination -- the
5 re-examination of the witness.
6 Mr. Kearney, please proceed.
7 MR. KEARNEY: Thank you, Your Honour.
8 Q. Mr. Krasniqi, I have just a couple more questions about the
9 communiques and then I'll move on. You mentioned during your
10 cross-examination by Mr. Emmerson that the communiques that were written
11 in 1997 were authored by members of the diaspora, specifically in, I
12 believe, Switzerland and Albania. Is that correct?
13 A. I said that it was possible that they were the authors, but who
14 the authors were, indeed, that I don't know. It is possible that those
15 communiques were written or authored by members of the General Staff that
16 were in Albania or in Switzerland, but to what extent that is true, that I
17 don't know.
18 Q. I just want to ask you a question. I'm looking at page 5026 of
19 your transcript, lines 6 and 7. You gave an answer saying -- and just to
20 give you a grounding, I'll read the question as well at line 3.
21 "Q. And would it be fair to say that you did not know the names
22 of more than half or less than half of the other members of the body
23 calling itself the General Staff?"
24 Your answer: "Well, it's difficult to say now because I know all
25 of them now, but at the time I did not know some of them."
1 My question is: Do you now know the remainder of the
2 General Staff who was -- you referred to earlier as part of the diaspora
3 in Switzerland and Albania?
4 A. Of course, now I know all of them. Eight years have passed since
5 the war happened.
6 Q. And who were the members of the General Staff that were living in
7 the diaspora back in 1997, please?
8 A. Well, Azem Syla, Xhavit Haliti, Bardhyl Mahmuti, Ali Ahmeti,
9 Kadri Veseli, they were in the diaspora.
10 Q. I assume you've talked to those men since 1997. Is that a fair
12 A. You mean after 1997? Well, even during the war some of them were
13 not in Kosova. With some of them, I met after 1999.
14 Q. Based on your contact with them since 1997, have you learned who
15 authored the communiques from 1997 that are attached to your statement?
16 A. This I don't know.
17 Q. You were asked by Mr. Emmerson about annex 2 to your statement.
18 This is communique 35 published on 8 August 1997 in Koha Ditore. In that
19 communique you were asked specifically about guerilla operations carried
20 out against Serb policemen and two Albanian civilians as well as three
21 armed authorisations -- operations, excuse me, that were authorised by the
22 General Staff on the 3rd and 4th of August, 1997. You were asked by
23 Mr. Emmerson if you knew of these operations in 1997. Your answer
24 was: "No."
25 But then you gave the following answer, this is at page 5041:
1 "At the time I had no knowledge about these operations. I may
2 know of them, today" and this is at the very end of 5041, continuing on to
4 "At the time I had no knowledge about these operations. I may
5 know of them today, but not at that time."
6 I want to ask you: What do you know about these operations, if
7 anything, at this time that you did not know back in 1997?
8 A. Which operations are you referring to because there are many of
10 Q. Yes. I'm referring to the ones that you told us you have
11 information or you may have information about now that you didn't back in
13 MR. EMMERSON: Again, just so that there's no misunderstanding
14 might the witness be directed to the specific annex communique that I was
15 asking him questions about.
16 JUDGE ORIE: That's annex 2 --
17 MR. EMMERSON: Exactly. And to the lines and the particular
18 operations that were there being referred to so that he knows exactly what
19 it is he is being asked about.
20 MR. KEARNEY: Is the blue folder with the annexes in Albanian
21 still available for this witness, Madam Usher?
22 JUDGE ORIE: Could it then please be provided to the witness.
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Which number did you say?
24 MR. KEARNEY:
25 Q. Number 2, and this is -- the beginning of the first full paragraph
1 is what I'll be questioning you on, Mr. Krasniqi.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. It's only in one portion that operations are --
3 I think three operations are mentioned, Mr. Kearney. If you would
4 specifically draw the attention of the witness to those.
5 MR. KEARNEY:
6 Q. Mr. Krasniqi, do you see the second full sentence in the text
7 which starts: "This communique states ..." Do you see that -- those
8 words, sir?
9 I'll read the sentence for you to see if you can find it.
10 "This communique states: 'By a decision of the UCK Central Staff
11 made on 3 and 4 August our guerilla units carried out three armed
12 operations against the occupiers and their collaborators.'"
13 Do you see that statement?
14 A. No. No, no -- yes, now I do, on 3rd and 4th of August.
15 Q. Now, yesterday during your testimony you were asked by
16 Mr. Emmerson about the operations that are referenced in that annex and
17 you said: "At the time I did not have any knowledge about those
18 operations. I may know of them today but not at the time."
19 Can you please tell us, Mr. Krasniqi, what you know, if anything,
20 about those operations now that you did not know in 1997, please.
21 A. I wrote a book, "The Big Turn," and in order to write that book I
22 had to consult some literature. And while consulting that literature, I
23 learned about these operations.
24 Q. And can you please tell us more specifically about these
25 operations. Which operations are you referring to?
1 A. I learned about this one that you read in the communique.
2 Q. And what did you learn about those operations, please?
3 A. Nothing in addition to what is here in the communique.
4 Q. Did you learn that in August of 1997 there were, in fact, three
5 operations conducted on the orders of the UCK Central Staff?
6 A. From the communique, yes.
7 Q. But, Mr. Krasniqi, you just told us that in writing your book,
8 "The Big Turn" you consulted literature about these operations. What
9 literature did you consult?
10 A. The communiques.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Let's try to get to the core of the issue. You say
12 that you learned about the operations, whereas you had no knowledge of
13 what they were in 1997. What were these operations, three operations?
14 Against what? What type of operation? The Chamber's got no idea about
15 what we are talking about, so could you tell us. Let's start with the
16 first. First operation would be where? What? If you know.
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know anything else. All I
18 know is what the communique says.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Do I then understand that whereas in 1997 you were
20 not aware of these operations, that you later by consulting the
21 communiques learned that there had been three operations but that you do
22 not know anything additional to that?
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, that's correct.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Kearney.
25 MR. KEARNEY:
1 Q. In your book, Mr. Krasniqi, "The Big Turn," do you describe any of
2 the operations that were conducted by the KLA during 1997?
3 A. In my book I mainly deal with political issues, organisational
4 issues. I also treat of the KLA from the time it was formed. I write
5 about the legendary commander Adem Jashari and his family. I give
6 information about political developments --
7 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ...
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I speak about some fightings, but
9 not specific operations.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. You started giving us the full content of the
11 book, more or less, whereas the specific question was whether operations
12 were described. If at any later stage, I don't know whether we are going
13 to do that or not, if at any later stage, we would read this book of yours
14 or any other book you may have written, would we find further details
15 about operations, early August 1997, by KLA units, such as where the
16 operations took place --
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, you wouldn't. There isn't such
18 information there.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Kearney.
20 MR. KEARNEY:
21 Q. In your book, do you describe the fact --
22 MR. EMMERSON: I'm sorry to interrupt. I've allowed this line of
23 questioning to go on, but we don't have the books in a form in which we
24 can understand them.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
1 MR. EMMERSON: They haven't been raised in cross-examination.
2 None of these questions arise out of cross-examination and it is not fair
3 or proper for Mr. Kearney to conduct re-examination on the content of
4 books that haven't been disclosed or analysed.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Guy-Smith, joining I take it?
6 MR. GUY-SMITH: Yes, and we had an agreement there would be no
7 discussion about the books other than they were, in fact, books of
8 Mr. Krasniqi's.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Harvey, I take it that you join as well?
10 MR. HARVEY: It would be very surprising if I didn't, Your Honour.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Let me then just for the record say that I see on my
12 desk three books, one apparently written in a language I could read; two
13 in a language which I'm not familiar with.
14 Mr. Kearney, do you have knowledge of the content of the book --
15 of one of these books?
16 MR. KEARNEY: I don't, and I'm --
17 JUDGE ORIE: You don't.
18 MR. KEARNEY: I'm just --
19 JUDGE ORIE: Nevertheless, you are -- in your questions you are
20 asking -- I asked the witness if I would read that book would we find any
21 further information about this. There might be a stage that the Chamber
22 would read that book if one of the parties, after having read it, tenders
23 it and if there's no objections. But at this moment you're alluding to
24 what you would expect to be in the book, whereas the witness, of course,
25 as far as early August 1997 operations is concerned, the witness denied
1 that we'll find anything in the book.
2 MR. KEARNEY: Your Honour, the Chamber's point is well-taken. The
3 reason I pursued this line of questioning was because this witness himself
4 said that he learned during his apparent research for the book or writing
5 of the book of some of the operations in question; that's what I was
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And I asked him specifically then how to
8 understand that. And what the witness then said is that whereas he may
9 not have been aware of the operations, perhaps because he had not seen the
10 communiques at that time, that later on when he consulted the communiques
11 that he learned that there were three operations without any further
12 details. I think that was the clear testimony of the witness. Then I
13 asked him whether we would find anything else in the book, which of course
14 gives an opportunity to the parties to check the credibility and
15 reliability of those answers.
16 So please proceed and I do understand that there's an agreement
17 between the parties that the content of the book as such is not subject of
18 examining of the witness at this moment.
19 MR. KEARNEY: I just have one last question in this area and then
20 I'm going to move on.
21 Q. Mr. Krasniqi, do you have knowledge of guerilla operations taking
22 place by the KLA in 1997 at all?
23 A. The ones that we mentioned several times so far and that you find
24 in the communiques.
25 Q. Now, you also mentioned in your cross-examination that there was a
1 point in time when you learned that Ramush Haradinaj was the -- had a
2 commanding role in the Dukagjin Zone. I'm going to read you a question
3 and answer by way of foundation on page 5051 at line 11.
4 You were asked by Mr. Emmerson: "And was that the first occasion
5 on which you became aware that he had any commanding role in the Dukagjin
7 And perhaps I should back up a question. At line 7: "Can I ask
8 you please, first of all, is it correct then that the first time you met
9 Mr. Haradinaj was at the end of June/beginning of July, that was the first
10 occasion you'd met?"
11 Your answer was: "Yes."
12 The next question was: "And was that the first occasion on which
13 you became aware that he had any commanding role in the Dukagjini area?"
14 Your answer was: "No, I knew this from before, before I went."
15 And finally, the last question I seek to discuss with you is:
16 "Q. I see. Would it coincide with his appoint -- appointment on
17 the 23rd of June approximately?"
18 Your answer was: "Yes."
19 Mr. Krasniqi, do you remember those questions and those answers
20 given by you yesterday?
21 A. Yes, I remember them very well.
22 Q. Do you remember in your Limaj testimony being asked a similar
23 question, this is at transcript page 3480, beginning at line 1. First of
24 all, do you remember being asked questions on this same topic about during
25 what period Mr. Haradinaj was a commander of the Dukagjin Zone?
1 A. In the Limaj case I was not asked questions about Mr. Haradinaj.
2 Q. Let me see, Mr. Krasniqi, if this refreshes your memory in that
3 regard, starting at page 1.
4 "Q. Same thing, yes. Who was the commander of that zone as you
5 recall it, again in this period of time April to August, if you can help
6 by remembering?
7 "A. The zone commander he was such later, but at this period it
8 was Ramush Haradinaj."
9 Do you remember giving that answer to that question?
10 A. I don't believe I've mentioned April. I must have said later,
11 when he was appointed. When I was appointed as spokesperson after the
12 23rd of June, not about April. I didn't say anything about April.
13 Q. Mr. Krasniqi, did Mr. Haradinaj have de facto command of the
14 Dukagjin Zone before he was formally appointed in June of 1997?
15 MR. GUY-SMITH: I believe you're asking for legal conclusion at
16 this point.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kearney, if you would reformulate your question,
18 which of course asks for an assessment of -- a qualification, as a matter
19 of fact, of a certain situation.
20 MR. EMMERSON: If I may.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Emmerson.
22 MR. EMMERSON: The answer that the witness gave in the Limaj
23 case --
24 JUDGE ORIE: Well, we see the answer. Limaj, of course, is --
25 transcript is in evidence --
1 MR. EMMERSON: Exactly --
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
3 MR. EMMERSON: So Your Honour's seen the answer --
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I wouldn't say it makes matters much clearer --
5 MR. EMMERSON: That's my point.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Well, that's as a matter of fact is commenting
7 both on question and answer given by the witness at this moment. But,
8 Mr. Kearney, perhaps you ask the witness what he could tell us about the
9 position of Mr. Haradinaj and then further develop what you seem to seek.
10 MR. KEARNEY:
11 Q. Isn't it true, Mr. Krasniqi, based on your answer in Limaj that in
12 fact, not pursuant to appointment by the General Staff, but in fact,
13 Ramush Haradinaj --
14 MR. EMMERSON: I'm sorry, I object to the form of the question.
15 It's a leading question based on an ambiguous answer.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kearney, you should, if you ask -- if you refer
17 to the answer given by the witness at that time after such a period of
18 time, then you should at least put the answer he gave at that time and
19 then you can ask further questions. And I think, as a matter of fact --
20 no, it has been -- let me just see. You have read to him the answer. You
21 asked the witness whether he remembered that he gave that answer, and then
22 he says: "I don't believe I mentioned April." So there's a challenge as
23 to the transcript reflects what he said.
24 MR. EMMERSON: With respect, first of all he didn't mention a
25 month at all in his answer. He was asked a question and he gives an
1 answer which, as I sought to emphasise a moment ago --
2 MR. KEARNEY: Mr. Emmerson, excuse me. If we're going to be
3 having a conversation about this, may we have the witness take off his
5 MR. EMMERSON: I'm very happy --
6 JUDGE ORIE: Take off your earphones, Mr. Krasniqi.
7 We can all read. Let's refer to the lines we're talking about.
8 MR. EMMERSON: Yes -- what was occurring --
9 JUDGE ORIE: I think at page 46, line 22, Mr. Kearney said he
10 would refresh the memory of the witness. Then he read to him the
11 question. The question relates to a period April to August in Limaj, and
12 then the witness answered: "The zone commander he was such later, but at
13 this period it was Ramush Haradinaj."
14 MR. EMMERSON: Yes.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Which -- and then the witness was asked whether he
16 gave that answer. He said then: "I don't believe I've mentioned April."
17 That seems to be correct on the basis of the transcript, because the
18 question mentioned April and he referred to a later period and he also
19 said that at this period --
20 MR. EMMERSON: Yes.
21 JUDGE ORIE: -- it was Ramush Haradinaj.
22 MR. EMMERSON: Can I just develop my concern about this, just for
23 a moment. At that point in his cross-examination in the Limaj case,
24 Mr. Mansfield for Mr. Limaj was running through each of the zones at
25 something of a trot, asking for a brief picture, a snap-shot. He put the
1 question to the witness in relation to all zones for the period that he
2 was concerned with, and the witness replies: "The zone commander he was
3 such later but at this period it was Ramush Haradinaj."
4 Now, "this period" could mean a period earlier, it could mean
5 April to August, or it could mean the period he refers to when he says,
6 "he was such later"; in other words, "The zone commander he was such
7 later at this period" - i.e., later when he was zone commander - "it was
8 Ramush Haradinaj." Now, no attempt was made in Limaj because it wasn't
9 necessary to seek to elicit clarification.
10 If Mr. Kearney wishes to put to this witness the question and
11 answer that he gave and ask him whether that is, in his view, consistent
12 with his testimony in a nonleading form then I have no objection. My
13 objection is to the question asked just a moment ago, page 48, line 6, on
14 the basis of which Mr. Kearney seeks to elicit a meaning from that answer
15 and put it in a leading form to the witness. And my objections are
16 two-fold. He's not entitled to put leading questions in re-examination,
17 and he's certainly not entitled to put leading questions on the basis of a
18 selective understanding from the Prosecution of an ambiguous answer from
19 the witness.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kearney, would you agree that the answer in Limaj
21 is quite ambiguous?
22 MR. KEARNEY: No, I think this is --
23 JUDGE ORIE: Then please tell me how I -- I mean, the witness has
24 now his earphones off. Mr. Emmerson tells us that it's an ambiguous
25 answer and you tell us it's not. How do we have to understand the answer
1 in your view.
2 MR. KEARNEY: Well, Your Honour, the answer is very clear. He's
3 asked about a period, April to August. This is a -- I would remind the
4 Trial Chamber this is an educated --
5 [Trial Chamber confers]
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please proceed.
7 MR. KEARNEY: And before the witness puts his earphones back on,
8 the word "de facto" that I used that was objected to by Mr. Guy-Smith,
9 this is a word this witness used himself in his interview notes. I don't
10 think it calls for a legal conclusion. With the Trial Chamber's
11 permission I would like to use that word again in forming the question.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Well, as a matter of fact, if you then could do
13 that -- as a matter of fact, I asked you about the ambiguity of the answer
14 on page 3480, line 4 and 5, but you didn't address that matter. If you
15 want to ask the witness about these matters, the Chamber would prefer you
16 not to do it on the basis of the answer he gave in Limaj. Please proceed.
17 MR. KEARNEY:
18 Q. Mr. Krasniqi, was there a period before Mr. Haradinaj was
19 appointed formally zone commander that he was the de facto commander of
20 that zone?
21 A. I could say he was or he wasn't. I think this was a prejudiced
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. --
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Officially he was made commander on
25 the 23rd of June.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Krasniqi, what Mr. Kearney is asking you, whether
2 Mr. Haradinaj, before he was officially appointed commander, exercised de
3 facto command which, let's try to keep matters simple, means that he gave
4 instructions and orders to KLA members, units - whatever you know about
5 this, tell us - in that period of time.
6 Mr. Emmerson, I'd like first --
7 MR. EMMERSON: Yes -- [Microphone not activated].
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I'd first have the witness answer the question
9 rather than giving his opinion about the answer -- about the question.
10 Could you tell us.
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Before he was appointed commander, I
12 don't know.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
14 Mr. Kearney.
15 MR. KEARNEY:
16 Q. Mr. Krasniqi, I want to ask you questions now about Mr. Brahimaj,
17 following-up or seeking some clarifications about questions put to you by
18 Mr. Harvey yesterday. You told us about after 11 June 1998 you began to
19 work with Mr. Brahimaj in the General Staff; is that correct?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. You told us a great deal about geographically where these meetings
22 took place. I want to ask you now in June of 1998 about time, not
23 geography but time. Tell us, please, in the remainder of June 1998 after
24 the 11th of June, how often did the General Staff meet?
25 A. It's difficult for me to give you an accurate number of those
1 meetings. Maybe we met two or three times, maybe more, but I can't give
2 you an exact number.
3 Q. That would be two to three times in the remainder of June 1998; is
4 that right?
5 A. I said that it's difficult for me now to give you an accurate
6 number, two times, three times. It was difficult for us to move at that
7 time. The situation was very difficult.
8 Q. These meetings that you're describing, how long would they last
10 A. It depended on the issues that we had to discuss or to have a
11 joint stand about. It could be two hours or three hours.
12 Q. Now, after June, in July, is it true from -- is my understanding
13 true from your testimony yesterday that the frequency of these meetings
14 decreased as the summer offensives began?
15 A. Yes, of course. The offensives hindered us from moving, and it
16 was not possible for us to meet more often.
17 Q. Can you give us any estimate, Mr. Krasniqi, of how often in July
18 then the General Staff met?
19 A. I couldn't say. Once or twice, but I'm not sure.
20 Q. I'm going to ask you the same question about August, please. How
21 many times -- and I realise this is a long time ago, but could you tell us
22 how many times did the General Staff meet in August of 1998?
23 A. I can't remember because August was the month when the Serb
24 offensive had reached its climax and I don't know whether we had an
25 opportunity to meet even once or not.
1 Q. So these meetings that happened in June, July, and August that you
2 just described, did Mr. Brahimaj attend all of these meetings or were
3 there some that he missed?
4 A. It's been a long time, of course, and it's difficult for me to
5 give you an accurate answer. But sometimes, because of the distance from
6 the Dukagjini Zone, Lahi Brahimaj could not move in those areas. Maybe he
7 crossed the boundaries illegally to come from one area to another.
8 Q. So are you saying that because of the distance from the Dukagjini
9 Zone there was some meetings that Mr. Brahimaj did not attend or did he
10 attend all of the meetings? I'm not clear on your answer, please.
11 A. I can't give you an accurate answer regarding the number of
12 meetings that he did attend and did not attend.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Krasniqi, the first question was whether he
14 missed some. Without asking for numbers, was he always present?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As I said, I was not dealing with
16 this matter, who attended and who didn't. That's why it's difficult for
17 me to pinpoint whether he missed a meeting or not. But bearing in mind
18 the fact that the fighting was quite intensive during this time, the
19 possibility for a member of the General Staff to be absent from a meeting
20 was quite there, although Lahi Brahimaj was quite disciplined about these
21 meetings. He was almost in every one of them.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So that's finally the answer, then, is that he
23 often attended but you cannot be sure whether he always attended, which is
24 understandable for you due to the circumstances at the time. Is that
25 correct understanding of your answer?
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
3 MR. KEARNEY:
4 Q. You mentioned the distance of the Dukagjini Zone from the -- the
5 area of the General Staff meetings in Negrovce, Klecka, Divjake. What was
6 that distance?
7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kearney, we have maps. Let's not ask witnesses
8 about distances if we can look at it. If it has any specific relevance,
9 then please ask for the relevant -- but let's --
10 MR. KEARNEY: In fact, Your Honour, I do have a map of this. It's
11 marked as 65 ter 1351 --
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes --
13 MR. KEARNEY: -- perhaps we could bring it up at this time.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But so then we can see what the distance is?
15 Please proceed.
16 Do you want to tender the map, Mr. Kearney?
17 MR. KEARNEY: I do.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Then, Madam Registrar, that would be number ...?
19 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this will be Exhibit Number P329,
20 marked for identification.
21 MR. KEARNEY: And, Your Honour, just for the Court's and the
22 Trial Chamber's clarification, the blue square lines on this map represent
23 10 kilometres.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
25 MR. KEARNEY:
1 Q. Mr. Krasniqi, can you see this map?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Does that fit with your knowledge, sir, of the geography of
4 Kosovo; namely, the distance from Jabllanice there on the map to your home
5 village as well as the other villages that you mentioned in your testimony
7 A. Yes, it does.
8 Q. Mr. Krasniqi, how long does it take to drive from Jabllanice to
9 your home village in Negrovce?
10 A. You mean how long would it take today or during the war?
11 Q. Tell us both, please.
12 A. Today it's, of course, much faster, within 40 minutes, because the
13 road is not straight, it goes up; while during war the distance was not
14 that big but the difficulties were there.
15 Q. In June of 1998, how long in your experience -- you were living
16 there at the time, how long would it have taken to drive from your village
17 to Jabllanice?
18 A. I was twice, during the war, travelled from Divjake to Jabllanice,
19 and it took me a long time for this journey because we had to walk for one
20 part of the road and then get to the asphalt road Klina-Gjakove, which was
21 at the time controlled by the police and military Serb forces. So before
22 reaching Jabllanice we had to cross the Drini River, and from the villages
23 of Malisheve municipality, Llapsheve and up to Jabllanice we had to travel
24 on foot and that took us several hours and we mainly travelled at
25 night-time for security reasons.
1 Q. So is it your testimony that the -- in June of 1998 this trip from
2 Jabllanice, say from Divjake would have taken several hours?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Mr. Krasniqi, how long did you work with Mr. Brahimaj after June
5 of 1998? How long did you consider him a colleague of yours in the KLA?
6 A. Throughout the entire time. He's still a colleague of ours.
7 Q. When you say "still," are you talking about this year, 2007?
8 A. I'm talking about the period after the war.
9 Q. During this period of time that you worked with Mr. Brahimaj, did
10 you consider him a friend, sir?
11 A. Of course.
12 Q. Is that still the case, Mr. Krasniqi? Do you consider
13 Mr. Brahimaj a friend even today?
14 A. Of course I do. Nothing has changed between us.
15 Q. I'd like to ask you the same question regarding Mr. Haradinaj. Do
16 you still consider him or do you consider him a friend today as you sit
17 here in court?
18 A. Mr. Haradinaj was a comrade in arms. He was a good fighter and I
19 have respect for him even today.
20 Q. Lastly, I want to talk to you about Mr. Balaj. Is this a person
21 that you met during the war as well?
22 A. I didn't meet him.
23 Q. Mr. Krasniqi, I want to return to your last answer. In response
24 to my question regarding Mr. Haradinaj if he was a friend, you said: "He
25 was a comrade in arms. He was a good fighter and I have respect for him
1 even today."
2 My question is more simple than that: Is he a friend of yours
4 A. I answered your question.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Well, as a matter of fact you did not, but I
6 understood your answer to be the following, that you're not personal
7 friends, but nevertheless that you, due to his past, you respect him very
8 much, which is not exactly the same as personal friendship. Is that well
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know how to
11 understand "personal friendship." We didn't have a personal friendship,
12 but a joint cause made us be comrade in arms, co-fighters, and have the
13 same goal.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Kearney.
15 MR. KEARNEY:
16 Q. But since the war, Mr. Krasniqi, in the government in Kosovo have
17 you worked with Mr. Haradinaj?
18 A. No.
19 Q. You indicated that you did not meet Mr. Balaj during the war.
20 Have you met him since the war?
21 A. No, I haven't.
22 Q. Mr. Krasniqi, without telling us the contents, have you ever given
23 a statement to the Defence during the investigation of this case?
24 MR. EMMERSON: That's a question that could have been addressed to
25 me. I'd like to know the relevance and how it arises out of
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kearney.
3 MR. KEARNEY: I'm trying to explore this witness's bias,
4 Your Honour.
5 MR. EMMERSON: As a matter of fact, I'm perfectly prepared to
6 answer the question and I'll do it in a proper form, but it should have
7 been asked to me if Mr. Kearney wanted to do it. He's not in a position
8 to explore bias of his own witness in re-examination. It's not a proper
9 way to conduct a re-examination.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kearney, certainly it's not a question that
11 arises out of cross-examination, but I understand that Mr. Emmerson is
12 willing to give you the information. If there's any reason then for
13 follow-up questions, we'll hear them and see how to -- whether there will
14 be any objections against it.
15 Mr. Emmerson, are you willing to give the information?
16 MR. EMMERSON: Yes, I'm happy to communicate that as far as I'm
17 aware, we have never, nobody on our team has ever interviewed this
19 JUDGE ORIE: May I just ask whether that would be true for all of
20 the Defence teams.
21 MR. GUY-SMITH: Yes, it would.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Harvey.
23 MR. HARVEY: Never had any contact with Mr. Krasniqi before.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kearney, if there's any need to put further
25 questions in relation to this, we'll hear them.
1 MR. KEARNEY: There's not, Your Honour, and in case of fact, I
2 have no more questions of this witness. We do have some administrative
3 matters to discuss, namely the books and the 92 ter summaries.
4 JUDGE ORIE: I would first of all like to give an opportunity to
5 Defence counsel whether there's any need for re-examination.
6 Yes, Mr. Harvey.
7 MR. HARVEY: Your Honour, yes, there is one matter that arises out
8 of the fresh questions put by Mr. Kearney.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I said re-examination but of course --
10 MR. HARVEY: Re-cross.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, re-cross. Yes, Mr. Kearney.
12 MR. KEARNEY: I'm sorry to Mr. Harvey but just regarding the books
13 we are going to need just to ask - maybe the Chambers can do it - just ask
14 him in point of fact what these books are, if he wrote them, just a basic
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Harvey.
17 Further cross-examination by Mr. Harvey:
18 Q. Mr. Krasniqi, you were asked a few questions ago by Mr. Kearney
19 concerning your opportunities to meet with Lahi Brahimaj at meetings of
20 the General Staff. He did not ask you whether you met with him outside
21 meetings of the General Staff, so I'd just like to come to that point with
22 you for a moment. Aside from meetings of the General Staff, while you
23 were stationed in Drenica, did you meet with Lahi Brahimaj during the
24 month of June?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Again, I appreciate what you said about it being difficult to
2 remember the frequency of such meetings, but would you be able to assist
3 the Tribunal to any extent in indicating how frequent your contacts were
4 with him in Drenica during the month of June outside General Staff
6 A. I don't remember how frequent.
7 Q. Would you say more than once? More than twice? Or are you simply
8 unable to recall at this stage?
9 A. I wouldn't be able to tell you the accurate number, but we did
11 Q. Thank you. Same question for the month of July.
12 A. Same answer.
13 Q. And I assume I would get the same answer in August and September?
14 A. August and September were quite difficult months for meeting.
15 Q. Thank you very much.
16 [Trial Chamber confers]
17 JUDGE ORIE: Judge Hoepfel has one or more questions for you.
18 Questioned by the Court:
19 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Yes. Mr. Krasniqi, may I also take you back to
20 these meetings of the General Staff in mid-1998. Now, yesterday and today
21 you gave us already some explanations. There were -- such as where these
22 meetings took place. And you were asked as to the meeting on the 23rd of
23 June, 1998, when Mr. Ramush Haradinaj, as you said, "officially was made
24 commander"; i.e., commander of the Dukagjini Zone. So I'd like to ask you
25 about the way this election or appointment was conducted.
1 First, would you call this an election or appointment?
2 A. It was an appointment.
3 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Thank you. Further, how was this decision taken?
4 You were present, I assume; is this right?
5 A. Yes.
6 JUDGE HOEPFEL: And how many else were present?
7 A. Maybe it will be difficult for me to tell you how many there were
8 present because quite a long time has passed, but we were seven,
9 approximately, because not all attended that meeting. We had quite a long
10 discussion, and in the end we adopted the decision to appoint the
11 commanders of the Drenica, Pashtrik, and Dukagjini Zones.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Harvey --
13 MR. HARVEY: Your Honour --
14 JUDGE ORIE: -- although it's not very usual to interrupt if a
15 Judge puts questions to a witness but if there's anything, please --
16 MR. HARVEY: I do apologise for interrupting. I just wanted to
17 make sure that there wasn't any confusion here between the meeting on the
18 23rd of June which took place in Lapusnik at which, to the best of my
19 knowledge and belief, Mr. Krasniqi was not present, and a subsequent
20 meeting of the General Staff that would have taken place to ratify the
22 MR. EMMERSON: We're now having multiple interruptions in the
23 Judge's questions. I think Mr. Harvey must not have meant to
24 say, "Lapusnik."
25 MR. HARVEY: Absolutely right, I'm sorry. I'm having a flashback.
2 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Yes. Can you help us.
3 So were you present at the meeting where this appointment was
4 decided or was this already --
5 A. If you are referring to an appointment in Jabllanice, that I don't
6 know. As far as the appointment made in Divjake, this I know and what I
7 told you refers to this one.
8 JUDGE HOEPFEL: And as far as you know, was the will of those
9 members of the General Staff who were absent taken into some account? I
10 will be more specific. First, as you were not present, were you asked
11 before about the decision to be taken then in this meeting?
12 A. No, but I was present at the meeting in Klecke when the commander
13 of the Dukagjin Zone was appointed.
14 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Yes. And do you know how, if any, expressions of
15 the will of those absent were factored in?
16 A. It was not my duty to deal with this issue. This was somebody
17 else's responsibility as far as others were concerned, but the appointment
18 of Mr. Haradinaj as a commander of the Dukagjini Zone was done pursuant to
19 the will of the majority.
20 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Thank you.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson.
22 MR. EMMERSON: I'm sorry. There are some questions arising out of
23 that line of questioning, if Your Honour would permit me.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Well, I would first like to finish the questions of
25 the Judge --
1 MR. EMMERSON: I'm sorry I thought Judge Hoepfel --
2 JUDGE HOEPFEL: I am done but maybe there are other questions of
3 the Bench and you will have an opportunity later.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Krasniqi, during your examination, questions were
5 put to you in relation to a paragraph found in the investigator's notes
6 which relate to the May 2004 interview. I read the whole of the paragraph
7 to you.
8 Paragraph 81: "When asked if the commander of an operational zone
9 would know what was happening in his area of responsibility, Mr. Krasniqi
10 stated that they did, in fact, try to know but this at times proved
11 difficult. Commanders, however, were obliged to inform the General Staff
12 of any crimes or breaches committed, and the General Staff would then
13 order appropriate action."
14 What would be the appropriate action to be ordered when
15 information about crimes or breaches would have been received?
16 A. The General Staff and the KLA did not have, first of all, did not
17 have a higher body, such as an assembly or parliament that would make the
18 laws. It was more on -- based on the will and the readiness of the
19 individuals to take upon themselves responsibilities in the interest of
20 the nation, but what would these responsibilities would be in case a
21 commander of a zone or another person informed of illegal acts or breaches
22 of laws on war, these measures would be the following: The person would
23 be known who committed that crime or breach; then the measures that would
24 follow would be the ones removing him from the position where he was. At
25 that time the General Staff and the KLA did not have the proper mechanisms
1 to take any other measures, just to publicly remove those ones from
2 positions, those ones who would commit crimes or breaches.
3 The General Staff publicly distanced themselves from the actions
4 in the terrain that were not supported by the members of the General Staff
5 and that were far from the policy pursued by the General Staff. If
6 necessary, I can mention two cases in relation to which the General Staff
7 of the KLA publicly reacted. One of the cases occurred in Drenica when
8 one -- somebody from the ranks of the KLA stopped a truck and this truck
9 was driven by a Serb national. This truck was stopped. We interfered and
10 we released the driver and his truck. And we told them that this stop was
11 carried out by irresponsible people and that these irresponsible people
12 are not allowed to carry out such actions. So this is one of the cases
13 when the General Staff interfered.
14 The second case is when a hand-grenade was thrown in Peje, in a
15 cafeteria in Peje which was full of Serbian youth. There were casualties,
16 injured, and in this case the General Staff publicly distanced itself from
17 such violations and attacks on unarmed civilians. So what we proclaimed
18 in our statements that we're waging a war against the apparatus and
19 against the Serbian regime but not against the citizens.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you for that answer. I'd like to refer to part
21 of your testimony of today which was against two persons who had conducted
22 propaganda against the war. You told us that that may have been the
23 reason why they were stopped and, as you said, then they were released.
24 Do you remember that?
25 A. Yes.
1 JUDGE ORIE: You also told us that -- as a matter of fact, you
2 were asked then, whether by your own definition of collaborator, whether
3 it is correct that you would not characterise the activity of giving
4 propaganda against the war as being collaboration. And you confirmed that
5 it was correct. Then you said the following: "That's why they were
6 treated the way they were treated. They were released. Every time you
7 stop someone could not have been treated as collaborating."
8 In your answer there is a suggestion that being released is
9 because they were not collaborators; is that correctly understood?
10 A. Yes.
11 JUDGE ORIE: That would also suggest that if you would stop
12 collaborators, that you would not release them.
13 A. No, it doesn't.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Then please explain to me. Is it that you wouldn't
15 stop collaborators or you would also release them. Then it becomes not
16 quite understandable for me how you made that distinction. Could you
17 please explain how I should understand it in any other way as I did put it
18 to you.
19 A. The KLA did not have the means and the possibility to have prisons
20 and to detain collaborationists. Because, first of all, they were
21 protected by the Serb forces and collaborators were called those people or
22 those Albanians who worked in the Serb secret police or otherwise called
23 Serb intelligence service. I'd like to make a clarification here. The
24 Serb intelligence service is not the same as Western intelligence services
25 which collect information and then leave the relevant bodies deal with
1 them. The Serb service was an executive body as well, and they executed
2 decisions on the basis of the information they got. And these people who
3 were collaborators of the Serbs, of course they did not move around in the
4 war areas and it wasn't possible for us to detain or imprison them. We
5 didn't have any prisons, but maybe there were points, crossing points,
6 where people who looked suspicious were stopped. But even this was
7 limited. I repeat, the KLA did not have the possibilities to have any
8 prisons or detain people because the area was also limited.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I want to be quite frank with you. It's --
10 still does not explain clearly your testimony, whereas you said you
11 release them every time you stop someone could not have been treated as
12 collaborating. That's what you said and your answer does not fully
13 explain. I just put it to you so that if you want to add anything to your
14 explanation that you have an opportunity to do so. You answered my
15 question, but I just want to be frank with you that it not in every
16 respect makes me fully understand the distinction you made earlier in your
17 answer between the release of two persons not being collaborators.
18 A. In fact, I wouldn't mind calling them collaborators. I don't know
19 whether to call them or not. They were against the war. They conducted
20 propaganda against the war, but I can't call them collaborators.
21 Collaborators to us were those people who collaborated and who worked for
22 the Serb regime and the Serb police and army but not somebody who refused
23 to enter a war. A collaborator was somebody who was part of the
24 mechanism, who was part of the apparatus and served that apparatus.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Let me try to make it as clear to you as I can.
1 In your answer there's a clear suggestion, and I think you confirmed that,
2 that there is a distinction between the way you treat collaborators and
3 these two people you considered not to be collaborators. The not
4 collaborators, of which you now say you could call them also collaborators
5 but you wouldn't do it, the -- at least these two persons were released,
6 which leaves the question open what one would do if those who were stopped
7 were collaborators. That's not entirely clear to me at this moment.
8 A. [No interpretation]
9 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter did not hear the answer. Could
10 the witness repeat it.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Could you please repeat the answer because the
12 interpreters couldn't hear you.
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We did not stop collaborators.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you for those answers.
15 Mr. Emmerson, you had --
16 MR. EMMERSON: Yes.
17 JUDGE ORIE: -- some more questions triggered by the --
18 MR. EMMERSON: Principally arising out of Judge Hoepfel's
19 questions. Might I just ask the witness to remove his headphones for one
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
22 Mr. Krasniqi, could you please remove your headphones.
23 MR. EMMERSON: It may be that Your Honour's taken that last line
24 of questioning as far as it needs to be taken. There's simply one matter
25 that struck me as Your Honour was asking the question.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
2 MR. EMMERSON: It's in relation to the last of the three sentences
3 in the passage that Your Honour quoted to the witness which most recently
4 I think appears at page 66, line 23. The first two sentences
5 read: "That's why they were treated the way they were treated. They were
6 released," sorry, page 65, line 23. Then and then there is a sentence
7 that reads: "Every time you stopped someone could not have been treated
8 as collaborating."
9 On the face of it that is a sentence with a grammatical
11 JUDGE ORIE: I understand the -- yes. If you would take it
12 grammatically purely then --
13 MR. EMMERSON: It wouldn't -- yes. I mean, the only reason I
14 mention it is simply to see whether Your Honour wants to take it any
15 further or not.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Well --
17 MR. EMMERSON: Is that -- it struck me that what that might be is
18 a rough translation of -- or an approximate translation of the mere fact
19 that someone has been stopped --
20 JUDGE ORIE: What I will do, Mr. Emmerson, is to ask the specific
21 attention of those who are transcribing and those who are translating and
22 to check on the basis of the original words spoken by the witness whether
23 there is a grammatical difficulty or not.
24 MR. EMMERSON: Yes.
25 JUDGE ORIE: I don't think it of great use at this moment to
1 further pursue the matter.
2 Please proceed.
3 MR. EMMERSON: I wonder if the witness could --
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Could you please put your earphones on again,
5 Mr. Krasniqi.
6 Further cross-examination by Mr. Emmerson:
7 Q. Mr. Krasniqi, just for the sake of clarification, Judge Hoepfel
8 asks you some questions, this is the Judge who sits to your left in front
9 of you, asked you some questions about the -- a meeting at which the
10 General Staff took a decision about the appointment of a commander for the
11 Dukagjini region and specifically he asked you whether you understood it
12 to be an appointment or an election. Now, in this case we have seen
13 detailed minutes recording a meeting on the 23rd of June that took place
14 in Jabllanice at which there was a lengthy -- or there is recorded a
15 lengthy discussion which culminates in a decision to create a staff for
16 the Dukagjini Plain Operational Zone, and is followed by what appears to
17 be an election with Ramush Haradinaj being nominated by one party and
18 Lahi Brahimaj being nominated by another. And then speeches taking place
19 in favour of one or the other and culminating in a vote by a majority in
20 favour of Ramush Haradinaj as zone commander.
21 Now, that is a meeting which you were not present at, is that not
22 correct? You were not there at that meeting in Jabllanice?
23 A. I said that I was not present in Jabllanice. If you are referring
24 to a Jabllanice meeting, I don't know about that, and that was not a
25 meeting of the General Staff. Maybe it was a meeting from -- of people
1 from the Dukagjini Zone but not of the General Staff.
2 Q. Exactly. Can I take it you've never seen the minutes to that
3 meeting then or studied them yourself?
4 A. I'm not sure.
5 Q. Very well. The minutes record -- or at least one version of the
6 minutes records that Rexhep Selimi, who was I think at that point a member
7 of the General Staff, was present at that meeting. Is that something that
8 you are aware of or not, that there was one member of the General Staff
9 present at that meeting? If you can't remember, please say so.
10 A. I heard about this later from Rexhep Selimi himself.
11 Q. Now, you also mentioned a meeting of the General Staff at which a
12 decision was taken concerning the appointment of the commander of the
13 Dukagjini region and I think you mentioned two locations for it according
14 to my notes. You had mentioned Klecka and also Divjake, D-i-v-j-a-k-e,
15 just a few moments ago in answer to Judge Hoepfel. Wherever the meeting
16 of the General Staff took place, can we assume or can we infer from your
17 evidence, that that was a meeting that took place after the election of
18 Ramush Haradinaj on the 23rd of June?
19 A. Yes, of course. We took into account the decision of the zone
20 because the zone brought the proposal and we decided on the proposals that
21 the zone sent us.
22 Q. Thank you. And just for the sake of the record, what -- can you
23 now remember was it at Divjake or Klecka that that meeting took place?
24 Can you remember at which of the two it was? Again, if you can't
25 remember, please say so.
1 A. Klecka and Divjake are very close to each other, but as far as I
2 remember it was in Divjake.
3 Q. Very well. And finally this: You've called it an appointment
4 rather than an election in answer to Judge Hoepfel's question. Does it
5 really come to this that you were presented with the results of an
6 election and you endorsed those results, you, the General Staff.
7 A. Yes, that was a decision that was made in the Dukagjini Zone.
8 Q. Yes. And do you know roughly how long after the election your
9 meeting took place in Klecka?
10 A. I don't remember exactly, but I could venture a week or ten days
11 after that meeting. Could have been more or less than that.
12 Q. Thank you very much.
13 JUDGE ORIE: If there are no further questions triggered by the
14 questions of the Bench, do we need - and I am addressing the parties - do
15 we need the presence of the witness to deal with the books? Perhaps we
16 should ask the witness.
17 Questioned by the Court:
18 JUDGE ORIE: There are three books on my table which were provided
19 by Mr. Kearney. One bears a title in English which is: "Kosova in a
20 historical context." And if the parties would not object, I would read
21 that the title in original would be: Kosova [Interpretation] "In a
22 historical context." [In English] Is that the original in your language?
23 Is that the book you wrote?
24 A. Yes.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Then I have another book, which I can't give you the
1 title of, but it seems that it is, at least, the cover is in off-white and
2 something between red and pink with a picture of a statue. Is that a book
3 that you wrote?
4 A. Yes.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Then there is a third book which is with a green
6 cover and I would say a picture of what we know as P Exhibit 9, that is, a
7 UCK emblem on it. Is that a book you wrote?
8 A. No, that's not my book.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So therefore, that is an -- is that a book
10 published by a person by the name of Gafur Elshani?
11 A. Yes.
12 JUDGE ORIE: And is it a collection of documents and articles?
13 A. Yes.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Then we have identified the three books that were
15 provided by the Office of the Prosecution. The books you wrote, when you
16 wrote them, did you intend to give a -- on the assumption that you wrote
17 about the events in the late 1990s in Kosovo, was it your intention to
18 write historical documents which would reflect your view on what happened
19 at the time?
20 A. I gave information about the events that happened from 1990 to
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And in your recollection, did you try to do
23 your best to reflect facts as good as you could in accordance with the
24 facts that took place at the time?
25 A. Yes, that was my aim, so that the readers in Kosova could get to
1 know about a very difficult period in their history.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you for those answers.
3 I don't want to take this any further, just to see whether
4 Mr. Krasniqi wanted to write a novel -- well, with -- where he felt
5 totally free to mix up history and other things. This is not just for the
6 information of the parties. A question -- at least the answer to the
7 question does not mean that everything Mr. Krasniqi wrote in the book is
8 the ultimate statement of the facts.
9 MR. EMMERSON: I wasn't going to raise the issue at this stage
10 because I think it's apparent as it possibly could be from the
11 cross-examination of this witness that a mixture of statements where the
12 sources on examination prove not to be as reliable as the statements might
13 appear has been characteristic of his writings in certain cases, not least
14 because he was engaged in the promulgation of propaganda. And so before
15 anything in the books became material on which the Tribunal would want to
16 proceed, it would presumably be necessary to have Mr. Krasniqi recalled to
17 examine --
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that's -- of course I just wanted to know
19 whether he intended to write fiction or whether he intended to at least
20 deal with history, even if that would leave quite some room for
21 interpreting history.
22 Then I'd like to give the three books back to the Prosecution, and
23 the Chamber at this moment will not further deal with the books unless the
24 parties would refer to it.
25 Then, Mr. Krasniqi, this then concludes your evidence. You may
1 have understood that since the parties had not yet read the three books,
2 that they might apply at any later stage that you would further testify
3 about what they find in the books. The Chamber doesn't know whether this
4 will happen or not, but this is just to inform you that I could not
5 exclude for that possibility. I'd like to thank you for having come to
6 The Hague and to have answered questions of the parties and the Bench and
7 I wish you a safe trip home again.
8 I'm just consulting the parties. I think under the present
9 circumstances an instruction not to say a word about his testimony would
10 not be appropriate. I see that the parties agree with me, so I'll not
11 give such an instruction at this moment. Then one final matter. Is there
12 any objection against P329, that is, the map tendered by Mr. Kearney. No
13 objection. Then P329 is admitted into evidence. Since protective
14 measures have to be prepared for the next witness, we will -- Madam
15 Registrar, do we need then a full half-hour to prepare for -- especially
16 for voice distortion?
18 Then we'll resume -- Mr. Re.
19 MR. RE: Yes, thank you. Mr. Di Fazio will be taking the next
20 witness assisted by Ms. Schweiger. I just wish to -- I note the Trial
21 Chamber's decision in relation to provision of cross-examination material.
22 I just wish to draw the Defence counsel, if they haven't received it,
23 their attention to the disposition on the final page and having to provide
24 material when the witness takes an oath.
25 JUDGE ORIE: That will take another half-hour, Mr. Re.
1 MR. EMMERSON: I'm standing here. I hadn't even realised that the
2 Trial Chamber had issued that decision.
3 JUDGE ORIE: It had been signed at 3.00 today; it has been filed a
4 half an hour ago.
5 MR. EMMERSON: It's clearly not something we can implement for the
6 next witness.
7 JUDGE ORIE: You're not blamed for -- to the extent possible
8 because that's -- the decision, as a matter of fact, follows the
9 Milutinovic decision in this respect. That means that exhibits to be used
10 in cross-examination should be announced at the beginning of the testimony
11 of the witness in chief, that is, when he takes the oath.
12 MR. EMMERSON: Yes.
13 JUDGE ORIE: So on from the moment where there's no further free
14 communication between the Prosecution and the witness.
15 MR. EMMERSON: Yes.
16 JUDGE ORIE: To the extent possible, of course, you're invited
17 to -- to meet with the new decision -- but there's full understanding that
18 preparation within one hour, within half an hour, risks shortcomings which
19 are understandable.
20 MR. EMMERSON: Yes.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Re, I am looking at you, you would certainly
22 understand it.
23 MR. RE: We certainly do but would there anything to prevent the
24 Defence from complying with the spirit of it by providing the material by
25 tomorrow morning?
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, although -- yes. That --
2 MR. EMMERSON: I'd like to study the decision before I respond to
3 any of it and see the terms in which it's been put. Whilst --
4 JUDGE ORIE: Literally the same as Milutinovic. If we need the
5 witness for what you would like to raise, then we'll ask him to stay; but
6 otherwise, I would rather -- it's a quarter to 6.00.
7 MR. EMMERSON: Yes. I can deal with it in one sentence.
8 JUDGE ORIE: One sentence.
9 MR. EMMERSON: Mr. Re and I have spoken about the issue of
10 timetable for the Defence objections in respect of the subpoena for
11 Witness 730.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
13 MR. EMMERSON: The Prosecution has no objection to the Defence
14 filing that which it wishes to file on Tuesday.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, and Mr. Re, there would be no problem since, I'm
16 talking off the top of my head, that on the 18th of June that witness is
17 supposed to testify. That would not cause you any problems in view of the
18 time it usually takes to -- first of all, for the Chamber to decide, then
19 to have it translated, have it given --
20 MR. RE: There's no difficulty, no.
21 JUDGE ORIE: No difficulty.
22 Then we'll have a break and we'll resume at quarter past 6.00.
23 --- Recess taken at 5.46 p.m.
24 [The witness withdrew]
25 --- On resuming at 6.19 p.m.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kearney, you are on your feet.
2 MR. KEARNEY: I am. I'm sorry to be but I am. I just wanted to
3 bring one thing to the Trial Chamber's attention. The 92 ter summaries
4 have not been read in yet for the last witness.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
6 MR. KEARNEY: I'm happy to do it at another time, I'm happy to do
7 it now.
8 JUDGE ORIE: I'd rather do it at a moment when there's no witness
9 waiting. It's to inform the public but not necessarily to be done
10 immediately on the spot.
11 Mr. Di Fazio, is the Prosecution ready to call its next witness?
12 MR. DI FAZIO: It is ready, if Your Honours please.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And that would be Witness 6? Protective
14 measures, face distortion, voice distortion, and pseudonym. Is that --
15 MR. DI FAZIO: That's correct.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Then, Madam Usher, could you take the necessary
17 measures to get the witness into the courtroom.
18 I take it that it goes without saying that the cameras will also
19 respect the face distortion.
20 [Trial Chamber confers]
21 MR. DI FAZIO: Will your -- sorry.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Di Fazio.
23 MR. DI FAZIO: I apologise for interrupting. I didn't realise the
24 Trial Chamber was conferring. Will Your Honours explain the measures that
25 apply in respect of protection of this witness to --
1 JUDGE ORIE: I usually say something about it especially when I
2 address him as Witness 6.
3 MR. DI FAZIO: I would be grateful if you could. I haven't had a
4 chance to speak to this man, and so --
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
6 MR. DI FAZIO: -- he'll probably be reassured to know that.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I will pay attention to it.
8 MR. DI FAZIO: And just before that last statement leads me into
9 any error, let me say this: I tried to speak to this man moments ago
10 without the assistance of an interpreter and I think that I probably ended
11 up causing more bewilderment than anything else and I wanted to explain
12 the court system and therefore I want that set clear.
13 [The witness entered court]
14 JUDGE ORIE: Good afternoon, Witness 6. Can you hear me in a
15 language you understand?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, only in Albanian.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Witness 6, I call you Witness 6 because the
18 Chamber has decided that protective measures were justified in respect of
19 you. That means that we'll not use your own name, we'll call you
20 Witness 6; no one outside this courtroom would see your face, even those
21 who are on the public gallery will not see your face because they're --
22 it's shielded, as you can see; furthermore, your voice is distorted, that
23 means when your testimony is broadcasted that no one will see your face
24 but also no one will be able to recognise your voice. Do you understand
25 that? Yes.
1 Then before you give evidence the Rules of Procedure and Evidence
2 require you to make a solemn declaration that you will speak the truth,
3 the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. The text is now handed out to
4 you by Madam Usher and I invite you to make that solemn declaration.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will speak
6 the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you very much. Please be seated.
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
9 JUDGE ORIE: You will first be examined by Mr. Di Fazio, who's
10 counsel for the Prosecution. Don't be worried, the curtains will be up
11 but the screen is still there, so that no one sees your face.
12 Mr. Di Fazio, once the curtains have stopped making noise, you may
14 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you, Your Honours.
15 WITNESS: WITNESS SST7/6
16 [Witness answered through interpreter]
17 Examination by Mr. Di Fazio:
18 Q. Witness 6, I'm going to show you something on the screen that
19 appears in front of you.
20 MR. DI FAZIO: I'd like the witness to be shown 65 ter 1347, which
21 I believe is his pseudonym sheet.
22 Q. Witness, feel free to lean forward and have a look, and I'd like
23 you to look at the details that are contained on that document. And
24 without mentioning them out loud, can you tell us if the last -- if that
25 is your last name; if that is your first name; your father's name; your
1 date of birth; and your place of birth. Are those details correct?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Thank you.
4 MR. DI FAZIO: I'd just like to get some more personal details
5 from this witness, and if Your Honours please we'll have to go into
6 private session briefly.
7 JUDGE ORIE: We turn into private session.
8 Witness 6, that means even what you say could not be heard by
9 anyone outside this courtroom. May I invite you to come a bit closer to
10 the microphone.
11 [Private session]
5 [Open session]
6 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're back in open session.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
8 Madam Registrar, could I assume that 65 ter number 1347 would be
10 THE REGISTRAR: That's correct, Your Honours.
11 JUDGE ORIE: And since I expect no objections, it's admitted into
13 Please proceed, Mr. Di Fazio.
14 MR. DI FAZIO: And under seal --
15 JUDGE ORIE: Under seal, yes, of course.
16 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you for reminding me.
18 MR. DI FAZIO: All right.
19 Q. Witness, I want you to turn your mind to events in June of 1998.
20 Now, in that month did you visit any relatives or attempt to visit any
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Now, again it's important that you don't mention names so that
24 you're not identified. Where were these relatives living at the time?
25 A. In Nepole village, Peje municipality.
1 Q. And were these relatives, in fact, of your wife?
2 A. Family, my wife's family.
3 Q. All right. Thank you. Did you attempt -- did you, in fact, start
4 out on a journey to visit these people?
5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Harvey.
6 MR. HARVEY: Your Honours, every question so far has been leading
7 and I have not objected, but from here on in I would ask that Mr. Di Fazio
8 exercise extreme caution. Thank you.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Di Fazio, you're put at notice.
10 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes. Thank you.
11 Q. Yes. Now, my question was: Did you visit these people? I'm
12 asking you about the month of June 1998.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. --
14 MR. HARVEY: Your Honour, the question was: Did you start out on
15 a visit to these people?
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Unless there's any specific reason whether
17 starting out here would not have resulted in visiting, I think we could
18 have done without the objection, but if there's any good reason for that I
19 do not know, but Mr. Di Fazio certainly will know.
20 MR. DI FAZIO:
21 Q. In June 1998 did you visit any relatives?
22 A. No. We set out to visit them but we were stopped.
23 Q. Thank you. Who did you set out to visit?
24 A. I set out with my wife and my five children and we were going to
25 visit my wife's family.
1 Q. Thank you. How did you set out? How were you travelling?
2 A. We set out by car.
3 Q. Whose car?
4 A. My car.
5 Q. Thank you.
6 A. A Mercedes Benz.
7 Q. Thank you. Who was in the car?
8 A. I was with my wife and my five children. My wife was pregnant at
9 the time.
10 Q. Now, cast your mind back and tell us, if you can, if you can, the
11 date upon which you set out on this trip.
12 A. It was the 13th. It was a Friday in 1998.
13 Q. And just again, in case it's not absolutely clear, what month was
15 A. The sixth month.
16 Q. Thank you. Did you arrive at your destination?
17 A. No.
18 Q. Without mentioning the name of your home village, tell us the
19 route upon which you set out on this trip.
20 A. It was about 11.30 a.m. when we set out from my village towards
21 the village of my wife's family.
22 Q. What road did you take in order to get to the village of your
23 wife's family?
24 A. The Gjakove-Kline road.
25 Q. What sort of road is that? Is that a secondary road, a principal
1 road? Can you inform the Trial Chamber, please.
2 A. It is a main road.
3 Q. How far did you get along that road?
4 A. Up to a place called Grabanice. The Serbian military stopped us
5 there. We returned and took the direction towards my house. It was about
6 1.00 when they kidnapped me on the Gjakove-Kline main road.
7 Q. I'm going to get to that issue of what you say is your kidnapping
8 in a moment, but firstly I want to be clear about the route that you took.
9 When you left your home village, did you get on to the main
10 Djakovica-Klina road?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. And did you travel northwards along that road in the direction of
13 your wife's family's village?
14 A. Yes, that's correct because my village is at the exit from
15 Gjakove. It's from there that I took the direction towards my wife's
16 family village.
17 Q. Now, I want to be absolutely sure. On what road was this Serb
18 location where the military -- Serbian military stopped you? It's the
19 road that I'm interested. Where was this -- where was the Serb military
20 that you have mentioned?
8 [Private session]
11 Pages 5173-5180 redacted. Private session.
20 [Open session]
21 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're back in open session.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
23 MR. DI FAZIO: Your Honours, I was wondering if the Defence have
24 no objection, would they mind the witness being given a map for him to
25 look at overnight. He may be, by given time for him to look at it, be
1 able to mark his itinerary on such a map and it may be that this will
2 resolve the matter. And I'm sure that all the parties are interested in
3 knowing exactly where he was stopped and how. So that's a suggestion I
4 make, it's made in the spirit of trying to clarify what I think is a
5 noncontentious area.
6 JUDGE ORIE: And would then the map do, the map that we have in
7 front of us with the red circles on it.
8 Witness 6 -- yes, Mr. Harvey.
9 MR. HARVEY: Your Honour, might I ask that the witness remove his
10 headphones for just a moment.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
12 Could you take off your headphones for just a second.
13 Yes, Mr. Harvey.
14 MR. HARVEY: Your Honour, I have no means of knowing the answer to
15 this question but I thought I should at least raise it. The witness has
16 for the first time in a -- and he's made something like eight statements
17 to my knowledge. He has for the first time today mentioned this business
18 about having been stopped by a Serb roadblock. It is in the statement of
19 his wife, and so obviously I'm not taken by surprise by it. I have no
20 means of knowing whether his wife is here with him in The Hague. If she
21 were, then of course it would be fatuous to suggest that he wouldn't speak
22 to her overnight, and if he's going to take a map home with him --
23 JUDGE ORIE: Well, not to -- I wouldn't instruct the witness not
24 to speak to his wife until tomorrow but certainly give an additional --
25 MR. HARVEY: I just thought I should ask.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
2 Mr. Di Fazio, do you know whether the witness is accompanied by
3 his --
4 MR. DI FAZIO: I don't know. I don't know that detail. I wish I
5 could answer you now I just don't --
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
7 MR. DI FAZIO: I rather doubt it but I can't say one way or the
9 JUDGE ORIE: We'll ask the witness in such a way that -- Witness
10 6, could you please put your earphones on again.
11 Witness 6, did you come to The Hague with any members of your
12 family or did you come alone? If you came with members of your family,
13 don't tell me who it is, but did you come alone or are family members
14 accompanying you?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I am alone.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
17 That -- then, Witness 6, the map you see on your screen at this
18 moment --
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Now I think I see it.
20 JUDGE ORIE: What we are going to do is the following. We are
21 going to provide you with a similar map on paper. If you would please,
22 before you return in this courtroom tomorrow, carefully look at that map
23 on paper and try for yourself to find out what roads you exactly took on
24 the day you have been asked questions about so that tomorrow we might more
25 easily find our way on this map. So you'll be provided with a paper copy
1 of the map. You should not consult other people about it, but just for
2 yourself to look at it to see whether you can find the villages, the roads
3 where you went so that tomorrow you're prepared to answer further
4 questions on this subject.
5 Is that clear to you?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then --
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I wanted to say something, if I may.
9 JUDGE ORIE: One second.
10 [Trial Chamber confers]
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, you would like to say something. Please tell me
12 and tell the Chamber.
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I wanted to speak about my
14 kidnapping from Guri i Zi, that place, everything is in the statement.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We will continue tomorrow putting further
16 questions to you. We usually stop at 7.00 at night. It's five minutes
17 past 7.00, so tomorrow you'll be further examined on these matters. And
18 since you have, from what I understand, given several statements, it might
19 be that the Chamber would like to hear from you and not just read what you
20 earlier gave as a statement. So just wait and what questions will be put
21 to you tomorrow and then you can tell us about it.
22 We stand adjourned until tomorrow, the 1st of June, quarter past
23 2.00, same courtroom.
24 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.05 p.m.,
25 to be reconvened on Friday, the 1st day of
1 June, 2007, at 2.15 p.m.