1 Wednesday, 10 October 2007
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness entered court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 9.06 a.m.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning to everyone.
7 Would you please call the case, Mr. Registrar.
8 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. Good morning everyone
9 in the courtroom. This is case number IT-04-84-T, the Prosecutor versus
10 Ramush Haradinaj et al.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you very much.
12 Before I give you the opportunity, Mr. Emmerson, to continue your
13 cross-examination, two small matters.
14 There is a request by the Prosecution to send a letter with
15 corrections to Professor Aleksandric. Before the Chamber decides this
16 matter, the Chamber would like to know whether there's any objection by
17 the Defence.
18 I see "no," by Mr. Emmerson.
19 Mr. Guy-Smith?
20 MR. GUY-SMITH: No.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Harvey?
22 Then second, the Chamber was informed that the Haradinaj and Balaj
23 Defence do not oppose a request for protective measures for the witness
24 who's scheduled for tomorrow. The Chamber would like to know, Mr. Harvey,
25 what your position is.
1 MR. HARVEY: I apologise that the information didn't get through
2 to the Court. We also have no objection, Your Honours.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Thank you very much.
4 I don't know whether you have to apologise or whether it was our
5 fault. We just don't know. But it's on the record now that all three
6 Defence teams do not object.
7 Then good morning -- good morning, Mr. Stijovic. May I remind you
8 that you're still bound by the solemn declaration you've given at the
9 beginning of your testimony. And Mr. Emmerson will now continue his
11 Mr. Emmerson, you may proceed.
12 MR. EMMERSON: I wonder if the witness could be given the black
13 binder, please.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
15 MR. EMMERSON: I think he has it. I'm sorry.
16 JUDGE ORIE: He has it already.
17 WITNESS: ZORAN STIJOVIC [Resumed]
18 [Witness answered through interpreter]
19 Cross-examination by Mr. Emmerson: [Continued]
20 Q. Mr. Stijovic, could you turn to tab 14, please. I have just one
21 or two further questions to ask you about your interview with
22 Radomir Markovic and the testimony you gave in the Milosevic trial.
23 First of all, tab number 14, can I ask you, please, to identify
24 that document and your signature on it, the statement that was taken from
25 Mr. Markovic on the 26th of June, 2001.
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Thank you.
3 MR. EMMERSON: May that please be marked for identification.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
5 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be marked for
6 identification as D171.
7 MR. EMMERSON: And I should also ask at the same time that the
8 briefing note which is behind tab 13 be marked for identification as well.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
10 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be marked for
11 identification as D172.
12 MR. RE: The Prosecution will be taking an objection at the
13 appropriate time to the admission into evidence.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
15 MR. RE: Especially --
16 JUDGE ORIE: It's good to know it's on the record. We'll consider
17 that when it comes to that.
18 MR. RE: Yes.
19 MR. EMMERSON:
20 Q. Now, as regards this statement, Mr. Stijovic, we can see in the
21 English translation on page 1 about ten lines down, the sentence
22 beginning: "Beyond the main topic of the meeting," where you refer -- or,
23 I'm sorry, where the statement refers to the content of a meeting that
24 took place in March 1999 at which Mr. Markovic was present together with
25 President Milosevic, Mr. Stojiljkovic, and Vlastimir Djordjevic.
1 I'll just read a short passage into the record, if I may. "Beyond
2 the main topic of the meeting, at its very end, Vlastimir Djordjevic
3 raised the problem of removing Albanian bodies to remove all possible
4 civilian victims who could become the subject of an investigation by The
5 Hague Tribunal. Mr. Milosevic ordered Vlajko Stojiljkovic to undertake
6 the measures necessary to remove the bodies of the Albanian citizens who
7 had already been buried. I personally did not get involved in the
8 conversation on this topic, since none of the orders was directed at me."
9 "I know that Stojiljkovic appointed General Dragan Ilic to
10 implement this task and that the latter then went with a specific team of
11 collaborators to the KIM area. I personally did not want to allow the RDB
12 to get involved in this morbid tale of later disinterment and removal of
13 the bodies, so as far as I know, it was the RJB and members of the VJ that
14 participated in this."
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson, you're reading.
16 MR. EMMERSON: Yes. I'm ending the quotation at that point.
17 Q. Mr. Stijovic, were those the words of Radomir Markovic or -- or
18 were they words that you, so to speak, put into his mouth?
19 A. I interrogated Radomir Markovic to the best of my knowledge about
20 the events in Kosovo and Metohija and on the basis of the task given to me
21 from the leadership of the State Security Service. This is -- these are
22 the words of Radomir Markovic, the way he uttered them, and I relayed them
23 in his statement. These are his words.
24 Q. Thank you.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson, part of your reading was about Albanian
1 citizens who had already been buried, where I see in the original
3 MR. EMMERSON: I do apologise.
4 JUDGE ORIE: The distinction is not -- it was a mistake.
5 MR. EMMERSON: I apologise. It was my mistake.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please proceed.
7 MR. EMMERSON:
25 JUDGE ORIE: Then we'll turn into private session, if that's
1 what -- yes. We'll turn into private session.
2 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're in private session.
3 [Private session]
11 Pages 9153-9156 redacted. Private session.
4 [Open session]
5 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
6 MR. EMMERSON:
7 Q. Having dealt with the -- the top end of the organisation, I want
8 to now look at the -- the grassroots end, if I can put it that way.
9 I'm going to just read to you a sentence from a statement made by
10 your boss, David Gajic, chief of RDB in Kosovo, where he refers to some
11 information. This is not in evidence, this statement, although Your
12 Honours have seen it before. It is statement made in August 2003 to the
13 Office of the Prosecutor commenting on the Joint Command minutes.
14 And he refers at one stage, Mr. Stijovic, in the statement to an
15 entry in the minutes of the Joint Command, which is an entry recording
16 something that he had said. And he says: "This information was provided
17 to the RDB by the head of our local office, Vule Mrksic is V-u-l-e Mrksic.
19 Now, can I ask you, please: Who is Vule Mrksic?
20 A. A person by that name was not part of the State Security Service.
21 David Gajic is dead. He passed away a year or two. Just to inform the
23 Q. Thank you. Do you know anybody by the name of Vule Mrksic?
24 A. No.
25 Q. Do you know anybody by the name of Vukmir Mrksic?
1 A. No.
2 Q. And the Vladimir Mrksic that you've told us about, an operative
3 working in the Decane office of the DB, Vladimir Mrksic, did he have a
4 shortened version of his name at all?
5 A. Mr. Emmerson, there seems to be a misunderstanding there. Not
6 Vladimir Mrksic. Rather, Vladimir Mircic. And I pronounced his name that
7 way. There is no Vladimir Mrksic, only Vladimir Mircic.
8 Q. Then we may have a translation problem. The passage from
9 Mr. Gajic's statement refers to Vule Mircic, M-i-r-c-i-c. Now, did
10 Vladimir Mircic that you've told us about in Decane go by the name of Vule
11 or Vula?
12 A. You don't have the correct information. Let me tell you this
13 correctly. Vladimir Mircic is an operative of State Security in Decani.
14 Vukmir Mircic, aka Vula is his brother, and he was the chief of MUP
16 Q. I see.
17 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's Correction: The chief of OUP
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] These are probably the persons
20 you're talking about.
21 When we were in private session, I was explaining that signature,
22 you'll recall, and the -- and he was not the -- the second signature but
23 the third signature. I said that I recognised his signature.
24 MR. EMMERSON:
25 Q. I'm going to come back to that signature in a -- in a moment or
1 two. So that is Vladimir Mircic and his brother is Vula or Vukmir Mircic;
3 A. I constantly receive in my translation Mrksic. It's not Mrksic.
4 It's Mircic.
5 Q. Yes?
6 JUDGE ORIE: We receive on our transcript -- we receive Mircic as
7 the name.
8 MR. EMMERSON: And may I --
9 JUDGE ORIE: That's how -- also how I hear Mr. Emmerson pronounce
10 the name. So from now on, unless we get notice, it is Mircic we are
11 talking about, two brothers.
12 Please proceed.
13 MR. EMMERSON:
14 Q. And again, so that we're clear, Vladimir was an official of the
15 RDB; is that correct?
16 A. That's correct.
17 Q. And where was he based?
18 A. In the building of the Decani OUP -- or rather, Decani SUP in the
19 town of Decani.
20 Q. And Vule or Vula, you say he was not a member of the RDB or he
22 A. He wasn't a member of the RDB. He was chief of the Decani OUP.
23 That's organ of the interior.
24 Q. So the two brothers worked together in the same building; is that
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Thank you. I'm going to ask you about a number of documents now.
3 First of all, could I --
4 JUDGE ORIE: Your last question was a composite question. It
5 could be that -- but there is a risk in the same building and working
6 together is not the same place or working together -- "working together,"
7 I would like to have that ...
8 MR. EMMERSON:
9 Q. The two brothers were based in the same building in Deqan for the
10 purposes of their respective work; is that correct?
11 A. Thank you, Your Honour. Yes, they were based in the same
12 building, but they didn't do the same jobs. The older brother was in the
13 department of the public security and the younger brother was in the
14 department of state security. And these are two different domains.
15 However, they were sitting in the same building.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
17 Mr. Emmerson.
18 MR. EMMERSON:
19 Q. Very often when people were brought into custody, they would be
20 interrogated first by public security officers and then by state security
21 officers; is that correct?
22 A. Well, it's not correct. It depended on the particular job that
23 the person had.
24 Q. Yes. Just -- just to be clear, I mean, we've seen at least one
25 example of it already in this case. People were -- people taken into
1 custody were interviewed by both organs on occasions, were they not?
2 A. That's right.
3 Q. And they'd be sharing information and effectively working side by
4 side; is that right?
5 A. No. The public security service, if I need to explain, conducted
6 initial interview with the person brought in. However, if through the
7 information obtained from this individual there was some interest for the
8 State Security Service, then the State Security Service would continue the
9 interview about the circumstances, because the State Security Service had
10 good quality information and they were dealing with terrorism.
11 Q. And in those circumstances, the suspect would be taken to the
12 fourth floor, is that right, of the Deqani police station for
13 interrogation by the RDB?
14 A. That was not the way. First of all, there were no floors in that
15 building. The second floor.
16 Q. I see. You're sure -- sure about that, are you?
17 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's Correction: It didn't have four
19 MR. EMMERSON:
20 Q. Forgive me, but we've heard testimony from people who have worked
21 there who said that it did and that's where the RDB was based. Is that
22 possibly your recollection at fault, then?
23 A. Had -- that they were taken to the fourth floor? I'm absolutely
24 certain about my memory. There was no fourth floor.
25 Q. All right. Very well. I'll -- it's conceivable that --
1 JUDGE ORIE: Were they taken to the floor where the RDB was
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, the second floor.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
5 MR. EMMERSON: It could be an error on my part. I'll check the
7 JUDGE ORIE: But the fourth floor was mentioned.
8 MR. EMMERSON: Yes, yes.
9 JUDGE ORIE: But let's move on.
10 MR. EMMERSON:
11 Q. Could we please turn to tab 23 for a moment in the bundle. And as
12 I ask you to do that, Mr. Stijovic, I -- I want to ask you this: Did you
13 ever learn of complaints that people who had been taken into custody at
14 Gjakova or Deqan police station or indeed Pec were mistreated by the RDB
15 or RJB, public security or state security? They were beaten?
16 A. Yes. We received this information subsequently, most often when
17 the trial was already in progress, and that happened at the main hearing.
18 The individuals were then denied the statements that they had given,
19 claiming that they had been taken under duress and with the use of
20 violence against them during examination.
21 Q. Well, let's look at tab 23 for a moment, because that's not a
22 statement that was made at trial but a statement that was made by an
23 individual three days after the statement that you have annexed as annex
24 41 to your witness statement.
25 Now, annex 41 is one of those in respect of which the Trial
1 Chamber has indicated that it is in the territory of potential
2 non-admission, but if you remind yourself of annex 41 to your witness
3 statement, which is marked for identification P973, that is a statement
4 allegedly made by somebody called Rifat or -- Haradinaj, a record compiled
5 of an interview allegedly by somebody called Rifat Haradinaj and dated the
6 27th of March dealing with events of the 24th and 25th of March.
7 If we could turn to tab 23, then, for a moment. This is, for the
8 record, a part of Exhibit P5 -- it's already in evidence. It's Exhibit
9 P5, page 30.
10 Now, this is a statement taken from the same gentleman three days
11 later, on the 30th of March, by an organisation called the Humanitarian
12 Law Centre.
13 And if we look at the substance of the statement, he refers to
14 having been arrested on the 24th of March at some distance from the
15 Haradinaj family compound, and it indicates that he had not himself
16 witnessed the exchange of fire around the compound itself.
17 And then in the third paragraph of his statement, he says this
18 following his arrest: "They -- then they took us to Eljmi's house where
19 the attack was and knocked us down onto the sand. There were 10 or 11 of
20 us. I don't know exactly, because I didn't raise -- dare raise my head to
21 see. Us four were among the first. The others were brought in later. We
22 lay there for a long time. They stomped on our backs, heads, and legs and
23 hit us with their rifle butts. They drove the Pinzgauer up very close,
24 like they were going to run over us. They said they would slit our
25 throats, shoot us. Then the one in charge came up and told them to stop
2 "Later on they took us off the street and into Dragoslav's yard,
3 because foreign reporters were coming. They didn't beat us in the yard,
4 just handcuffed us. At about half past 8.00, they put us in a car and
5 drove to Gjakova. There were two bodies lying near the steps at the
6 police station there. They lined us up and told us to identify them. I
7 couldn't, because they were badly shot up. I could hardly stay upright
8 because of the beating I'd got. They beat an old man. And when I looked
9 in that direction, they got mad and began hitting me again."
10 "It was one after midnight when the questioning started. The
11 inspectors asked me how the attack began and what I knew about the UCK.
12 They questioned me the next day too. They made me say in front of a
13 camera that what Dragoslav Stojanovic had said about his house being fired
14 at from Eljmi's house was true. In the beginning I told the truth - that
15 I couldn't see if there was shooting from Elmji's house because mine is
16 two kilometres away. But they finally made me say Dragoslav's statement
17 was true. They let me go at 3.30 in the afternoon on the 26th of March."
18 That is the -- the statement as it appears. And then the record
19 that you have, which is unsigned, at annex 41 of this interrogation is
20 dated the following day, the 27th of March, the day after this interview
21 took place.
22 Now, Mr. Stijovic, people were beaten, weren't they, in custody
23 routinely, both by officers of the RJB and by officers of the RDB? And
24 you know that, don't you?
25 A. No. What you have just read out, Your Honours, I may comment upon
1 and I can do it on each sentence uttered by this person in the statement
2 given to the Humanitarian Law Centre. But what I would like to do and
3 what I would like everybody to do, to put this in the context and the time
4 and the events.
5 As concerning the use of violence, these things probably occurred.
6 I cannot say that it was not the case, and I don't think there is any
7 police force in the world not using these methods at least at one point
8 when they overstep the boundaries.
9 Q. Thank you. You weren't there during this interrogation, were you,
10 Mr. Stijovic?
11 A. No, I wasn't. But a good friend of mine, Mr. Otovic, was killed
12 on that occasion.
13 Q. We are aware of that.
14 You mentioned earlier on a statement that was discussed in private
16 MR. EMMERSON: So could we just go in very briefly to private
17 session to identify the statement concerned.
18 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're in private session.
19 [Private session]
8 [Open session]
9 MR. EMMERSON: For clarity sake, you identified the signature at
10 the bottom of the statement, annex 18, as Vukmir Mircic; is that correct?
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's not correct. I also said
12 then, when this was shown to me, that it was Vladimir Mircic. I remember
13 well. And you can look at the annex shown to me by the Prosecution that
14 his signature was the second or the third one and that I recognised it.
15 It was Vladimir Mircic, and that is when I said that this was probably
17 MR. EMMERSON:
18 Q. You're quite correct. I misspoke myself.
19 If we could just look, please, behind tab 24. There is here a
20 statement which was taken, as you can see, on the 6th of October, that is,
21 two days before you testified about annex 18. It is the same of
22 Muhamet Avdijai, and the relevant passage reads as follows: "I was
23 arrested by the police in Junik on the 19th of February, 1998. I was
24 taken to the police station in Junik, where for the next three hours I was
25 repeatedly beaten by the police. They used their plastic batons to beat
1 me, as well as their fists and feet. After around three hours, other
2 police arrived at the station in Junik. They were from Decan. They took
3 me from Junik to the police station in Decan, where for the next two or
4 three hours they carried on with the same treatment as the police in
5 Junik. I was beaten in the same manner."
6 "I do recall meeting a man there, one of the police officers, who
7 I knew as Vula Mircic. It was in his office that I was interviewed
8 between being beaten. After around three hours, officers from the UDB
9 arrived there. They took me to the police station in Peja. I was
10 repeatedly beaten there by them. They interviewed me in between the
11 beatings, but I was in no condition to know what I was being asked. I do
12 not remember what I was asked exactly. I do not remember signing any
13 statement there, but I was later taken to court in Peja where -- where one
14 was produced. I refused to accept the allegations being made about me and
15 no witnesses were ever called to the court to give evidence.
16 "I can say that during the time that I was being interviewed I
17 was told things by the people interviewing me and asked to agree them --
18 agree with them. I never volunteered anything myself. I have never
19 voluntarily given any statement to the Serbian authorities about anything
20 that was happening in Kosovo in 1998.
21 "I just wish to clarify what I mean by the police in Peja. At
22 the police station there were also offices of the UDB and it was in their
23 offices that I was interviewed, by them, not the usual police, and it was
24 at their hands that I was beaten."
25 Mr. Stijovic, are you in a position to contradict that?
1 A. Allow me, Your Honours, to explain this, because this was a
2 lengthy quotation and I cannot just give a yes or a no answer to this
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please explain what you'd like to explain.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] First of all, I am talking here
6 about things to the best of my knowledge, and I continue to do so.
7 I express some suspicion about this hindsight, especially
8 referring to the statement taken on the 6th of October, 2006 --
9 correction, 2007, that refer to the events that took years ago. And I
10 mentioned that there was a method that statements were given to the organs
11 of the police and to the investigators which were later denied in court.
12 In this particular instance, the gentleman you mentioned had an
13 opportunity to point out to the court in Pec, when he was brought in -- or
14 draw their attention that violence or any illegal methods were applied to
15 him. And this would have been responded to by the court.
16 It seems to me that he failed to do so.
17 MR. EMMERSON:
18 Q. On what do you base that observation? Did you -- do you study the
19 court records, Mr. Stijovic?
20 A. No, I haven't studied the court records, but we used the court
21 records as a kind of guidance in our operation in our department. And I
22 believe that the court decisions are -- were very important both in the
23 past and in the future for our work.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Perhaps in -- in order to -- perhaps to shortcut
25 matters, of course, looking at these statements now opens several
1 possibilities, of course, which Mr. Emmerson is now exploring.
2 The one is that those who have taken the statements might not
3 easily acknowledge that they were recorded in a false manner and that they
4 reflected what was not said. But there's also another possibility, that
5 is, that those who gave the statements at the time have difficulties in
6 acknowledging what they said at the time. So these two poles, to say so,
7 is -- are, of course,-- the Chamber is well aware of that.
8 To the extent we can clarify it, whether we can establish whether
9 it was the one or the other, that's fine. The Chamber is not
10 over-optimistic in this respect.
11 Please proceed.
12 MR. EMMERSON:
13 Q. But to be absolutely clear about it, Mr. Stijovic, you testified
14 on Monday that not only were you not present at these interrogations but
15 that the extent of your knowledge was having read the two documents that
16 are in -- annexed as annexes 17 and 18; is that correct?
17 A. As far as these two statements that were shown to me are
18 concerned, yes. Time-wise, I was in Pristina.
19 Q. Thank you. Could you turn to tab 21, please, for a moment. Tab
20 21 is not yet marked for identification. It is Defence document
21 1D00-1793, and the translation of this document is a draft translation.
22 Might it be marked for identification, please.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
24 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will marked for identification
25 as D173.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
2 MR. EMMERSON:
3 Q. Just to explain this document to you before I ask you about it --
4 the contents, Mr. Stijovic, this is a document filed with the Peja
5 district court in November 2001, based on an investigation conducted by
6 the council for the defence of human rights and freedoms in Kosovo and
7 statements taken from Albanian citizens about alleged crimes committed by
8 Serb forces and Serb officials. And this document is a complaint against
9 Vukmir Mircic?
10 Now, just to help us, if you can, to -- to compare the
11 biographical information. It indicates that "Vukmir Mircic, known from
12 his mother, Vasilika, and father Mitar, with the name Vula, born on
13 September 11, 1954 in the village of Kodrali." Are those biographical
14 details correct, as far as you know?
15 A. I honestly cannot tell you his date of birth, but that Vukmir
16 Mircic was what it says here, that's true. As far as his mother's name or
17 which school he finished, I really cannot be of any help in that
19 Q. We can see a little later further down he used to work in the
20 municipal court of Deqan as a typist, a job he switched with the Serbian
21 internal affairs UDB job in Peje. Moreover, he was also a chief of
22 Serbian place in Deqan.
23 Is that correct?
24 A. Yes, that's correct.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson, you're putting this document to the
1 witness. Wouldn't we first ask whether he knows anything about the
2 existence of the document or about the content of the document.
3 MR. EMMERSON: Yes.
4 JUDGE ORIE: And then perhaps go -- ask him whether he was aware
5 that the council for the defence of human rights and freedoms lodged a
6 complaint against Mr. Mircic, and then we would know whether it makes any
7 sense at all to put further questions to him in this context.
8 MR. EMMERSON: Yes.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
10 MR. EMMERSON:
11 Q. First of all, were you aware that a formal complaint had been
12 lodged against Mr. Mircic?
13 A. No.
14 Q. I'm going, if I may, nonetheless to ask you one or two
15 supplementary questions in relation to the content. If we turn to
16 paragraph 5, for example, many of the allegations relate to crimes
17 allegedly committed in 1999. But the paragraph 5 records an allegation
18 that in June 1998, Mr. Mircic came to the house of the man called
19 Qazim Bid Kuqit in Decan and took 15 immobilised civilian population to
20 the police station in Decan, torturing them and beating them for two days
21 and nights. After two days, 14 of them were released. While on the other
22 side, they held Beqir Regje Cacaj for another two days and nights
23 torturing. Afterwards, he got released in very bad health conditions.
24 Therefore, he died after two days and in his last minutes of life was
25 saying, "I'm dying because of Vula."
1 Now, do any of those names mean anything to you, Mr. Stijovic?
2 A. No, they don't mean anything to me. But it's simply illogical to
3 me that one man can take away 15 immobilised persons. That would require
4 a huge amount of logistics, sir.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Let's not, where there's no personal knowledge of the
6 event, start speculating on whether he was alone or with a group and
7 whether -- we haven't seen the -- any statement of the witness. It's just
8 a summary, Mr. Emmerson. Please proceed.
9 MR. EMMERSON:
10 Q. Did you ever investigate complaints about ill-treatment by RDB or
11 RJB officials?
12 A. During this testimony, I cannot tell you exactly when, but you
13 will find it easily - said that I headed and organised the collection of
14 evidence pertaining to the crimes committed in Kosovo and Metohija and
15 that these involved the activities or crimes committed both by the
16 Albanians, i.e., members of the KLA and FARK, and the Serbs, members of
17 the police, soldiers, and civilians. So this involved crimes.
18 We compiled documentation with the aim and intention to hand over
19 these documents to the competent judicial organs for further processing.
20 So in response to your question, my answer is "yes."
21 Q. Can you tell us, was anybody ever prosecuted in respect of
22 interrogations conducted by RDB officials?
23 A. I cannot tell you, and I can explain you the reasons why I cannot
24 tell you.
25 Q. If it would be helpful to explain the reasons, then please do;
1 otherwise ...
2 A. In early January, I fell quite ill. I had heart problems and I
3 was sent for treatment to Belgrade, and I never returned back until March,
4 the start of bombardment. Other people were involved in that.
5 Then the bombing started. I interrupted my treatment of my own
6 accord. I then continued my treatment. And from 1999 to 2003, I was
7 involved in business that had nothing to do with Albanian terrorism and
8 these activities, so that I did not have access to the documentation
9 concerning the crimes committed in Kosovo and Metohija in that period of
10 time both by Serbs and Albanians.
11 Q. Very well. And you have no independent knowledge one way or the
12 other whether any proceedings were brought against RDB officials, I mean?
13 A. No.
14 Q. I see. I want to turn to another topic that you mentioned in your
15 testimony yesterday, and that was the ambush, as you described it, on the
16 28th of February, 1998 in Likoshan, where you said that following the
17 ambush search operations were conducted in Likoshan and the villages
18 around it.
19 Can I be clear what you mean by "search operations," please.
20 A. The searches meant looking after, tracking down the attackers who
21 opened fire on the police. They were on the hunt after them.
22 Q. And can I ask you this before looking at Likoshan in a bit more
23 detail: On the 5th of March, there was a police operation on the Jashari
24 compound in Prekaze. Was that also what you would characterise as a
25 search operation?
1 A. No, that was not a search operation. That was an attempt at
2 arresting Adem Jashari and his group.
3 Q. Very well. In the course of the search operation in and around
4 Likoshan and the arrest operation in Prekaze on the 5th of March, can you
5 tell us, please, what investigations were conducted into crimes allegedly
6 committed by Serb forces.
7 A. As far as I know, some intelligence was obtained - and I'm telling
8 you this to the best of my knowledge. There is ongoing work on these
9 matters since in Belgrade there exists a special chamber with the Belgrade
10 district court, this chamber for war crimes, and there is a separate
11 prosecutor's office for war crimes. All the information indicating or
12 pointing to such activities was forwarded to these offices. And as far as
13 I know, there is an ongoing investigation.
14 Q. I see. And an ongoing investigation still, nine years later?
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson, that is the answer of the witness. You
16 are more or less --
17 MR. EMMERSON: I'm sorry.
18 JUDGE ORIE: -- trying to ask his comment.
19 MR. EMMERSON: I'm sorry.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Please proceed.
21 MR. EMMERSON:
22 Q. You seem to have, if I may say so, rather a lot of knowledge of
23 the detail of what was going in and around Likoshan at that time, because
24 you've testified about the KLA ambush and other matters of that nature.
25 Were crimes committed, as far as you know, by Serb forces in Likoshan and
2 A. I know that there were many victims. I know that we carried out
3 certain activities to investigate all the circumstances leading to that
4 incident. I know that there is still work being done on that, just as we
5 are dealing today still here with crimes committed in Kosovo nine years
7 And I apologise, Your Honours, if you deem this last remark of
8 mine improper.
9 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's Correction: Crimes committed by
10 the KLA in Kosovo.
11 MR. EMMERSON:
12 Q. Just to be clear, another Chamber of this Court has found that
13 the -- the evidence is that 83 Kosovar Albanians were killed in those
14 operations, including elderly people, and at least 24 women and children,
15 that a pregnant woman was shot in the face and a baby killed in Prekaze.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Re.
18 MR. RE: Is there a reference to a judgement of the Trial Chamber
19 or --
20 MR. EMMERSON: Yes. It is the Limaj judgement, paragraph 49. I
21 wasn't going to read the whole paragraph.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
23 MR. EMMERSON:
24 Q. We've also heard testimony from Colonel Crosland, who visited the
25 Prekaze site, that bodies appeared to have been shot at close range and,
1 as the Limaj Trial Chamber found at paragraph 49, there were reports of
2 summary executions.
3 Is this information that you investigated at the time,
4 Mr. Stijovic?
5 MR. RE: Before the witness answers.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
7 MR. RE: My recollection is that this matter was not adjudicated
8 by the Limaj -- the Limaj Trial Chamber. It was a matter which is
9 referred to as historical events leading up to the matters which were in
10 the Limaj indictment.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Guy-Smith.
12 MR. GUY-SMITH: I would -- I would tend to disagree. That was --
13 this was evidence that was introduced during the Limaj trial and evidence
14 upon which the Limaj Chamber made its determination and its judgement, and
15 these were adjudicated.
16 MR. RE: It was outside the indictment period. It was before the
17 indictment -- Limaj indictment period.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, sometimes facts are established in a
19 judgement even if they are not part of the indictment. At the same time,
20 we should be very cautious, because the Defence might be focusing less on
21 facts that are not in the core of the indictment. So to that extent, some
22 caution --
23 MR. EMMERSON: Yes.
24 JUDGE ORIE: -- is --
25 MR. EMMERSON: I can certainly help find the passage over the
1 break. But the Prosecution itself makes the same allegations in very much
2 the same terms in the Milutinovic trial.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But still to be proven, I take it.
4 MR. EMMERSON: Still to be established.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Please proceed.
6 Let's -- perhaps, Mr. Emmerson, if you go into less details about
7 it, but we could ask the witness whether, in view of these facts, whether
8 he considers that these allegations have been sufficiently investigated at
9 the time, if at all.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As far as I know, these allegations
11 are still being investigated into, and a good many of these allegations
12 were confirmed. And I repeat, I am speaking to the best of my knowledge.
13 MR. EMMERSON:
14 Q. Mr. Stijovic, you told us that it was your responsibility at the
15 time to investigate crimes committed in Kosovo in the context of this
16 conflict. Can you help us, please, what steps did you take to investigate
17 these two incidents? That is, before the change of regime in Belgrade.
18 What steps did you take?
19 A. Do you want me to recount the entire procedure under which we
21 Q. I would like you to tell us in very summary form what steps you
22 personally took to investigate war crimes committed by Serbian forces in
23 Likoshan and Prekaze, please, in 1998. In other words, what steps you
24 took at the time.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stijovic, I think Mr. Emmerson is mainly
1 interested to know whether you paid serious attention to crimes committed
2 by Serbian forces at the time or whether you were not much interested in
3 investigating them and --
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In a highly serious manner. In a
5 highly serious manner. Because the consequences of these events, the
6 repercussions of these events were great for the Republic of Serbia.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Could you then tell us exactly in relation to the two
8 incidents mentioned what you investigated or what you did.
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Specifically within my sector in --
10 where I worked and which I directed, we produced a plan of work for these
11 matters. And in relation to this case as well as for all the other cases
12 where there were indications that there were war crimes committed, a
13 dossier was formed through public security which was duty-bound by the law
14 to conduct a scene of crime investigation. This was out of our
15 jurisdiction. We weren't involved in that. That's why we obtained
16 information from public security on these events.
17 On the other hand, other sources were the Albanian media who
18 reported on some of the information that we had obtained through operative
20 Next followed the interviewing of persons who could help clarify
21 these events.
22 For every case where there were indications that they involved a
23 war crime --
24 JUDGE ORIE: Your answer -- your answers now strike me as being of
25 a rather general nature. If -- if any such thing happened, I'd like to
1 hear from you that the day after the Likoshan operation I tasked Mr. X, Y,
2 or Z to interrogate allegations that 20 people were killed... I'd like to
3 have concrete answers to those questions, rather than that you were
4 duty-bound to start a file and that a work plan was made, because without
5 being cynical, it -- it happens in this world that work plans are made
6 mainly for the purpose of not performing the -- the work.
7 I'm not saying that that was the case, but I'd like to receive
8 concrete information about what you actually did. Or what was done under
9 your responsibility. Please tell us.
10 MR. HARVEY: Your Honours.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Harvey.
12 MR. HARVEY: I do apologise for interrupting. I have to leave the
13 room for a brief spell. There's no objection -- and thus leave my client
14 without counsel at the table.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
16 MR. HARVEY: But there's no objection to matters continuing in my
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
19 MR. HARVEY: With your leave.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
21 MR. HARVEY: Thank you.
22 JUDGE ORIE: We'll miss him -- Mr. Troop, isn't it?
23 MR. HARVEY: He'll be back tomorrow.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Please continue, Mr -- or I would like to ask
25 the witness first to answer a question: Could you give us concrete
1 information. I formed a team of five people consisting of A, B, C, D, and
2 E which I sent to the location the week after that or I sent someone to
3 the investigating judge and asking for his assistance and -- whatever, but
4 rather concrete information than general statements.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I agree, Your Honour.
6 I did not have operative authorities enabling me to conduct an
7 investigation in the sense of the criminal law. What was within my ambit
8 was to collect the documentation that was relevant for that.
9 The analysis department asked from operative leaders and persons
10 working on the ground to send all the information they had in order to
11 have a compilation of the relevant documentation in one spot. I have to
12 tell you, unfortunately, that many people in the police and the state
13 security service underestimated the significance of a timely and active
14 effort in the exercise to clarify the events on both sides, and perhaps
15 that lay at the heart of the problem that the efforts at collecting
16 documentation for Kosovo encountered.
17 I did the best I could, given the position that I occupied.
18 JUDGE ORIE: May I try to understand your answer that you said
19 we're asking for information but we didn't receive it in a timely manner.
20 And then how much did you insist? How often did you repeat your request?
21 And what measures you took in order to receive that information? And
22 when, finally, did you receive it, if you received it at all?
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The documentation arrived quite
24 slowly. And I mean the documentation about the incidents down there and
25 about the events in general.
1 And I have to tell you that one of the reasons why I ended up ill
2 in the end was the terrible stress and the terrible pressure in trying
3 to -- to explain the significance of this process to the people who were
4 involved in the job. The persons heading these departments were not
5 forthcoming in that process.
6 My analysts and people working on the documentation were the ones
7 who were sitting in the building and who were supposed to make an analysis
8 of these events, to make an assessment of these events. These were not
9 operatives who would have the authority to go out into the field,
10 investigate people, and investigate these events. And that's all I can
11 tell you on that score.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Just for your information, I think --
13 [Trial Chamber confers]
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson, the Chamber gained sufficient
15 impression on the activities developed at that time, which might also
16 explain the nine-year period.
17 Please proceed.
18 MR. EMMERSON:
19 Q. Can I move on to another topic, please, Mr. Stijovic. In the
20 period running up to 1998 and specifically during 1997, did you meet a man
21 called Mahmut Bakalli in Prishtine?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. And did you also meet at the same time a man called Baton Haxhiu?
24 A. It's difficult to gather this from the transcript. You're
25 probably referring to Baton Haxhiu.
1 Q. Yes, I am. Did you meet him?
2 A. The answer is "yes."
3 Q. Can you turn to tab 17 in the bundle, please. This is a statement
4 tendered by the Prosecution under Rule 92 bis both in the Milosevic and in
5 the Milutinovic trials.
6 MR. EMMERSON: I'll ask that it please be marked for
8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
9 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, tab 17 is document ID 1D62-0029. It
10 will be marked for identification as D174.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
12 MR. EMMERSON:
13 Q. Yes. I'm going to pick it up, if I may, please, on page 7, in the
14 numbers in the bottom right-hand corner. I don't think you -- you --
15 well, perhaps I should ask you. Do you read English, Mr. Stijovic?
16 A. No. Unfortunately, I don't.
17 Q. But you do read Albanian.
18 A. For the sake of the Trial Chamber, I believe it would be better
19 for me to have this interpreted into Serbian. I do read Albanian, but I
20 do hesitate to get the information this way, because I might get something
21 wrong. I -- I'd rather have the interpretation.
22 Q. Yes. In fact, it's my error, the -- I'd assumed the translation
23 was Albanian without checking it. In fact, it is a Serbian translation,
24 which you have immediately behind the English. And the passage that I'm
25 going to begin with is on page 5 of the Serbian, and it's the -- starts at
1 the third paragraph on page 5, and it continues to the fourth paragraph on
2 page 6.
3 I'm going to put a specific passage to you in just a moment, but
4 if I can simply summarise the background to this. Mr. Bakalli in this
5 statement describes a meeting in November 1997 at which you had arranged
6 via a telephone call to him for discussions between the Serbian side and
7 the Albanian side about respective demands for autonomy for Kosovo and
8 independence for Kosovo. And he describes the meeting as having taken
9 place in Mr. Bakalli's apartment on a Saturday in Prishtine. And he
10 indicates that the Albanian side was represented by Mr. Bakalli and
11 himself and the Serbian delegation consisted of yourself, David Gajic,
12 Jovica Stanisic, as well as a man he thinks was called Hadic?
13 A. Mr. Emmerson, I apologise. I think this is an error where it says
14 that I spoke over the phone with Bakalli. As far as I'm able to glean
15 from this -- it's line 24, I think. "Bakalli in this statement
16 describes --"
17 Q. I'm sorry, you're absolutely right. It's -- again, I misspoke
18 myself. It's Mr. Haxhiu who describes the meeting between himself and
19 Mr. Bakalli on one hand, and yourself, Mr. Gajic, Mr. Stanisic, and
20 another man on the other hand. Do you remember the meeting?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. And without going into the details of what was put forward by
23 Mr. Bakalli, the statement describes the Albanian position as being set
24 out in effect as greater autonomy but something short of full
1 And I'm looking now in the English on page 7 and in the Serbian on
2 page 6. And I'm looking at the third full paragraph on page 6 in the
3 Serbian and the first paragraph on page 7 in the English.
4 And it reads as follows: "Gajic then responded to Bakalli's
5 proposal. He said that if Bakalli's presentation was the Albanians' final
6 proposal, then the negotiations were over. The Serbs will never accept
7 this, he said. If you insist on this, Gajic said, then Kosovo is in great
8 danger. I responded that I didn't think Albanians would accept anything
9 less. Gajic said if this was our final position, then it meant war."
10 He goes on: "I don't remember exactly which members of the
11 Serbian delegation said what, because we were all discussing back and
12 forth. But I am certain of one of them -- I am certain that one of them,
13 I believe it was Hadic, said that the Serbian forces were very strong.
14 There is a plan" -- and my pronunciation will no doubt be wrong here.
15 "There is a plan called Sprzena Zemlja, he said, and this can be
16 implemented within 24 hours. In English, this could be translated into
17 'burnt land' or 'scorched earth'. Stijovic, I believe, said that this
18 military plan of action was in the mind of many Serbs. I remember that
19 one of them said there are 463 ethnic Albanian villages in Kosovo - maybe
20 he said 643 - and they will all be burned. I believe Gajic said that."
21 Can I ask you, please, to comment on that passage that I just read
22 to you, Mr. Stijovic.
23 A. I can comment on it, but I would like Their Honours to permit me
24 to give you a brief answer. I know that I've been asked not to go into
25 details, but I'd like the permission to explain as briefly as possible the
1 events concerned.
2 Q. Well, before -- before you do, were those words spoken by somebody
3 in the Serbian delegation referring to a scorched earth policy and the
4 burning of a -- a number of hundred Albanian villages?
5 A. No.
6 Q. Okay. Tell us, please, what explanation you'd like to give.
7 A. I have always been the sort of person open to dialogue and
8 discussion and I tried to ensure that the situation, the developments in
9 Kosovo and Metohija, took as normal a course as possible.
10 In that context in late 1997, a meeting was held in the flat of
11 Mahmut Bakalli in Prishtine, which was attended by the late Bakalli,
12 journalist Baton Haxhiu, David Gajic, the then-assistant chief of the DB,
13 the assistant to Jovica Stanisic, and Milosav Vilotic, assistant chief of
14 the DB of Serbia. Therefore, there was no Hadzic person who attended the
16 What Bakalli said at the time and what you relayed here as greater
17 autonomy but something short of independence, well, it wasn't really along
18 those lines. This is what Bakalli said, and I will refer you to the
19 following meeting that was held in Brezovica, which was video and audio
21 Bakalli said that the KLA activities had gone so far that general
22 armed conflicts could quite easily break out in Kosovo and Metohija. He
23 said that it was the last ditch attempt for the politicians and the
24 politics to try and prevent the spread of clashes that were imminently to
25 come, and this he proved to be quite foreseeable in that. He said that
1 through the State Security Service a message should be sent to Milosevic
2 that the Albanians and Serbs should engage in discussions about -- for a
3 final solution of Kosovo and Metohija because the KLA was just a part of
4 the problem in Kosovo and Metohija. And Bakalli stated this proposal,
5 which enjoyed the support of all the politicians, and that was Kosovo and
6 Metohija outside the legal jurisdiction of Serbia but within Yugoslavia
7 without a border toward Serbia but with an established border toward
8 Albania and Macedonia.
9 This was in compliance with all the principles coming from the
10 Dayton Accords and the principles espoused by the International Community.
11 This conversation in Bakalli's flat was the sort of conversation
12 which made it possible after a while, as a special envoy of
13 President Milosevic, Jovica Stanisic met with Bakalli in a building of
14 ours in Brezovica, and this meeting was recorded. There is a video and
15 audio recording. Bakalli, I, and another person - the witness mentioned.
16 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter didn't catch the name.
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We did not attend this meeting.
18 Baton Haxhiu testified about this meeting as did Bakalli. Upon his
19 arrival, Baton Haxhiu gave an interview, an extensive interview, where he
20 minimised the role of the meetings and presented a host of elements that
21 did not result from these meetings. Baton Haxhiu is an acquaintance of
22 mine, a good journalist, and I did not want in any way to be detrimental
23 to him, to make any problems to him.
24 Bakalli, after the testimony --
25 JUDGE ORIE: Could I stop you there. We're talking about a
1 meeting which apparently has taken place in November.
2 MR. EMMERSON: Yes.
3 JUDGE ORIE: And --
4 MR. EMMERSON: Your Honours will --
5 JUDGE ORIE: The -- the perception of what happened during that
6 meeting seems to be quite different.
7 MR. EMMERSON: Yes. I don't seek to --
8 JUDGE ORIE: One seems to be more inclined to play the
9 peace-seeking party oneself and to blame the other party. I mean,
10 that's -- it's not the core of this case. I think you've drawn our
11 attention to something where the witness said the report about what
12 happened is not correct. I've got a different memory on that.
13 MR. EMMERSON: Yes. I -- I have very little further for this
14 witness. But may we take the break at this point so that I can review
15 what -- what further questions I need to deal with?
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And, Mr. Stijovic, I do understand that you'd
17 like to explain your position in -- in some detail. Often if you say
18 those words were not spoken, it was rather we who wanted to seek
19 resolutions for the matter, it was the other party which -- then we don't
20 have to go in that much detail of what really is not the core of this
22 We'll have a break until 11.00.
23 --- Recess taken at 10.33 a.m.
24 --- On resuming at 11.04 a.m.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson, before you continue, is there any doubt
1 in your mind as that the Defence - I'm also addressing other Defence
2 counsel - that we could finish the witness well in time?
3 MR. EMMERSON: I have about 15 minutes or so.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Okay.
5 MR. GUY-SMITH: I believe, based on the examinations that have
6 occurred thus far, coupled with some of the comments that have been made
7 by the Chamber, that we will finish well within time. I'm changing part
8 of my examination.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Harvey.
10 MR. GUY-SMITH: Reducing detail, that is.
11 MR. HARVEY: I have also been listening very carefully about the
12 comments that have followed about Your Honours' lips about what may or may
13 not be relevant and I should be cutting my cross accordingly.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then, Mr. Re, re-examination will then, in view
15 of what has just been said, not take that much time that the witness could
16 not leave in time.
17 Yes. I would say nodding is not on the record. But you're
18 nodding yes, Mr. Re. It's now on the record.
19 MR. RE: It's hard not to nod.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, yes.
21 Mr. Emmerson, please proceed.
22 MR. EMMERSON: May I just correct one matter in respect of which I
23 misspoke myself earlier on, and it relates to the four floors/two floors
24 issue. In fact, the testimony is that it was the police station in
25 Gjakova had four floors, rather than the police station in Deqan.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
2 MR. EMMERSON: So to that extent, I correct the question that I
3 put earlier on.
4 MR. RE: That was at page 6201 of the transcript.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I remember the evidence. I only said --
6 MR. EMMERSON: Yes.
7 JUDGE ORIE: -- there was a fourth floor.
8 MR. EMMERSON: Yes, exactly.
9 JUDGE ORIE: But in a different location. Yes.
10 MR. EMMERSON: Yes.
11 Q. Mr. Stijovic, I gather from the testimony that you gave last week
12 that there were individuals who were in fact cooperating with your service
13 but who were continuing to be active members of the KLA. Is that correct?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. And you told us that amongst one of the motives that might
16 persuade them to cooperate was the giving effectively of an immunity to
17 them for alleged criminal activity up until that point.
18 Can I ask you: Were they given an immunity for any alleged
19 infringements of the criminal law after they were operating as part of
20 your service?
21 A. No.
22 Q. So continuing to take part in the activities of the KLA, that
23 would be a crime, would it not?
24 A. Activities in the KLA, such as murders, theft of property, and the
25 like, we were not prepared to grant immunities to our associates. And
1 they were aware of that. They were guided in that direction.
2 Q. Just to be clear, simple membership of the KLA at this time was a
3 crime, was it not?
4 A. No, that was not a crime. The very fact that somebody was a
5 member of the KLA, that was a hostile activity; however, a crime is
6 something that is being committed.
7 Q. So, for example, if the KLA or -- including one of your agents
8 were to launch a military attack on a police unit and to shoot and kill
9 police officers, armed police officers, in the course of such an attack,
10 would that be a crime?
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson, you're entering an area which is
12 closely linked to the existence of armed conflict, and it could have a lot
13 of legal implications. Your question requires thorough knowledge of legal
14 matters as well.
15 MR. EMMERSON: Well, I --
16 JUDGE ORIE: What is a crime -- if you would say whether this was
17 an act which is described in criminal law, that's not exactly the same as
18 a crime.
19 MR. EMMERSON: Yes. I -- let me -- let me put the question more
20 precisely, if I may.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Please do so.
22 MR. EMMERSON:
23 Q. Were your operatives, that is to say, the agents that you had
24 infiltrated or recruited within the KLA, were they given to understand
25 that if they took part in armed engagements with Serbian forces, they
1 would or would not be prosecuted for it?
2 A. They knew - that is to say, during the training conducted by an
3 operative - were informed that they were not allowed to participate in any
4 activities that might end up as a crime of murder, serious injury, not to
5 mention war crime and other more serious crimes.
6 Q. Do you know whether such individuals were ever tasked either by
7 members of your service or by members of the RJB to commit crimes in order
8 to implicate or discredit the KLA?
9 A. To the best of my knowledge, I can only say what refers to the
10 security service. Definitely no, and they were never given. And I
11 believe that the same applied to the public security services; although, I
12 cannot say for sure.
13 Q. Can I ask you: Do you know or did you know at the time a man
14 called Momir or Miomir Mitic, a police chief in Ferizaj?
15 A. No, I didn't know him.
16 Q. Can you help us with the name at all? You may not have known him,
17 but did you know of him?
18 A. No, sir. I don't know. There were over 20.000 policemen in
19 Kosovo. I couldn't have known the names of each and every one.
20 Q. Could you tell us, please, the names of the RDB officials in
21 Ferizaj, perhaps starting with the chief of the RDB in Ferizaj, in March
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson, the location doesn't ring a bell to me.
24 Could we -- could we try to find out where Ferizaj approximately is.
25 MR. EMMERSON:
1 Q. Can you give us the approximate location of Ferizaj, please. Am I
2 right in thinking this is broadly speaking, south-east in Kosovo.
3 A. Urosevac is the place located on the direction towards Macedonia.
4 I'm not very good at geography. It's about 40 kilometres from Pristina.
5 Q. So Ferizaj is 40 kilometres from Prishtine?
6 A. Ferizaj is the Albanian name for Urosevac. About 40 kilometres.
7 I cannot give you the exact figure.
8 Q. And can you help us, please, as to the names of the senior RDB
9 officials in Ferizaj.
10 A. I don't know how much this question is something within my
11 capability. I'm afraid that this would constitute or be in contravention
12 of the secrecy, official secrecy obligation. I am not a lawyer, but I am
13 not competent enough to judge whether any discussion about how the
14 organ -- the service or structure was -- be something beyond my authority.
15 I was authorised and I can only speak about the events that took place in
16 Kosovo and Metohija at the time.
17 So this was a secret service. These were operatives of the
18 security service who are still working there. And I think this is an
19 impossible proposition.
20 Q. I see.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson, I do not know what the relevance and
22 the importance is of this information, but --
23 MR. EMMERSON: Yes. Well --
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Guy-Smith is on his feet as well.
25 MR. GUY-SMITH: Yes, if I might. In the Milosevic trial, the
1 issue of RDB as well as public officials who were operating at that area
2 was raised by the Prosecution. I believe it was raised both in private
3 and in open session.
4 MR. EMMERSON: Yes. Well, maybe we might just go briefly into
5 private session.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're in private session.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
9 [Private session]
16 [Open session]
17 MR. EMMERSON: And its document identification is 1D62-0096.
18 Q. If I can summarise the background to this statement, Mr. Stijovic,
19 it -- it describes events that took place very shortly after the incident
20 in Prekaze on the 5th of March in which the maker of this statement
21 describes being called to a meeting in Ferizaj with Momir Mitic, the
22 police chief of Ferizaj, and a man called Jashanin, who is described as
23 having -- and this is page 4, fourth paragraph, pre-penultimate line --
24 who is described as having joined the police station in 1998, originally
25 coming from Serbia, and was the chief of the -- was the chief of the DB in
1 Ferizaj. And this individual describes having been recruited as an agent
2 at that meeting and being told that he would be issued with a uniform,
3 weapons, and Chinese ammunition, and describes having been taken to
4 Prishtine and introduced to a commander of the SAJ and, in particular, an
5 individual who he was told had been involved in Prekaze.
6 And if I can pick it up at the English at the bottom of page 5, he
7 says that: "At the meeting in Prishtine with the SAJ officer and
8 Mr. Mitic," he was given a number of tasks. And I'll just read these --
9 this one short paragraph: "Firstly, he said" - that is, Mr. Mitic said -
10 "there is an Albanian man in the village of Manastirc, Ferizaj, who owned
11 a number of buses. He wanted to burn all the buses and leave a note
12 nearby which would say something like 'these buses are never to drive
13 Serbians again'. The letter will have a KLA badge stuck to it. Mitic
14 explained that this would make the owner of the buses and everybody else
15 think that the KLA were responsible for burning the buses. And when Mitic
16 finished explaining the plan, the commander" -- that is, the SAJ commander
17 -- "said, 'this plan is approved.'"
18 And then over the page: "Mitic then continued, saying that he had
19 identified a number of target locations which he wanted to throw grenades
20 at." And he mentioned them one at a time and gave reasons for each; I
21 don't go through them individually.
22 Now, pausing there. First of all, were you aware of any such plan
23 in relation to Ferizaj that agents be recruited to commit crimes in that
25 A. No. And I'm not sure who are you referring to when you said they
1 were recruited by someone. Can you clarify that for me?
2 As far as I know, the State Security Service definitely had
3 nothing to do with this. However, as far as the details relating to these
4 persons mentioned here, they could be more helpful. I see this document
5 for the first time and what you have just said or quoted is something that
6 I also hear for the first time. An imagination is a wonderful thing and
7 it can do wonders.
8 Q. Very well. In answer to your question as to recruitment, that is
9 spelled out on page 4 in the fourth paragraph as having taken place at a
10 meeting at the police station in Ferizaj in the presence both of
11 Mr. Mitic, the police chief, and Jashanin, possibly Ashanin, the DB
12 representative in Ferizaj.
13 You know nothing about this particular incident. Can I ask you
14 whether you know of other similar cases?
15 A. No.
16 MR. EMMERSON: Those are my questions.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Emmerson.
18 MR. EMMERSON: Yes. I'm sorry, I --
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
20 MR. EMMERSON: Just before Mr. Guy-Smith cross-examines, may I for
21 the record indicate tab 13, which has been MFI'd as D172 is document
22 identification 1D62-0010; tab 14, which has been MFI'd at D171 is document
23 identification 1D62-0018; and tab 24 document id 1D63-0010 has not been
24 identified as present.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Before I give you an --
1 Yes, Mr. Guy-Smith.
2 Yes. Before I give you an opportunity to cross-examine the
3 witness, Mr. Stijovic, I've got a more general question in relation to the
4 last series of questions put to you by Mr. Emmerson.
5 Questioned by the Court:
6 JUDGE ORIE: This Chamber heard some evidence about the -- the
7 origin of ammunition. The evidence - and I'm summarising now - is -- is
8 that KLA used ammunition of Chinese origin but that the Serbian forces
9 would also procure ammunition of Chinese origin. But the suggestion then,
10 of course, was made that the use of this ammunition could suggest that
11 what was achieved with this ammunition was KLA activity.
12 Are you aware of any such thing that the origin of the ammunition
13 played a role in activities, or did you ever come across such a thing in
14 your intelligence activities?
15 A. I believe this is just a serial type that the Kosovo Liberation
16 Army was using Chinese-made ammunition. Whenever you mention China, it
17 implies an old-fashioned weapons and ammunition. However, they used very
18 modern weapons.
19 As far as the State Security Service and the MUP is concerned, as
20 per establishment and what was issued to me and other police officers,
21 both in the public security sector and the state security sector, there
22 was -- were no weapons that used Chinese ammunition. These weapons were
23 for the most part produced by Zastava, which is in the Serbian town of
24 Kragujevac, and the special units used, how to say, some more
25 sophisticated weapons from the arsenal, such as Heckler & Koch and other
1 weapons. So this is my general knowledge and I hope it was helpful.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Now, your answer is limited to police officers,
3 public security, and state security.
4 Now, the Chamber also heard some evidence that sometimes there
5 were combined operations. The Chamber also heard some evidence that
6 sometimes by looking at the colour would look like army then changed from
7 green/brown to blue, which then was meant to illustrate that these were
8 police officers.
9 Do you know anything about the use of Chinese ammunition in the
10 broader sense of armed forces?
11 A. Are you referring to the Serbian forces?
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
13 A. No.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
15 Mr. Guy-Smith.
16 Yes, but before we continue, Mr. Emmerson, the registrar draws my
17 attention to the fact that tab 24 has not been MFI'd.
18 MR. EMMERSON: May it be MFI'd, please.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Guy-Smith --
17 Mr. Guy-Smith.
18 THE REGISTRAR: Sorry for the interruption, Your Honours, but tab
19 24, that's document ID number 1D63-0010, will be marked for identification
20 as D176.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
22 Mr. Guy-Smith, you may proceed.
23 Mr. Stijovic, Mr. Guy-Smith is counsel for -- Defence counsel for
24 Mr. Balaj.
25 Cross-examination by Mr. Guy-Smith:
1 Q. I want to pick up in a general sense where we just left off,
2 discussing the issue of special units. As I understand your testimony
3 thus far, among other places that you received information, you also, as
4 an intelligence analyst, received information concerning the special units
5 that were operating throughout Kosovo. And I'll for the moment confine
6 myself to the period from 1997 through to 1999. Correct?
7 A. That's not correct. The analysis department in Pristina did not
8 receive information or reports from units for special operations which was
9 attached to the State Security Service, and even less from the SAJ, who
10 were attached to the public security service. They had their own analysis
11 department and were directly related to the service headquarters in
12 Belgrade, both in terms of the line -- the chain of command and the
13 analytics department line.
14 Q. Were you aware of a special unit whose name was Fog, who operated
15 in Kosovo during the period of 1998 and 1999?
16 A. This is the first time I hear of it. No.
17 Q. I'm going to read to you from a document that has been identified
18 as 2D758. It's the only document, I think that, we haven't put in the
19 electronic disclosure system. We're attempting to -- the electronic
20 system. We're attempting to use it, and we'll see what kind of success we
21 can have.
22 So if I can have that given to the Chamber as well as the
24 I'd like to read something to you. This is from American
25 RadioWorks, "Excerpts from interviews with militia members." And I'm
1 specifically dealing with page 5 of that document. It's in English, so I
2 will read it to you and see whether you can comment on this at all.
3 "Predrag was a policeman in Pec. He joined a special police unit
4 in early 1998. He says he participated in the attack in Cusaka on May
5 14th, 1999. Everyone had their fixed positions where they were supposed
6 to hold. The Frenkies had its own. The Fog (OPG) had its own, the
7 Yugoslav Army its own ... Fog went in first, or as we called them, 'the
8 men in black'."
9 Question: They wore black uniforms?
10 Answer by Mr. Predrag: Yes, and the KLA wore black. So that was
11 one of Fog's advantages against the KLA. They (Fog) went in first, to
12 establish a bridge. We were on the wings ... We were on the left side.
13 On the right side was Munja, the Pec boys. There was also a special
14 police unit -- excuse me, that was also a special police unit. It wasn't
15 paramilitary ... We made a wedge, then widened it."
16 Do you have any information upon which you can comment concerning
17 a group called Fog that wore black uniforms that were involved in military
18 actions during 1998 and 1999?
19 A. You will not hold this against me, but I'll do what I can to help
20 you. I think it would exhibit a lack of seriousness on my part to comment
21 upon a radio report.
22 You asked me about Fog. This is the first time I hear of it. As
23 for the OPG, yes, these are the so-called operations sweep groups that
24 were part of special units of the MUP of Serbia. These were mobile groups
25 which, in the event of a terrorist attack or action, were ready to act
1 swiftly in that direction.
2 You mentioned the Munja. I believe you said that they were Pec --
3 the Pec boys. We had a very serious problem, the State Security Service,
4 with a person by the last name of Minic. He was a local criminal from Pec
5 who used the nickname Munja and who was surrounded by several criminals.
6 He took part in a number of events where those coming under attack from
7 them were both Albanians and police officers. This was a criminal group.
8 I took part in that action in 2001, where we tried to arrest them
9 in Belgrade. However, the group -- or rather, the person managed to flee
10 through illegal channels and the use of illegal papers and criminal
11 channels. As far as I know, this person passed away in prison in
12 Argentina at a later -- later date, later on.
13 Now, as for who thought what and about who was where at a certain
14 point in time, I don't think I should comment on that.
15 This is what I can tell you on the basis of what you read out to
17 Q. So if I -- if I understand your testimony correctly, with regard
18 to Munja, this --
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Guy-Smith, you -- just for my information, we
20 have been provided with a hard copy document, also American Radio works,
21 but that's something different from --
22 MR. GUY-SMITH: They gave you --
23 JUDGE ORIE: -- what we have on the screen now.
24 MR. GUY-SMITH: Uh-huh.
25 JUDGE ORIE: It's differently different. It says: "Police units.
1 And here it says: "Excerpts from interviews with militia members."
2 MR. GUY-SMITH: Well, I must be -- I must be getting ahead of
3 myself. Because that's the next document.
4 JUDGE ORIE: That's the next document.
5 MR. GUY-SMITH: That's the next document I'm going to be using.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Then I understand. But since you said it was not
7 uploaded yet, I was a bit confused. But it's clear to me now.
8 MR. GUY-SMITH: This is why -- I'm trying to use our system. I'm
9 trying to make it work.
10 JUDGE ORIE: And that also explains why I did not find anything on
11 page 5.
12 MR. GUY-SMITH: And I do apologise for that.
13 JUDGE ORIE: No problem.
14 MR. GUY-SMITH:
15 Q. If I understand your testimony correctly, you were aware of the
16 fact that there was an organisation of criminals operating wearing black
17 uniforms during the period of 1998 and 1999 in Kosovo who were engaged in
18 attacking, as I understood your testimony, both Serbians as well as
19 Albanian citizens; correct?
20 A. To be more precise, this was a small group of criminals haling
21 from that area gathered around that person -- now I remember his name,
22 Nebojsa Minic, nicknamed Munja. They were primarily bent on property
23 crimes. They plundered, stole jewellery and money from persons, regardless
24 of their ethnicity. They took advantage of the chaos and confusion on the
25 ground, and that was all.
1 Q. I see. With regard to the special units that were operating
2 during 1998, were you aware of a special unit that was operating under the
3 name of Lightning or whose leader was nicknamed Lightning?
4 A. There was no special unit that would act in that way or use that
5 title. Absolutely not. The units in Kosovo related to the special units
6 were units for special operation within the MUP, special antiterrorist
7 unit within the Ministry of the Interior of the Republic of Serbia and
8 sometime in the month of March or early April the special units of the
9 Army of Yugoslavia arrived, which acted opposite the Albanian border.
10 These were the only units on the part of security service that were active
11 down there.
12 The OPGs that you mentioned were an intervention unit that was
13 used for specific purposes at -- and for short periods of time. So there
14 were three different types of special units that were active in Kosovo and
15 there weren't any other.
16 I heard in my testimony yesterday some exotic names mentioned,
17 such as Tigers, lions, and so on and so forth. But I assure you that
18 these were the only types of units that were active in that area, the
19 three types I mentioned.
20 Q. Okay. So with regard -- just so we're clear here, with regard to
21 the gentleman that you just spoke about, Nebojsa Minic, can you help me
22 here - and now I am referring specifically to the document that I've
23 handed to the Chamber and to the Prosecution, which is entitled: "Police
24 units. Munja Lightning. Lightning was created in early 1998 in response
25 to attacks by the Kosovo Liberation Army in and around Pec. The unit was
1 established as an auxiliary to the special police units, PJP, of the
2 Serbian Interior Ministry, according to several fighters. Lightning had
3 between 30 and 50 members and numerous armed vehicles -- armoured vehicles
4 which were stored at the Yugoslav Army barracks in Pec before the NATO air
5 war. Lightning units wore the same camouflage uniforms of the PJP but
6 often attached a shoulder flash of a lightning bolt. They were the guys
7 who would go into places no one else wanted to, says one Serbian police
8 reservist. Of course, Lightning would destroy everything, and I mean
10 Is that the group that you're referring to when you mentioned
11 Mr. Minic, the commander of Lightning?
12 A. The first -- first of all, I didn't mention him as a commander. I
13 mentioned him as the leader of a criminal group.
14 Second, based on all the information I have - and I believe I do
15 have a great deal of information - the -- within the units of MUP and the
16 Army of Yugoslavia in Kosovo, there weren't any criminal groups. The
17 units you mentioned, I don't know what the circumstances were in which the
18 people who spoke about it found themselves. I cannot claim or bring you
19 or Their Honours in a situation where I would say that what I am saying is
20 100 per cent true. What I can tell you is that I have my suspicions that
21 this unit indeed existed and -- or that it was under the patronage of a
22 Serbian leader, a legitimate leader. And this is what I can tell you --
23 Q. You have mentioned --
24 THE INTERPRETER: Or that it was under the patronage of a local
25 police commander, Interpreter's correction.
1 MR. GUY-SMITH:
2 Q. You have mentioned the OPG and having an awareness of them. I'd
3 like to read something to you and see whether or not you can confirm that
4 this is accurate. Page 2 of the document: "The operations group was
5 created in Kosovo as a secret elite antiterrorist unit. According to
6 several Serbian fighters, the OPG participated in some of the most
7 infamous massacres in Kosovo, including Donji Prekaz, Racak, and Kruska.
8 The OPG constituted of top police officers from -- throughout Kosovo and
9 from Serbia proper. The unit was reportedly created in late 1997 and
10 trained in Serbia."
11 "The units usually operated in 12-man or 24-man teams. Men from
12 other police units had very little contact with the OPG, especially before
13 the airstrikes. That's why they were called "Fog." They would disappear
14 without a trace. The OPG was assigned special tasks, to destroy the core
15 of enemy units, to make surprise attacks, and to terrorise local Albanian
16 populations. This included killing civilians in KLA areas in order to
17 quench any desire for insurgency. That was the case in Racak. OPG was a
18 powerful team and an effective one, but they participated in many crimes
19 that left many civilians dead."
20 Since you've -- since you've indicated an awareness of the OPG,
21 could you comment on this particular passage. I asked you previously if
22 you could confirm the information was accurate.
23 A. First of all, I can tell you that the information here does not
24 strike me as convincible.
25 Why not? I told you that there were OPG groups within the police
1 and they were not Fog or anything of the sort. These were groups of a
2 smaller operations composition that were prepared to swiftly deploy to the
3 places where a terrorist attack or activity took place. They were not an
4 elite special police force, because special forces require special
5 training in the world and in our country.
6 Now, the special units of MUP and the VJ of Serbia were the JSO,
7 SAJ, and the VJ special units. So it's absolutely untrue that these
8 groups were groups that were deployed to the places where nobody wanted to
9 set their foot, and I believe that the source of the information is not
10 really persuasive. It doesn't strike me as reliable. I believe that
11 this -- this is absolutely untrue.
12 Q. That's for -- that's for the Chamber to make a determination
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
15 MR. GUY-SMITH:
16 Q. I thank you for your opinion.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. -- Mr. Guy-Smith, could I ask the witness to take
18 his earphones off for a second.
19 Yes. Mr. Guy-Smith, I was asking myself what actually you were
20 asking the witness about, because in the cross-examination of Mr. Emmerson
21 we -- a lot of attention was paid to inappropriate behaviour of police
22 forces and leading persons in the police.
23 Now, it's -- it's not entirely clear to me whether that's what
24 you're seeking to establish or whether in addition to that you are seeking
25 to establish that there could well be confusion about inappropriate
1 behaviour committed by men in black uniforms and that, therefore, there is
2 a risk of confusing this kind of police units with what is called by
3 several witnesses and what we've seen have been described as -- as Black
5 MR. GUY-SMITH: You're well -- you're well ahead of me, Your
6 Honour. If I am asking the question in a fashion that is not getting
7 there quickly enough, I do apologise. I was going to ask specifically
8 about uniforms next. And you are --
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
10 MR. GUY-SMITH: -- right on -- you're right on -- you're right,
11 as we would say in the United States, you're right on the money.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Okay.
13 MR. GUY-SMITH: That's exactly where I'm going.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Yes. Yes, that's perhaps not a Continental
15 European expression but -- let's -- because if you are aiming at the
16 possibility that these units might be confused in one way or another just
17 by their clothing, then, of course, the Chamber would have to know, for
18 example, where Kruska is, the -- the geographical range of the operations
19 of the groups described here. There's not much given about the times
20 here. So therefore, if that's what you're aiming at, I -- I urge you
21 to --
22 MR. GUY-SMITH: The difficulty is that they disappeared into the
23 Fog, and I have -- so I can only do with what I --
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
25 MR. GUY-SMITH: The gentleman is an intelligence analyst. I'm
1 hoping to get some information.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, yes, I do understand. But you know where the
3 fog is, isn't it?
4 MR. GUY-SMITH: I do.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
6 Yes, Mr. Emmerson.
7 MR. EMMERSON: May just take advantage of this interruption. I
8 see that line -- page 61, line 1 the witness refers to the Munja -- the
9 group commanded by Munja as having been under the patronage of a
10 legitimate Serbian leader. And I wonder if that issue might be explored.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Guy-Smith, perhaps, you could ask further
13 I think, by the way, that --
14 JUDGE HOEPFEL: This was then corrected by the interpreter in 61,
15 line 4, under the patronage of a local Serbian commander.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Local Serbian --
17 JUDGE HOEPFEL: It was commander, it was.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And I think also that the witness -- let me
19 just see.
20 Yes, you said "the group commanded by Munja." That's not what we
21 find at that spot. And I think that the witness said that he didn't
22 consider Munja to be a commander, but it was a group of criminals
23 including Munja.
24 MR. EMMERSON: It's the word "patronage" that I was --
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But you also used -- you -- in -- in referring
1 to page 61, line 1 you used the word "commander" in which was --
2 MR. EMMERSON: That's my --
3 JUDGE ORIE: Denied.
4 MR. EMMERSON: That's my mistake.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
6 MR. EMMERSON: It seems to me the context of the question appears
7 to refer to patronage of the -- under Munja.
8 JUDGE ORIE: I do understand.
9 The witness has his earphones on again.
10 Mr. Stijovic, sometimes the -- the Chamber seeks clarification of
11 what the Defence is heading for, and then, of course, it would be
12 inappropriate for you already to be informed what they're heading for, and
13 therefore Mr. Guy-Smith will now continue his cross-examination.
14 Please proceed, Mr. Guy-Smith.
15 MR. GUY-SMITH:
16 Q. Yes. The group that we're referring to, the OPG, wore different
17 uniforms for different actions but they were best known, were they not,
18 for their black uniforms and their Western weaponry?
19 A. No. The composition of the OPG consisted of regular policemen
20 from platoons and companies of the police where a number of policemen were
21 assigned to that unit. They were stationed in a police station and were
22 on the -- on stand-by ready to intervene where -- wherever it was
23 necessary. They did not have different uniforms or different colour
24 uniforms compared to other policemen, but I do know that when they were in
25 action, they would have armbands or bandannas of a particular colour so
1 that -- so as to avoid any friendly fire. And, of course, there were many
2 different uniforms in Kosovo.
3 Q. Now, with regard to -- with regard to the OPG, are the men who
4 were involved in actions with the OPG different from those who were
5 involved in actions with the SAJ?
6 A. Well, you see, there's a big difference. A member of the SAJ or
7 JSO or special units of the VJ was a person who was trained in
8 antiterrorist combat and they were trained in special actions from all
9 sorts of weapons, knowledge of languages, and so on and so forth. They
10 were specialists in the very sense of the word. Whereas, these persons
11 here were regular policemen who had been selected based on the criteria
12 entertained by their superiors.
13 Q. And during 1998, the head of the SAJ was Stevanovic, was he not?
14 A. No.
15 Q. Was Stevanovic the commander of the Serbian special police force?
16 A. No.
17 Q. Do you know who Stevanovic was?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Who was he?
20 A. Obrad Stevanovic -- Obrad Stenovanovic [as interpreted] was a
21 lieutenant colonel, assistant minister of the interior who was charged
22 with setting up special units of the police out of which the OPGs were
23 formed and were later active. This had nothing to do with special units
24 or special forces.
25 Q. And by that I mean -- by that, if I understand your testimony
1 correctly, you're drawing a distinction between the OPG and the SAJ in
2 this regard.
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Okay. With regard to the SAJ, for semi-war operations did they
5 wear black uniforms?
6 A. Mr. President and sir, I hope you will not hold this against me,
7 but when we talk about "special units," they have a great amount of
8 uniforms that are used, depending on the occasion. Although I am very
9 eager to help you, I'm not sure that I can specify exactly what sort of
10 uniform these -- uniforms these were, what sort of weaponry they wielded.
11 I am not sure that I am the best person to talk to about that.
12 Q. If you can't, you can't help us in that regard, and I thank you
13 for your efforts.
14 Now, I'd like to see if I could understand something with regard
15 to an operation that occurred from the 29th of May to the 20th of June
16 which was called Operation Thunder. Are you -- first of all, are you
17 aware of that operation?
18 A. No.
19 MR. RE: Is that 1998 or 1999?
20 MR. GUY-SMITH: If we could pull up D162. The date is the 24th of
21 June, 1998.
22 JUDGE ORIE: I take it that answers your question now.
23 MR. RE: Yes. Thank you.
24 MR. GUY-SMITH: Can we -- do you have it?
25 THE REGISTRAR: No.
1 MR. GUY-SMITH: Try D -- 2D806. Perfect. I believe there is --
2 JUDGE ORIE: Has that received an MFI number already,
3 Mr. Guy-Smith?
4 MR. GUY-SMITH: Yes. I believe that is D16.
5 JUDGE ORIE: D16.
6 MR. GUY-SMITH: D162 is what I believe it is.
7 Q. This is a document -- and perhaps, to be helpful, I finally found
8 the translation of this document. If we could have the usher give a copy
9 of the Serbian translation to the -- the witness.
10 Have you had a chance to review the document, sir?
11 A. Not before. This is the first time that I see it.
12 Q. Do you know who Deputy Commander Captain Srdjan Perovic is?
13 A. Yes, I do. He was a police captain who on the 6th of July, 1998
14 was wounded during a KLA attack on the Selo Brezenik near Pec and he was
15 abducted on that occasion. His dead body was found on the 16th of August,
16 1998, which means that he was abducted when he was wounded.
17 Numerous injuries were found on the body. I wouldn't like to
18 bother either you and the Chamber about the severity and monstrosity of
19 his wounds and what happened to this man.
20 Q. Do you know the gentleman whose name is contained in this
21 particular subject, where it says: "During the aforementioned period,
22 three platoons of the 3rd Company of the 24th Detachment of the Special
23 Police Unit were directly subordinated to the JSO. While we were carrying
24 out this operation, platoon commander Vidomir Salipur was wounded."
25 A. No.
1 There's a mistake in the translation, when you said the 3rd
2 Company of the 24th Detachment of the special unit, what I see here is
3 "separate police units." Maybe this is what has created the confusion,
4 when we make reference to "special units" and "separate units."
5 MR. GUY-SMITH: Could we get a clarification from the translator
6 so we know which way we're dealing with, what --
7 JUDGE ORIE: Usually we -- let me just check. One second, please.
8 Yes. Usually translations are not verified, but if -- if we would
9 invite the witness to read the few words where he suggests there may be a
10 translation problem, then we will get a provisional view on whether
11 there's such a possibility from our interpreters.
12 Could you please read the few words where you think that there
13 might be a translation problem.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] "In the time specified, the 3rd
15 Company of the 24th Detachment of the PJP" -- which is an abbreviation for
16 special police units.
17 JUDGE ORIE: I doubt whether there's a real translation problem.
18 MR. GUY-SMITH: It doesn't look like there's a real translation
20 JUDGE ORIE: No. Please proceed.
21 MR. GUY-SMITH:
22 Q. If I understood your answer correctly, you do not know the
23 individual -- the individual involved there, the platoon commander
24 Vidomir Salipur; is that correct?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Okay. When you say you do not know him, did you ever hear during
2 your tenure in Kosovo, specifically during the war period that
3 Vidomir Salipur was a member of the Pec police department who was known
4 for beating and torturing ethnic Albanians in the streets?
5 A. Sir, I was the head of the analytical department in Pristina. You
6 should ask this question of someone from Pec. I had never received such
7 information about this individual.
8 I believe that there was a man called Salipur who was killed in
9 that period. Whether it's the same individual or not, I do not know and I
10 don't know the circumstances, and I have no detailed information relating
11 to this.
12 Q. When you say that you were in Prishtine in -- and we should ask
13 somebody from Pec. Am I correct in my understanding that you received
14 information from all of the regions concerning matters that were important
15 for purposes of compiling intelligence information during 1998?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. And if -- if I'm -- if I'm not mistaken, in your 92 ter statement
18 in paragraph 4 you indicated specifically that you received intelligence
19 and informations from three regional security centres: Prishtine,
20 Prizren, which includes Djakovica, Klina, Pec, Istok.
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Deqani, Prizren, and Orahovac.
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. And you also received information from one other centre, which is
25 the Glinje centre; correct?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Which included the municipalities of Glinje and Urosevac, which we
3 were earlier referring to as Ferizaj; right?
4 A. Urosevac, yes.
5 Q. Which is also called -- which is called in Albanian Ferizaj;
7 A. The Albanian -- the Albanians called Urosevac Ferizaj, that's
9 Q. And with regard to the information you were receiving from your
10 intelligence operatives and centres, you have told us of at least two
11 operatives, if I'm not mistaken, that you were aware of. And that was, I
12 believe, Mr. Jovovic, who was an operative in Djakovica.
13 A. I don't remember mentioning this name, Jovovic. You will have to
14 remind me of that.
15 Q. Then I made a mistake. Did you have an operative in the Djakovica
16 centre by the name -- first name would be Dejan or Dehan, last name
17 Jovovic, who worked for state security?
18 A. To tell you the truth, I wouldn't like to guess. I said that
19 there were 300 employees in the State Security Service and I wasn't able
20 to know all their names. There was a Jovovic, but he was working in the
21 State Security centre in Pristina. His first name was neither Dejan nor
22 Dehan. It was something completely different.
23 Q. We've heard the testimony that there was an individual by the name
24 of Bogdan Tomas who was working were the State Security Service. Is that a
25 name you're familiar with?
1 A. Yes, I am.
2 Q. And how about the name Zarko Bajcetic?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Darko Amanovic?
5 A. No, I'm not familiar with that name.
6 Q. You're not familiar with that name. Do you --
7 A. No. Darko Amanovic, no, I cannot remember, and I cannot say.
8 Q. In Ferizaj there was a regional centre where the state security
9 and, I believe, the MUP and the SUP all shared the same building; correct?
10 A. No, that's not correct. There was a subcentre in Urosevac of the
11 DB which was part of the Gnjilane regional centre. And it is true that
12 the State Security Department in Urosevac was sharing the building of the
13 Interior Affairs department in Urosevac.
14 Q. And that building, is that -- that's the building with the four
15 floors; correct? And your operation was on the fourth floor; right?
16 A. You know what? I don't want to sound hypocritical. This building
17 had more than four floors, and it is true that at one of the higher floors
18 there were State Security personnel.
19 Q. Well, do you know a gentleman by the name of Dragan Jasovic who
20 worked for SUP? Have you heard that name? He worked in Ferizaj.
21 A. No.
22 Q. Dragan Jasovic testified in a number of trials in this building,
23 including the trial of Mr. Milosevic as well as the Limaj trial, in which
24 he is indicated --
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Guy-Smith, did you verify whether there are any
1 protective measures involved?
2 MR. GUY-SMITH: Not yet.
3 JUDGE ORIE: It's --
4 MR. GUY-SMITH: I don't --
5 MR. RE: I can do that fairly quickly.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, would you please, please.
7 MR. GUY-SMITH: Dragan Jasovic was a witness called by the
8 Defence --
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. -- Mr. Re will check whether there are any
10 protective measures we should be aware of at this moment.
11 Please proceed.
12 MR. GUY-SMITH:
13 Q. And Dragan Jasovic indicates in his testimony that he not only
14 worked with a gentleman named Darko Amanovic, who was a member of the RDB,
15 but that your offices - by that I mean State Security offices - in the
16 building in Ferizaj were on the fourth floor.
17 A. I'm giving a testimony under oath, and I'm talking about things to
18 the best of my knowledge. I don't know this person. He gave evidence
19 here and it's up to him to confirm or not to confirm this statement.
20 As far as for Darko Amanovic is confirmed -- concerned, you first
21 asked me about Djakovica. As far as I understand, both Tomic and Bajcetic
22 work in Djakovica. I don't know about Amanovic. But I'm afraid you again
23 have information about this person and maybe there's again a confusion
24 with this person called Ashanin. I've never heard this name before.
25 Q. I'd like to ask you whether or not -- I want to go back in time a
1 bit, and I want to ask you whether or not in 1994 and 1995 you were
2 working in the State Security Service. My recollection is that you were.
3 A. Yes. Up until 1995, I worked as an operative in the RDB.
4 Q. In 1994 - perhaps it could have been a year earlier - there was a
5 incident at the State Security Service building in Ferizaj where an
6 individual by the name of Ismail Roka [phoen] left the premises through
7 the window. And by that I mean he either fell out or was thrown out of
8 the fourth-storey window. Are you aware of this incident?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Now, with regard to that incident, are you aware of who was
11 questioning him at the time that he was thrown out of the window?
12 A. Please. I said "yes" because you said something else.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Guy-Smith --
14 MR. GUY-SMITH: Well, I did --
15 JUDGE ORIE: You left it open.
16 MR. GUY-SMITH: I left it --
17 JUDGE ORIE: Well, the person thrown out or fell out of the
18 window. In the next question, you assumed on the --
19 MR. GUY-SMITH: I'm reminded of the "Accidental Death of an
20 Anarchist" by Dario Fo.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
22 MR. GUY-SMITH: But in any event, this gentleman left out of the
23 fourth-floor window.
24 Q. Do you know who was investigating him or who was questioning him
25 before he left the -- the premises suddenly?
1 A. No.
2 MR. RE: Could I ask Mr. Guy-Smith to give a -- a reference to the
3 date when this person testified. I can't find the name, that particular
4 name in the Milosevic witness list.
5 MR. GUY-SMITH: Which particular name?
6 JUDGE ORIE: The -- I asked -- Mr. Re offered to check whether
7 there was any protective measure --
8 MR. GUY-SMITH: Dragan Jasovic.
9 MR. RE: I've got the name. I'm asking for the date when he
10 testified, because there's no name in the list. It may be a protected
11 witness. I don't know.
12 MR. GUY-SMITH: I can assure you that he was not. But it's --
13 Dragan Jasovic was called by Mr. Milosevic and was heartily and thoroughly
14 examined by the Prosecution by Mr. Nice.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Guy-Smith --
16 MR. GUY-SMITH: That would be June 2005.
17 JUDGE ORIE: It's already a month.
18 Mr. Guy-Smith, during the last break the conversation among the
19 Judges included the word "peripheral." That was before you started to
20 cross-examine the witness. If we would have a break now --
21 MR. GUY-SMITH: Understood.
22 JUDGE ORIE: -- I could not ensure you --
23 MR. GUY-SMITH: Understood.
24 JUDGE ORIE: -- that the same word would be a part of our
25 conversation. Please proceed.
1 MR. GUY-SMITH: It will be the 15th, 16th, and 17th of June, 2005,
2 Mr. Re.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Re, Mr. Guy-Smith has now given the exact dates.
4 Yes. Please proceed, Mr. Guy-Smith.
5 MR. GUY-SMITH:
6 Q. During the time that you were working in 1993 and 1994 --
7 We need to go into private session for a moment.
8 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're in private session.
9 [Private session]
11 Pages 9222-9224 redacted. Private session.
16 [Open session]
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Guy-Smith, we are close to the moment where
18 we usually have a break. Could you --
19 MR. GUY-SMITH: I think this is -- I think this is probably not a
20 bad time to take a break, because based upon some of the interventions
21 from the Chamber, I think that what I'm going to do is reduce some of the
22 questioning that I have. So if I could have the -- that time to do that.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
24 MR. GUY-SMITH: Then I would have --
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We'll refrain from further conversations so as
1 to avoid the word "peripheral" during this break.
2 MR. GUY-SMITH: Thank you.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stijovic, we'll have a break. We'll resume at
4 ten minutes to 1.00, and I'm quite confident that you'll be able to travel
5 according to the arrangements made already.
6 --- Recess taken at 12.29 p.m.
7 --- On resuming at 12.58 p.m.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Guy-Smith.
9 MR. GUY-SMITH: Yes.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
11 MR. GUY-SMITH: If the witness could take off his headphones for
12 about a second.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Stijovic, would you please be so kind to
14 take off your earphones for a second.
15 MR. GUY-SMITH: I -- I have reviewed the areas in which I was
16 planning on asking questions, and I think it would be fair to say that
17 those areas include identifying statement-takers and disavowal of
18 statements by those who took the -- by those who were claimed to have
19 given the statements, allegations of some form of duress. However,
20 considering the kinds of indications that I am -- I believe that I am
21 getting from the Chamber, and understanding the amount of time that it
22 will take to do that, I am at this time not going to engage in that
23 examination with this gentleman.
24 However, I -- I would note for the record, for example, an area
25 that I may have gone into, although it is based upon what I have seen thus
1 far perhaps of -- of -- not of great help to the Chamber, would be what
2 has presently been identified as 2D0669, which is an investigative note
3 from the Prosecution in this case concerning -- concerning investigation
4 notes with Naser Kalamashi, whose statement is, I believe, tab number
5 70 -- I'm sorry, annex number 70 in the annexes that exist.
6 My concern has been that by virtue of the fact this gentleman has
7 been put forth with regard to the issue of the reliability of the
8 statements, that it may have -- it may well be worth going through the
9 kind of examinations that dealt with broad-base as well as some specific
10 issues concerning the taking of statements. However, based upon some
11 comments made by the Chamber, I am not going to engage in it at this time.
12 Not -- and I'm -- I'm not suggesting at the moment that there's not a
13 valid basis for the discussion; however, I don't know how helpful it's
14 going to be to the Chamber considering the kinds of information that has
15 been adduced thus far and the Chamber's indications.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Perhaps I could -- could try to -- to clarify
17 it. In the course of the proceedings, the evidence contains some indicia,
18 to say it, that interrogations may not always have been conducted in the
19 way they should be conducted. I leave it rather general. That's one.
20 I think this witness has not denied that such -- such
21 interrogations, that is, the -- with improper conduct of those
22 interrogating may have taken place.
23 The Chamber, as I expressed before - of course, that's not a
24 matter of evidence but -- well, to some extent it's a matter of evidence
25 as well. But, of course, the Chamber understands that sometimes there's a
1 very specific interest in producing statements not revealing the way they
2 in reality were taken, especially if they were -- if they were taken in an
3 inappropriate manner.
4 The Chamber is also aware that if a statement is given without any
5 duress, any force, whatever, that the person who gave that statement may
6 at a later stage be reluctant to admit that he gave such a statement in
7 full freedom.
8 Therefore, this is a very complex matter.
9 The Chamber is not assisted, I think, by emphasising that all
10 these possibilities are there. The Chamber is fully aware of that.
11 MR. GUY-SMITH: Could I ask --
12 JUDGE ORIE: If I could just --
13 MR. GUY-SMITH: Sure.
14 JUDGE ORIE: -- finish there. If there are good reasons to
15 believe that by questioning of the witness on these matters that a -- a
16 solid determination could be made as to what actually happened in case A
17 or case B and that is not done solely by a witness who later gives a
18 statement and said, "I was under force," et cetera, because that could be
19 the truth but could be an excuse for a statement he gave in full freedom
20 as well. So, therefore, that does not finally resolve the matter.
21 So the Chamber would be highly assisted by any examination of
22 witnesses or whatever other material which would give us solid reason to
23 believe that it was A or B. If that cannot reasonably be expected to be
24 achieved, then I think it takes a lot of time and we are from the balance
25 to one --
1 MR. GUY-SMITH: Sure.
2 JUDGE ORIE: -- and to the other, which doesn't help.
3 Of course, the Chamber would be very cautious knowing that these
4 possibilities were there to use these statements. At the same time, the
5 Chamber will also carefully analyse any statements, whether there's
6 anything in those statements that, for example, could not be induced by
7 the interrogator because we could not expect this to be known by the
8 interrogator. So, therefore, a lot of possibility, it needs a lot of
10 If by putting further questions to witnesses we could resolve the
11 matter, even if it would only be in relation to one or two statements,
12 fine. But if it comes down to: Are you aware that force was used now and
13 then in 1993 or 1997 or 1991, the same person who worked later for the --
14 once used force or five times used force -- I mean, that doesn't resolve
15 the matter in a way which assists the Chamber.
16 If this would be sufficient guidance for you, Mr. Guy-Smith.
17 MR. GUY-SMITH: That is -- that is sufficient guidance for me.
18 And it actually points out some of the dilemmas that we've had with
19 this -- this entire round of testimony in the -- in the annexes that were
20 attached thereto.
21 One of the difficulties that were, to be perfectly honest, I've
22 been having with this evidence is that the Prosecution took an entirely
23 different view of these kinds of statements in Milosevic. And by "an
24 entirely different view," I mean that they -- they took the position that
25 these statements were the result of a state practice of beatings and
1 torture and therefore exhibited -- exhibit no lack of -- no reliability
2 whatsoever. There was totally -- a total lack of reliability.
3 So when looking at the way that we're dealing in different
4 proceedings by the same office of the same kind of evidence, I thought it
5 important to go through this kind of detail. However, I understand the
6 Court's analysis and I understand the dilemmas that face the Court with
7 this particular evidence at this juncture, and I'm going to, as I
8 initially said, I'm going to truncate my examination in this regard,
9 because I think I'm going to end up doing precisely what may be of
10 little -- may be of little - and by that I mean a little bit - assistance
11 to the Chamber but based on where things are going, from what I
12 understand, I don't think it's going to be worth the time that's taken, as
13 much as I would like to get into some of these areas. But I'm not -- I
14 have -- I have a series of lists of horribles by these witnesses where
15 they disavow that which was said when the statements were made, but that
16 doesn't seem to be something that I think will be of further assistance
17 based on what you've said.
18 JUDGE ORIE: It doesn't seem to be conclusive for that.
19 And, of course, if at any later stage --
20 MR. GUY-SMITH: Sure.
21 JUDGE ORIE: -- there would be other evidence which would
22 corroborate this, then, of course, you never can foreshadow what will
23 happen in the future. But the mere fact that a witness later says that he
24 was forced to say something doesn't resolve the matter.
25 I'm not saying that it -- well, let's say in evaluating the
1 statements the Chamber may take into account the evidence even if not by
2 this specific witness on his statement, that if the witness would be asked
3 about it that he might have denied to ever have given such a statement or
4 that he was forced to give such a statement, which, again, then the
5 question, again, is whether that's the truth or whether --
6 MR. GUY-SMITH: Understood. Understood.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
8 Mr. Emmerson.
9 MR. EMMERSON: Might I just register one matter, lest silence
10 should be seen as acceptance.
11 In the guidance that Your Honours have just given, Your Honour
12 made reference to a careful analysis to determine whether the content of
13 the statement might contain information which must have been related from
14 the subject.
15 Without developing any submissions in detail, I would simply
16 record that plainly reliability of content is not the predominant or
17 indeed certainly not the only issue when considering ill-treatment and
18 voluntariness, because about by virtue of Article 15 of the Torture
19 Convention and by virtue of Rule 89(C) in the decision Furundzija, the
20 material which was or may have been obtained as a result of torture or
21 ill-treatment ought to be admissible, per se.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Emmerson, there is no question about that.
23 Of course, the problem is to establish whether there was any torture. And
24 if that would be established --
25 MR. EMMERSON: And who bears the burden of establishing the
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Of course, we're -- I mean, to exclude evidence
3 on the basis that it was obtained by torture, then you have to positively
4 establish or make -- to establish at the level of likelihood that there
5 was --
6 MR. EMMERSON: Well, that -- that begs a very difficult question,
7 in fact, as to whether or not before a statement can be admitted it must
8 be proved to have been obtained voluntarily or whether before it should be
9 excluded it must be proved to have been obtained --
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That's interesting. That's a legal matter
11 which of course is --
12 MR. EMMERSON: And I raise it -- I raise it simply because the way
13 that Your Honour put it could have been understood as an interpretation
14 that if -- if there were --
15 JUDGE ORIE: No. When I said we have to carefully analyse, that
16 was not to say that that is the exclusive job we have to do but, of
17 course, we have to take everything in its entirety, including a careful
18 analysis of --
19 MR. EMMERSON: Well, I don't -- I wouldn't dream of dissenting
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
22 Then Mr. Guy-Smith, can we invite the witness --
23 MR. GUY-SMITH: Well --
24 JUDGE ORIE: No? Not yet.
25 MR. GUY-SMITH: In one second. I believe the standard -- the
1 standard that was suggested is a standard suggested by the Prosecution
2 once again in Milosevic dealing specifically with this issue, the question
3 that Mr. Emmerson raised with regard to who bears the burden, and it was
4 argued that it would be a -- a balance of probabilities. At least in
5 those pleadings.
6 I think where I am left on behalf of Mr. Balaj -- and I'm, to be
7 honest with him, a bit uncomfortable, but I trust that my -- my discomfort
8 is more because of the system I come from rather than for any other
9 reason -- that I may at some point be asking the Chamber to review
10 testimonies in the Milosevic case with regard to this general issue and
11 with regard to the specific position that was taken by the Prosecution as
12 it relates to the voluntariness and reliability of these kinds of
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
15 MR. GUY-SMITH: I'm just alerting -- I'm alerting the Chamber that
16 they may be another way of dealing with the matter.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
18 MR. GUY-SMITH: And having -- having said that and noting the --
19 the time, I'm done with my examination.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And then perhaps you could also, perhaps, make
21 submissions on to the requirement or at least the wish to have a, in every
22 respect, consistent OTP in all cases, which is not a simple issue.
23 And I'd like to add to that. There is some -- I don't know the
24 word in English, as a matter of fact, but in ballet there is a movement
25 where you're on the floor with one leg in one direction. We call it in
1 our language "[Dutch spoken]". I don't know whether that's known. But
2 it's -- looking at the position of the OTP in these matters, there might
3 be some resemblance with that movement in ballet.
4 MR. GUY-SMITH: Well, I will --
5 JUDGE ORIE: But certainly a matter -- I mean, this is a rather
6 poetic way of -- of presenting it; whereas, of course, the legal issue
7 involved there certainly deserves attention if you want to draw the
8 attention of the Chamber to the position taken by the OTP in other cases.
9 MR. GUY-SMITH: Very well. Because this is something -- this
10 is -- this is a matter specifically that was raised and a decision was
11 issued in -- in Limaj concerning the difference of -- of positions it
12 would take.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
14 MR. GUY-SMITH: And once again, I turn -- I turn the microphone
15 over to Mr. Harvey at this point in time, unless, of course, the Chamber
16 has any questions, but I don't think they do at this juncture.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I now learn that the English expression is
18 "cord" for the movement in ballet. But let's not spend too much time on
20 You leave the -- yes.
21 MR. GUY-SMITH: And one last thing. It's a housekeeping matter.
22 That the -- the hard-copy document, I believe, that's 2D1027, if we could
23 get that marked -- I'm sorry, 21. Could we have that marked for
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
1 Mr. Registrar.
2 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be marked for
3 identification as D178.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
5 Mr. Harvey.
6 MR. HARVEY: Your Honours, I'm going to adopt the same --
7 JUDGE ORIE: Perhaps -- perhaps --
8 MR. HARVEY: Yes.
9 JUDGE ORIE: We would ask the witness to put his earphones on
11 Mr. Stijovic, we discussed some procedural matters which didn't --
12 it's -- it's still public, so if you want to know exactly what we said,
13 there's every opportunity to review it.
14 Please proceed, Mr. Harvey.
15 MR. HARVEY: Yes. Your Honours, I'm going to adopt what
16 Mr. Guy-Smith just said in relation to the limit of the number of annexes
17 that I'm going to look at with this witness, but I do want to start,
18 Mr. Stijovic, with annex 17, which I believe is MFI 949.
19 Cross-examination by Mr. Harvey:
20 Q. And do you have that, sir? Annex 17 to your statement.
21 JUDGE ORIE: And -- oh, yes, annex 17.
22 MR. HARVEY:
23 Q. That's the annex dated 24th of March, 1998. Do you have that,
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Okay. First of all, this is headed "Report." To whom was -- to
2 whom were you reporting? To whom was this report addressed?
3 A. The document that I have before me was authored by the Department
4 for the State Security Sector -- of the State Security Sector Pec. And
5 according to our information system, it was sent to the RDB centre in
6 Prizren and then to the third line, Albanian terrorism in Belgrade, and to
7 the RDB sector. You look at the top of the text and you can see to whom
8 it is addressed.
9 Q. Thank you. The -- this -- is it correct to say this is the first
10 report that -- well, sorry, may I just ask this: What is the difference
11 between a report and an official note as some of the other documents are
13 A. Well, a report or a brief is something that should assist the
14 leadership of the service in their further activities. So a piece of
15 information is something that will help the RDB in deciding on further
17 As for the official note, this document bears more weight.
18 According to the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Serbia at the
19 time, an official note could be considered as evidence in court under that
21 Q. If you could look, please, at the first paragraph of the substance
22 of the report. We have in English here - and please follow me to make
23 sure that the translation is correct - "Following activities of sabotage
24 and terrorist groups which call themselves the Kosovo Liberation Army, in
25 the area of responsibility of the Pec ORDB, it has come to our attention
1 that in addition to the so-called Decani Group (established in the
2 beginning of 1997), there is another sabotage and terrorist group active
3 in the area of the village of Jablanica ... Hereinafter referred to as the
4 so-called Jablanica Group."
5 "It has come to our attention" suggests that this is a relatively
6 recent discovery. Would you agree?
7 A. No.
8 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters note, could the other witness's
9 microphone be switched on, please.
10 MR. HARVEY:
11 Q. You say "no." In fact, this is the first time that the -- a
12 report has been sent to the Ministry of the Interior notifying them of the
13 existence of a so-called sabotage and terrorist group in Jablanica, isn't
14 that the fact?
15 A. No.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Harvey, would it assist you to know that the
17 Chamber, where it earlier said that you should not be surprised if 17 and
18 18 and 25 would not be admitted, that the Chamber has made up its mind in
19 this respect, that unless we hear now strong objections from Mr. Re that
20 17, for the reasons earlier indicated, is very likely not to be admitted?
21 MR. HARVEY: That's very helpful, Your Honour. There are just --
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Re.
23 MR. RE: I do hope to be heard at the appropriate time when we
24 have the submissions on this.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. At the same time, let's be very practical. I
1 think I earlier explained that 17, dealing with act and conduct of one of
2 the accused, would not be the appropriate way of presenting this evidence,
3 so therefore introduced by this witness.
4 And Mr. Re, in many respects I think the Chamber has -- is -- is
5 about -- and from the indications we gave, the Defence would not be
6 surprised if many of their objections will not be honoured, but this is
7 one where there's a very fair chance that it would be honoured.
8 MR. RE: I understand. But to assist, and Mr. Harvey, of course,
9 our primary argument will be that it is relevant to the existence of an
10 armed conflict at that point, the jurisdictional issue, more than the acts
11 and conducts of the accused. And that is more what we would be arguing
12 its use is for in these proceedings. I'm not arguing the point at the
13 moment, but that's just a telegraph where we would be going.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Would that assist you in any way? Because the
15 problem is, of course, the Chamber usually determines these matters --
16 that's a process, and we are coming close to saying "no" to this document.
17 But if it would be presented only for the existence of an armed conflict,
18 would that assist you in -- for your cross-examination?
19 MR. HARVEY: I'm always grateful to get any assistance I can from
20 the Prosecution. The issue that I am focusing on is predicated on annexes
21 56, 57, 58, and 59, which all precede annex 17 in point of time. And
22 without taking the witness through each of those annexes, it is clear from
23 that, it will be my submission, that they show a pattern from October of
24 1997 through the end of February of 1998 where the RDB is very unsure
25 about what's going on in the area of Jablanica and where nobody certainly
1 could claim that there was an armed conflict in existence predicated on
2 any of those annexes.
3 I'm not going to take the witness to them. I'm not going to take
4 the Tribunal to them. I just want to make Mr. Re clear, in my term, what
5 the position is that -- that we are taking in relation to the value of
6 these documents. But I -- I will move on.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Please do so. At this moment -- of course, I'm
8 a bit concerned about time as well, Mr. Harvey. I know that you're always
9 in the position where you easily fall victim to time taken by others.
10 MR. HARVEY: Sometimes I feel like the stepchild of this Trial
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
13 MR. HARVEY: But I am doing my best to move things as quickly as I
15 Q. Witness, you said on -- I'm losing count of the days now. You
16 said on Monday that "We knew at every moment what was going on in
17 Jablanica. And once he" -- that's Mr. Brahimaj -- "left Jablanica, they
18 would take him and follow him in his movements in Kosovo and" -- you
19 continued -- "then they would return him to the borders of Jablanica and
20 let him in."
21 At what time frame do you claim that Mr. Brahimaj was under such
22 total 24-hour surveillance?
23 A. Lahi Brahimaj was surveilled by the Djakovica department of the
24 RDB and he came under the stage of preliminary processing. I think it was
25 from 1996 that he was surveilled by the RDB.
1 Now, what you quoted me as saying on Monday had to do with the way
2 in which we surveilled him, and I was explaining this measure of covert
3 monitoring, of surveillance of him, his movements, and contacts in Decani,
4 Djakovica, and Pec.
5 We were unable to physically go into Djakovica because the
6 shadowing is normally done by the operatives of the RDB. However, we had
7 the equipment which enabled us to wait for him in a vehicle and to then
8 follow him in his daily activities.
9 This went on for as long as he was there, until he returned to the
10 village. This measure was applied, along with the other operative
11 measures, whenever we believed it would provide us with valuable
13 MR. HARVEY: Before we --
14 JUDGE ORIE: We to use our time as efficiently as possible. Your
15 question was about the time frame. Could you try to get the witness
16 focussed on your questions.
17 JUDGE HOEPFEL: [Microphone not activated] May I ask the witness
18 if I understood correctly, you wanted to tell us you were unable to
19 physically go into what place?
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I couldn't hear His Honour.
21 THE INTERPRETER: Your Honours, would you turn another microphone
22 on, please.
23 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Please, about this sentence, I quote from page 96,
24 line 7: "We were unable to physically go into Djakovica."
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Not Djakovica. Jablanica.
1 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Thank you. That was what I was assuming. Thank
3 MR. HARVEY: Thank you, Your Honour. I thought that was in need
4 of correction too.
5 Q. I asked you about the time frame. You are claiming that
6 Mr. Brahimaj was under pretty much 24-hour surveillance every time he left
7 the village of Jablanica starting from what date, sir?
8 A. First of all, I never used that term, "24-hour surveillance." I
9 said that this measure of surveillance was applied whenever it was deemed
10 necessary. Sometimes it lasted for two hours, sometimes for three hours,
11 sometimes longer, depending on how much time he would spend out in the
12 field and how far we were able to follow him. So this was the shadowing.
13 Now, as for the general surveillance of him, of his person, this
14 started in 1996. He was under preliminary investigation and this measure
15 of general surveillance can be checked into.
16 As I said, we had -- you normally had the proposal of the
17 operative, reasons for that, and then the approval of the superior. In
18 addition to that, we had to receive an approval from Belgrade allowing
19 this measure to be applied. And it is on the basis of this paperwork that
20 you can check back -- back the date when the RDB started treating him, as
21 we say in the service.
22 And if I may help. We had this piece of information. He was
23 followed by the RDB in Djakovica; whereas, that other thing had to do with
24 the Pec operatives learning something about his activities in Djakovica.
25 Q. You said "we knew at every moment what was going on." Do you
1 actually stand by those words or do you think you may have been slightly
2 overstating the case?
3 A. Well, you know what? When you say "at any time," you know how
4 many minutes and seconds are -- there are in 24 hours. Basically we knew
5 what was going on in Jablanica, who Lahi Brahimaj was, who he was
6 surrounded by, what they were involved in, where they were moving, and who
7 his contacts were, and this was within the remit of the State Security
8 Service. Therefore, I cannot say that every second we knew what Lahi
9 Brahimaj was doing, but essentially we knew who he was and what he was
10 involved in.
11 Q. You would agree, would you not, that you never once -- when I say
12 "you," the MUP, the SUP, the police forces at your disposal never once
13 moved to arrest Lahi Brahimaj during the period that you have just given,
14 1996 through 1998.
15 A. At the very beginning of the trial - and I even think that His
16 Honour has asked me -
17 Q. We are cut very, very short for time. You want to get out of
18 here. I want to get you out of here. That question could be answered
19 "yes" or "no," couldn't it?
20 A. Can you please repeat the question and I'll give you a
21 straightforward answer.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Whether you moved ever to arrest Lahi Brahimaj
23 between 1996 and 1998.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.
25 MR. HARVEY:
1 Q. Thank you.
2 Instead of which, you and your operatives spent all your time
3 collecting as much information as you could about what was going on in
4 Jablanica. And I'll be specific: The types of defences that had been
5 erected by the -- the guards who were protecting Jabllanice, the types of
6 radio communications, the types of armaments, the types of reconnaissance
7 patrols, the types of signaling that they used to notify each other if the
8 Serb forces were approaching. And I'm looking particularly at annex 44,
9 MFI 976, dated the 30th of March of 1998, for everyone else's reference.
10 But you would agree, you were collating as much information as you
11 could on what was going on in Jabllanice and how well defended the place
13 A. First of all, it's wrong to say that we were wasting time.
14 Initially, at the beginning of treating Mr. Lahi --
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stijovic, no one says that you're wasting time.
16 Of course, that's the way that Mr. Harvey expresses himself by starting
17 the question with "instead of" which, of course --
18 Mr. Harvey would like to know whether you spent your time
19 collecting as much information as you could about what was going on in
20 Jablanica. Is that what you did?
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Harvey.
23 MR. HARVEY:
24 Q. And the last page of annex 44, the last paragraph of that page
25 reads as follows: "Considering that extreme activities of the terrorist
1 organisation from the village of Jablanica and their involvement in
2 terrorist attacks on members and facilities of the Serbian MUP has been
3 indubitably confirmed, we deem that appropriate action should be taken in
4 order to crack down on further terrorist activities and arrest the
5 perpetrators of criminal offences."
6 Your recommendation -- well, your as an organisation
7 recommendation was that there should be a crackdown on Jabllanice, and
8 that was at the end of March you were recommending that; correct?
9 A. This was an RDB Djakovica recommendation. Back in 1995, in the
10 analytical department in Pristina, we wanted Lahi Brahimaj to be arrested
11 directly in 1997 in Jablanica. This is only one segment of the document
12 of the RDB, which rather belatedly in March 1998 they are asking an action
13 to be taken in Jablanica when Brahimaj was not accessible to us. He was
14 not allowed to leave Jablanica but, rather, only moved overnight in the
15 surrounding villages.
16 Had our suggestions been listened to and complied with -- because
17 we were not in charge on deciding on operative things -- he would have
18 been arrested much sooner and the things in Kosovo would have looked quite
20 Q. The point is this: The RDB was recommending at the end of March
21 that there should be a crackdown and arrest. That's in the same kind of
22 context of the sort of arrest that you spoke about earlier today in
23 relation to Prekaze. Essentially mounting an operation to go in and
24 search and destroy in Jabllanice. That's what you were really
25 recommending. Isn't that right?
1 A. I am repeating again for the benefit of Their Honours. That was
2 the recommendation of the local DB in Djakovica. And I still maintain
3 that it came rather late. This was not a position of the higher service
4 leadership, so it was a belated decision.
5 Q. You were aware of Sreten Camovic [Realtime transcript read in
6 error "Semovic"], the head of the RDB in Djakovica?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. You had meetings with him from time to time to discuss what should
9 be done and -- with people you suspected of KLA activities?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Did he report -- did he -- did he report to you?
12 A. No, he didn't directly report to me. Rather, through the chain of
13 communications he sent documents which ended up in the analytical
14 department. So he and I were on the same level when we discussed the
15 situation prevailing in Djakovica.
16 Q. Could I ask you quickly just to assist us with one piece of
17 wording in annex number 50. 50. You use a particular word twice, and I'd
18 like your explanation of what is meant by that word.
19 In the first substantive paragraph --
20 JUDGE ORIE: Could you give the --
21 MR. HARVEY: 50.
22 JUDGE ORIE: MFI number.
23 MR. HARVEY: I'm sorry, MFI 982, if my maths is correct.
24 Q. You use this expression: "Through appropriate measures and
25 actions, the department learned that the process of organising DTGs
1 culminated at the beginning of this year, especially after the realisation
2 of the DTG of Adem Jashari."
3 And I think in the original Serb that you have in front of you the
4 word "realisation" appears. Can you explain what this word "realisation"
5 mean, please.
6 A. Yes. Only, I noticed in line 19 that the name should be Sreten
7 Camovic, not Sreten Semovic. So this is something that has to be
8 corrected in the transcript.
9 Q. Thank you for that help.
10 Now, what about realisation?
11 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Is it -- is it Samovic or Camovic?
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] "C". Camovic.
13 Realisation is an ultimate measure applied by the RDB. By
14 processing a individual, is to create a situation; i.e., when we compile
15 documents, and if there are elements, we arrest this person and hand him
16 over to the judicial.
17 Another estimate and assessment would be to recruit this person to
18 work for the service. And in this particular instance, "realisation"
19 meant that a decision had been taken to have Adem Jashari and his group
20 arrested. So in that sense, the assessment of my colleagues from the Pec
21 RDB that in the aftermath of the action in Prekaz there was escalation in
22 Kosovo and Metohija.
23 MR. HARVEY:
24 Q. I'm sorry, I don't quite understand how "realisation" in this
25 context could mean "arrest." The man was executed, wasn't he?
1 A. No, he wasn't executed.
2 Q. Well, we won't quibble about it.
3 Let's go to the bottom of the next page, where you have again used
4 the same term: "Having realised Muhamet Avdijai." Now, does realised --
5 does "realised" there mean "arrested"?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Okay. I want to come back to Mr. Camovic now. Because of your
8 investigation of Jabllanice, it was important that anybody who came to the
9 attention of the RDB who claims to have been in Jabllanice and to have
10 been detained against their will, that person should be questioned
11 thoroughly and full information taken from them. That was important to
12 your investigation, wasn't it?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Mr. Camovic would have known that that was important -- an
15 important thing to do, wouldn't he?
16 A. Absolutely, yes.
17 Q. If a person claimed to have been detained in Jabllanice and to
18 have been beaten and to have seen others detained and beaten and killed,
19 that is something that would definitely have been taken down in statement
20 form by the RDB; right?
21 A. In accordance with what you have said, yes.
22 Q. And evidence of that sort would be passed up the line and would
23 come to you as well, wouldn't it, if there were statements from anybody
24 who had been the victim of such beatings or had witnessed such beatings.
25 A. Yes.
1 MR. HARVEY: If we could go into private session for one moment,
2 please, Your Honour.
3 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're in private session
4 [Private session]
13 [Open session]
14 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
15 MR. HARVEY:
16 Q. While we were in private session, I gave you a name of a person
17 who is known to this Tribunal as Witness 6. Have you ever been shown any
18 documents relating to Witness 6, Mr. Stijovic?
19 A. No, I cannot remember.
20 Q. Are you aware -- you've used the expression "associates" and
21 "operative connections." Are you aware of a family known as the
22 Jakupi -- or the Jakupi family from Gjakova?
23 A. I think I have heard of them, but I'm just expressing an opinion.
24 Q. I ask because they -- they had a reputation for being very close
25 to the police and for providing assistance to the police on many
1 occasions. Are you aware of them in that context?
2 A. I don't know if you are referring to the State Security Service or
3 to the police, i.e., the public security service. This family name sounds
4 familiar to me, but I don't know what you are referring to, whether they
5 were cooperating with the police or with the State Security Service.
6 Q. Well, my question is obviously only one you can answer if you know
7 if they were cooperating with either branch. Do you know if they
8 cooperated with -- with the police in either branch?
9 A. I don't.
10 Q. My final topic is that as head of investigations for RDB, you
11 would have been consulted if there was any plan to attack Jabllanice,
12 wouldn't you?
13 A. Either I misheard -- I think you said that I was heading
14 investigations. I didn't head investigations. I was the head of the
15 analytical department. There's a big difference between an investigation
16 and analysis.
17 Q. My apologies. I misspoke.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
19 MR. HARVEY:
20 Q. As head of analytical department, you would have been consulted
21 about a plan to attack Jabllanice; correct?
22 A. Basically yes. Yes.
23 Q. Thank you. And you're aware, I presume, that Jabllanice was
24 attacked by the Serbian forces at the beginning of August and then again
25 at the beginning of September.
1 A. They tried to enter the village of Jablanica and to capture or,
2 rather, arrest the group around Lahi Brahimaj. It was not an attack on
3 the village and the villager -- all the villagers there.
4 Q. Let's deal with the beginning of August first. At that time you
5 would have known the home address of Lahi Brahimaj? You'd have known
6 exactly where his house was. Yes?
7 A. This piece of information was known to the service, surely.
8 Q. And you would have known who lived there with him. Yes?
9 A. Absolutely, yes. The Djakovica department had all these details.
10 These are particular details.
11 Q. You would have known that his elderly mother and very elderly
12 grandmother both lived there. Yes?
13 A. They must have known the people who were directly involved in
14 processing Lahi Brahimaj. They surely knew his residential address, who
15 he was living with, and these details were generally known to the service.
16 But these details were not at the level that would reach me. These were
17 personal details, his mother and father. I was interested in the level of
18 connection between him and similar individuals.
19 Q. You were asked by Mr. Emmerson about what investigations you
20 conducted into crimes committed by police officers in the service of
21 Republic of Serbia. Did you ever investigate the killing of those two
22 elderly ladies who were hacked to death with knives by those forces? Was
23 that ever brought to your attention?
24 A. Believe me, this is the first time I hear of this. The first
25 time. I personally hear it for the first time and that these were
1 close -- closely related members of the Brahimaj family. So to the best
2 of my abilities and with all the information I have, I can say with full
3 responsibility that this is the first time I'm hearing this from you.
4 MR. HARVEY: No further questions.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Harvey.
6 Mr. Re, any need for further questions? I earlier mentioned the
7 peripheral aspect of some of the examination. Is there any need to
8 further explore the periphery?
9 MR. RE: Certainly not the periphery, but there are just several
10 matters which is I -- it will only take a few moments --
11 JUDGE ORIE: Okay.
12 MR. RE: -- Which require clarification.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Okay.
14 MR. RE: And one of those is from Mr. Harvey's questions about the
15 arrest -- or non-arrest of Mr. Brahimaj.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Please proceed. Try to finish in five minutes.
17 MR. RE: Yes.
18 Re-examination by Mr. Re:
19 Q. Mr. Stijovic. Five minutes. Short -- short answers, please.
20 Mr. Harvey just asked you about the RDB or the MUP not arresting
21 Mr. Brahimaj in 1997 or 1998. Short answer, please: Why didn't they
22 arrest him?
23 A. Because we first had to document his activities in order to have
24 the basis for an arrest. Once we were able to document that he was
25 involved in these activities, we monitored his activities and we revealed
1 the connections within the group that he was at the head of. However, the
2 direct decision of when the arrests would take place depended on the
3 operations chief on the ground.
4 Q. As far as you know, was it physically possible for the MUP to
5 arrest Mr. Brahimaj in 1997 or the early part of 1998?
6 A. Many times. It was feasible. It was practicable without any
8 Q. And in response to Mr. Harvey, you said it was not the position of
9 the higher-level leadership to arrest him. Can you just clarify what you
10 mean by that. Are you referring to the higher levels of the DB or the
11 state authorities?
12 A. First of all, in order to arrest Lahi Brahimaj, it was the RDB's
13 competence, because he was involved in terrorism. The proposal for an
14 arrest was given by the Djakovica DB. An operative proposal went down the
15 third line of communication, which is Albanian extremism and terrorism.
16 It was up to them to prove and say that the situation -- operational
17 situation was in place and that the arrest could be made, but it was late.
18 Lahi Brahimaj should have been arrested much sooner and we should have had
19 all the details available.
20 Q. Yesterday Mr. Emmerson asked you about levels of exchange of
21 information at the level of Mr. Markovic, as head of the DB, and
22 Colonel Gajic, within the military intelligence. And you were referring
23 to exchanges at their level. Were there exchanges at lower levels, such
24 as between operatives -- or, sorry, officials at your level and officials
25 of a similar level within the military intelligence in the same time?
1 A. Yes. Yes.
2 Q. Were they regular? If so, how regular? Very brief, please.
3 A. Periodically, depending on the actual needs and the operative
4 situation prevailing on the ground.
5 Q. Mr. Emmerson also asked you about Colonel Gajic's testimony in
6 relation to Arkan's men being brought into Kosovo, and you gave an answer
7 about some men being stopped at the border of -- of Montenegro.
8 Was Mr. Gajic, Colonel Gajic, better placed than you to know about
9 the activities or the -- the activities of groups such as Arkan's while
10 operating in Kosovo?
11 A. I'm not sure about that, that he was in a better position.
12 Regardless of his higher position and regardless of my high regard about
13 him as a person and as a member of the service.
14 Q. Earlier you were asked about Exhibit -- which is page 18 of part
15 of P5, which is the HLC report, and it was read to you in some detail.
16 And you said that you could comment on every sentence if you wished to but
17 it concerned the death of Mr. Otovic. Is there anything - very briefly -
18 that you could add to your earlier answer about your knowledge of the
19 circumstances -- not of Otovic but what was in that report that you didn't
20 say before?
21 A. I have many details about Otovic's murder provided by the
22 policemen who arrested Rasim --
23 THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness please repeat the names
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Otovic was shot in the head. The
1 shot was fired from the Haradinaj family house at the time when they
2 wanted to arrest Rasim Selmaj [phoen]. And I can give you a detailed
3 account of what they told me about this incident.
4 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber has received quite a lot of evidence
5 on -- on what happened on the day Mr. Otovic died, direct evidence.
6 Mr. Re.
7 MR. RE:
8 Q. Just the final matter was: Mr. Guy-Smith, I think, asked you
9 about Srdjan Perovic, the death of -- and it's referred to at paragraph
10 59, I think, of your statement -- sorry, 54 of your statement, where you
11 referred to: "In early July there was a heavy armed conflict" --
12 MR. GUY-SMITH: Excuse me. I did not ask about the death of. I
13 asked if he knew the man. And he responded concerning the death of the
15 MR. RE:
16 Q. I do apologise. Mr. Guy-Smith asked you about whether he knew you
17 and I just refer you to that passage in your statement, paragraph 54. And
18 you responded: "In early July there was a heavy armed conflict in the
19 vicinity of Lodja and several police officers were killed. In August 1998
20 bodies of police officers Srdjan Perovic and Rajkovic were found near
22 What was the source of your information about the abduction and
23 death of Srdjan Perovic by the KLA?
24 A. There was an attack on the villages of Breznik village near Pec.
25 The police intervened, and the unit headed -- led by Srdjan Perovic came
1 into an ambush and there ensued a crossfire in which Rajkovic was killed
2 and Srdjan Perovic was seriously wounded.
3 In addition to that, another few policemen were killed. I
4 remember that one of them was Dragan Prelovic [phoen].
5 JUDGE ORIE: You are describing the event, rather than to answer
6 the question, that is, what were the sources?
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The source of information was the
8 MUP of Serbia, the unit which was on the ground, and the source of
9 information about the body found on Zlopek-Celopek, the body came from one
10 of our associates who witnessed the torture and the killing and the role
11 of Mete Krasniqi in this incident. Once we had an opportunity to go on in
12 the field and according to the location indicated to him -- to us by him,
13 we found the bodies of Perovic and Rajkovic.
14 MR. RE: Thank you. And for the Trial Chamber's benefit, that
15 incident is also referred to in Exhibit P907, which is the 92 statement --
16 Rule 92 -- 92 ter statement of Witness 64 at paragraph 15.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
18 Any need for further questions?
19 Since the Chamber has no questions for you either -- for you
20 either, Mr. Stijovic, this concludes your testimony in this court. I'd
21 like to thank you very much for having come to The Hague, spent quite a
22 number of days in this courtroom. The Chamber is happy that it can excuse
23 you at the time so that you can fulfil your commitments. Thank you for
24 answering questions of -- of both parties and the Chamber.
25 We -- I apologise for the interpreters and the technicians. I
1 hope that the break you need, that you will get it, although a bit later
2 than expected.
3 Mr. Emmerson.
4 MR. EMMERSON: Just one sentence, if I may. There are now
5 submissions from both parties on an outstanding and be resolved --
6 JUDGE ORIE: I'm aware of that. And that relates to tomorrow. The
7 Chamber may be in a position to communicate with you this afternoon. And
8 whether that results in either late-night meeting or an early morning
9 meeting is still to be seen. The Chamber prefers just to start tomorrow,
10 because we'll adjourn until tomorrow morning, 9.00, same courtroom.
11 [The witness withdrew]
12 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 2.01 p.m.,
13 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 11th day
14 of October, 2007, at 9.00 a.m.