1 Monday, 15 October 2007
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 2.22 p.m.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Good afternoon to everyone.
6 Mr. Registrar, would you please call the case.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Good afternoon, Your Honours. Good afternoon to
8 everyone in the courtroom. This is case number IT-04-84-T, the Prosecutor
9 versus Ramush Haradinaj et al.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
11 Before we move on, I'd like to deliver one decision from the
12 Chamber and also make a statement on behalf of the Chamber. I will start
13 with the decision, that is --
14 This is a decision on the Prosecution's request of the 9th of
15 August, 2007 to make public two confidential annexes to a submission filed
16 by Mr. Haradinaj on the 16th of July, 2007.
17 On the 29th of June, 2007, Mr. Haradinaj requested temporary
18 provisional release for the period of the summer recess. The Prosecution
19 objected to this request on the 11th of July, 2007. On the 16th of July,
20 Mr. Haradinaj filed a reply. Attached to this reply were two confidential
21 annexes, containing a proposed public statement by Mr. Haradinaj and a
22 letter by Mr. O'Reilly. The Prosecution now requests that these
23 confidential annexes be made public.
24 On the 20th of August, 2007, the Chamber was informed by the
25 Defence for Mr. Haradinaj that it would not respond to the Prosecution's
2 Proceedings should be conducted, unless an exception is justified
3 under the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, in public. Mr. Haradinaj does
4 not object to the Prosecution's request. The Chamber sees no reason to
5 keep the annexes confidential, and therefore, in the interest of the
6 public character of the proceedings, grants the Prosecution's request.
7 Mr. Haradinaj is ordered to re-file his 16th of July, 2007 reply as a
8 fully public document but to redact, if he so wishes, Mr. O'Reilly's
9 address, phone number, and e-mail address.
10 And this concludes the Chamber's decision.
11 The Chamber will now give a statement concerning the scheduling
12 for the remaining part of the Prosecution's case. In this regard, the
13 parties will have received the latest report from the Chamber's database,
14 entitled "Report number 2," which indicates time spent on the case so far.
15 After having heard the testimony of Witness 68 last week, the
16 Prosecution had used up 107 of its 125 allocated hours. In reality, of
17 course, the Prosecution has used a few hours more when you take into
18 account Aleksandric, whose testimony has not yet -- has yet to be
20 The Prosecution has not requested any additional time for the
21 presentation of its case. Considering how much time the Defence has taken
22 for cross-examination and how much time has been spent on procedural
23 matters so far, the Prosecution would require another 14 days, 14 hearing
24 days, counting from the end of Witness 68's testimony, to complete its
25 phase of the case. With the current sitting schedule, that would be the
1 8th of November.
2 This being the case, the Chamber invites the Prosecution to file
3 the remaining 92 bis and quarter motions, should there be any, no later
4 than the 25th of October, 2007. The Chamber also invites the parties to
5 formally announce by that date whether the Chamber can expect to receive
6 any agreed facts, and if so, by when. So far the Chamber has not received
7 any agreed facts.
8 The Chamber also reminds the Prosecution that the statement of
9 Jovanka Antic was provisionally admitted on the 22nd of May, 2007 pending
10 the submission of a 92 bis attestation. The Chamber is not yet in receipt
11 of this attestation, and the Prosecution should be aware that unless the
12 Chamber receives it before the end of the Prosecution's case, the
13 statement of Jovanka Antic will not be admitted into evidence.
14 And this concludes the Chamber's statement on the scheduling for
15 the remainder of the Prosecution's case.
16 Mr. Emmerson, are you ready to continue the cross-examination of
17 Mr. Stijovic [sic] -- no, no, we're still in chief. I apologise.
18 Mr. Re, are you ready to --
19 MR. RE: Yes, yes, very much --
20 JUDGE ORIE: I think you said 15 minutes still to go.
21 MR. RE: That's exactly what I said.
22 While the witness is coming in, can I just add to the --
23 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
24 MR. RE: At transcript page 9280 on Thursday, the --
25 JUDGE ORIE: If you've got one second for me, Mr. Re.
1 [The witness entered court]
2 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stijovic, I've -- I have a technical matter to
4 discuss, first of all. There seems to be a --
5 MR. RE: Zivanovic.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
7 [Trial Chamber confers]
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. There seems to be a problem with the -- with
9 the live broadcast. We move into private session purely for technical
10 reasons to see whether moving in and then out again will resolve the
11 problem. It could not be excluded that it will.
12 Therefore, Mr. Registrar, we'll move into private session.
13 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're now in private session.
14 [Private session]
17 [Open session]
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Could I hear from the technicians whether this
19 moving in and out has resolved the problem.
20 I see the technician nodding "no."
21 I do understand that the recording of the proceedings is
22 functioning well. It's just the public broadcast, which as such is not a
23 reason to suspend the proceedings at this moment, because the recorded
24 hearing can be made available at a later stage to the public.
25 Mr. Zivanovic, before we continue, I would like to remind you that
1 you're still bound by the solemn declaration you've given at the beginning
2 of your testimony.
3 THE WITNESS: [No verbal response]
4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Re, are you ready to continue your
6 MR. RE: Yes, I am.
7 The thing I -- there were two things I wished to mention first.
8 One was at 9280 last Thursday, the 11th, I mentioned annexes 52, 57, 58,
9 60, 62, 75, and 88. They were all disclosed to the Defence on the 13th of
10 February this year being attached to the witness's statement which were
11 provided to them on that day.
12 The second thing is I've asked -- we've asked the registrar to
13 give a -- an MFI number to the index to the annexes, which I've circulated
14 around, so that could possibly be tendered as an aide-memoire.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar, that would be MFI ...
16 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that would be MFI P1102.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. This is not evidence as such but just to assist
19 Mr. Guy-Smith.
20 MR. GUY-SMITH: Yes. I don't know whether this is an appropriate
21 time to -- to argue matters of disclosure. I think not. I think, once
22 again, they're -- the Prosecution's emphasis is misplaced between the
23 issue of disclosure and the identifying of those exhibits and documents
24 that they intend to put on their 65 ter list and intend to have as
25 evidence as forms the basis of their case.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I understood what Mr. Re just said just as an
2 announcement of the days on which these documents were disclosed and not
3 to --
4 MR. RE: That's all, yes.
5 JUDGE ORIE: -- to fully cover all the issues in relation to
6 these documents.
7 Mr. Re, please proceed.
8 WITNESS: DRAGAN ZIVANOVIC [Resumed]
9 [Witness answered through interpreter]
10 Examination by Mr. Re: [Continued]
11 Q. Good afternoon again, Mr. Zivanovic. You may recall on Thursday
12 afternoon we sent you away with some maps to mark on them. Have you been
13 able to do that over the weekend?
14 A. Good afternoon. Yes, I've done my homework; although, I seem to
15 already have forgotten how this is done.
16 MR. RE: Could perhaps I just have a look at these, just to see
17 whether they need to be on the screen or not.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
19 MR. RE: I -- I safely think we can rely upon these with an
20 explanation from the witness and tender these into evidence. I think it
21 would take too long to replicate it on the screen.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Perhaps they can put -- be put on the ELMO.
23 Would that assist?
24 MR. RE: Yes.
25 JUDGE ORIE: And then I suggest that later on they be uploaded in
1 the e-court system that so that we have the -- the whole of the document
2 available in electronic format as well.
3 MR. RE:
4 Q. The first one I -- I'm going to ask you about is in relation to
5 the August offensive and which you refer to in your -- in your statement
6 at paragraphs 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, and 103.
7 And at paragraph 102 -- if that could just be briefly displayed in
8 Sanction for a moment. You say that: "The combat group 3 assisted the
9 MUP in taking Prilep from the KLA. You were present -- I'm sorry, I was
10 present in Prilep with my units directing and controlling them and
11 approving the decisions of the group commander. The MUP forces could not
12 enter the village for two days because of resistance from the KLA and
13 sought back-up assistance from a combat unit of the 15th Armoured Brigade,
14 which entered behind the MUP units but through a different route."
15 What we're interested in is the respective positions of the MUP
16 and VJ and the KLA in that particular offensive. Have you marked those on
17 that map which is now on the screen, or the ELMO?
18 And can the ELMO please be displayed.
19 A. Yes. That is marked on the map in blue, and this is the
20 disposition of the Siptar terrorist forces here.
21 In green I've marked the MUP forces. As you can see it in the
22 key here.
23 Red stands for the forces of the VJ supporting the MUP forces.
24 Q. What was the -- in geographical terms, where did the VJ get to?
25 What's the furthest point they got to?
1 A. As you can see, I mentioned here the dates 11 through the 13th,
2 when these units I was superior to were active, and this combat group
3 reached Rznic. It did not advance any further, as far as my unit is
4 concerned. The MUP --
5 Q. Just a second. Just to pause there. The date the -- the date was
6 11th to 13th August, 1998; correct?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. And the combat group you're referring to, is that the 3rd? That's
10 A. Yes. Yes.
11 Q. All right. Now, you were about to go to the MUP. Please explain.
12 A. I don't understand your question. I didn't hear the
13 interpretation that well. Sorry.
14 Q. You said, "I did not -- sorry, it -- that's combat group 3, did
15 not advance any further as far as my unit is concerned." Then you said
16 "the MUP," and I interrupted you. And please tell the Trial Chamber
17 where the MUP went.
18 A. The ultimate objective was to enter the village of Glodjane and to
19 search the area. The MUP entered the village of Glodjane and searched the
21 Q. Can you see the Lake Radonjic canal area on that map? That's
22 between Donji Ratis and the tip of the lake or the northern tip of the
24 A. Yes, I see the canal. Neither I nor my units reached that area.
25 It was the MUP that went there.
1 MR. EMMERSON: Yes --
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson.
3 MR. EMMERSON: I'm sorry to rise to my feet, but I think that
4 Mr. Re may have inadvertently misled the witness both by the question and
5 by the witness's pointer.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
7 MR. EMMERSON: Our understanding is that the canal area is not the
8 area that the witness then pointed to, nor the location that Mr. Re
9 directed his attention to.
10 JUDGE ORIE: You say that the canal is longer than indicated by
11 Mr. Re. It goes up to the --
12 MR. EMMERSON: Not -- not simply that, but --
13 MR. RE: I apologise. I was -- I was looking on the screen. That
14 was the problem.
15 MR. EMMERSON: Yes.
16 MR. RE: It's not Donji Ratis. I apologise. It's where it's
17 marked "ZZ" and the -- and Stanka, that area.
18 JUDGE ORIE: I think the witness now pointed at where the parties
19 would agree is the canal area.
20 Yes, please proceed.
21 MR. RE:
22 Q. Is your answer the same, that your -- your units did not go down
24 A. Yes., it's the same. I was present here in the canal area but in
25 the vicinity of the village of Rznic. I merely observed the canal area
1 from a distance to see what it was like. I didn't go there.
2 Q. What about the concrete canal area? Are you aware of the area
3 where the bodies were found?
4 A. No.
5 Q. Are you able to say how far from Rznic where the bodies were
7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Re --
8 MR. GUY-SMITH: I don't think --
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Five to six kilometres. But I
10 received the information from the superior command and the mass media. As
11 I told you, I wasn't there on the spot, nor were my units.
12 MR. RE: That -- that does clarify.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. In light of the previous answer that the
14 witness was not aware of the area where the bodies were found, he has now
15 clarified the issue that from what he learned from the sources he
16 mentioned, it would then be five to six kilometres.
17 Please proceed.
18 MR. RE: May that be received into evidence.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Registrar, that --
20 Mr. Emmerson.
21 MR. EMMERSON: I've certainly no objection to that. I wonder if
22 the witness might just be asked to clarify the legend which reads: "2.Od
23 MUP," which he's written along the northern part.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, close to the -- close to the lake where --
25 Your marking says: "2," apparently, "Od MUP," which is the
1 marking closest to where the canal flows into the -- in Lake Radonjic.
2 Could you tell us what that means.
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This means the 2nd MUP Detachment,
4 if I understand the question correctly.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And then further down where it reads "9.Od
6 MUP," is that the 9th MUP Detachment?
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If you're referring to what I'm just
8 pointing at now, yes, that's the 9th MUP Detachment.
9 JUDGE ORIE: May I take it that you would like to know what that
10 exactly means, Mr. Emmerson?
11 MR. EMMERSON: Yes. Precisely which division of the MUP forces
12 that involved.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Could you tell us what -- you've heard the
14 question by Mr. Emmerson.
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] These are special police units and
16 the strength of the detachment is some three to four hundred men,
17 sometimes less.
18 MR. EMMERSON: And finally, when the witness refers to "special
19 police units," obviously we are aware of both the SAJ and the PJP, as well
20 as potentially the JSO. I wonder if he can assist us to which of the
21 special units he's referring to.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Could you tell us?
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] PJP.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
25 Mr. Re, first of all, Mr. Registrar, we need a number for this
1 document, later to be uploaded in e-court, and that would be?
2 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that would be P1103.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
4 Mr. Guy-Smith.
5 MR. GUY-SMITH: I am not confident that the entirety of the
6 markings that are on the map are exhibited on the ELMO. I'm not sure if
7 that's the case or not.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Could we zoom out for a moment so that we see -- it
9 may be that the dates, which I expect to be in the left upper corner --
10 and otherwise, perhaps, Madam Registrar -- Madam Usher, if you would --
11 yes, we see that there's the 11th until the 13th of August, 1998 written
12 on top of the map.
13 Could you move the map in such a way that we can see all the
14 markings. Perhaps you start to the left-hand side.
15 If you'll just move the map in such a way that we go through --
16 yes, that seems to be ... I think nothing further down, markings.
17 Anything further to the right? No, that seems to give a complete picture.
18 MR. GUY-SMITH: My -- my question is -- and perhaps I've missed
19 it, and perhaps if I did: On the left-hand side of the map, there is a --
20 a designation of "10.Od MUP," has that already been identified? Perhaps I
21 missed that one.
22 JUDGE ORIE: No. But I take it that's the 10th Detachment. Would
23 that be also PJP, Mr. Zivanovic?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] All the units mentioned here in
25 green and have to do with the MUP are PJP units.
1 MR. EMMERSON: Sorry to keep --
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Emmerson.
3 MR. EMMERSON: -- bobbing up and down. But since we're dealing
4 with all the indications on this map. The witness has indicated as
5 regards those deployments along the main road of VJ forces that they are
6 forces of BG-3. I wonder if he can confirm whether or not BG-52 is in
7 fact not a part of BG-3 but a part of the 52nd Military Police Battalion.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Could you confirm that, Mr. Zivanovic.
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This marked as "BG-3" is from the
10 125th Motorised Brigade. The other units are from other elements of the
11 Pristina Corps.
12 MR. EMMERSON: I'm so sorry, but specifically BG-52 is marked on
13 the banks of Lake Radoniq. From other evidence, my expectation is that
14 that would be a reference to the 52nd Military Police Battalion. I wonder
15 if the witness could confirm that.
16 JUDGE ORIE: BG-52.
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, that's Combat Group 52 from the
18 Pristina Corps. I don't see how else to regard this.
19 JUDGE ORIE: No, it's -- Mr. Emmerson is just seeking full
20 understanding of your markings.
21 Mr. Re -- oh, Mr. Guy-Smith.
22 MR. GUY-SMITH: I trust that we've dealt with all the markings on
23 the map at this point now.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I take it that we have. That's why I invited
25 Mr. Re to continue.
1 MR. GUY-SMITH: Okay.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Re.
3 MR. RE: I've asked for it to be tendered -- I've asked for it to
4 be tendered.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Oh, yes. And a number has been assigned.
6 And is there any objection against? There's no objection. Then
7 the marked map is admitted into evidence and it was P1103. Yes.
8 Yes, please proceed.
9 MR. RE:
10 Q. The other map you have there, Mr. Zivanovic, does that refer to
11 the offensive described in paragraphs 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136 of
12 your statement?
13 A. Yes, this was in the month of September.
14 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
15 MR. RE: If it could just be displayed in Sanction for one moment,
16 135, so that it could be followed where I'm going, where you say --
17 Q. You issued a combat order on the 8th of September, 1998 to Combat
18 Group 2 to support MUP units in attacks against the KLA in the directions
19 of Prilep-Rznic-Dasinovac-Donja Luka axis to capture Rznic. Combat 3 --
20 Group 3 was ordered to support the MUP units along the Suka-Crmljan-Donji
21 Ratis axis and taking Grgoc village."
22 Could that be -- the map on the ELMO please be displayed.
23 A. Yes, here it is. Combat Group 2, supporting the MUP forces along
24 Rznic, Grdaja, and on to Dasinovac. And this is Combat Group 3, which
25 supports MUP forces along this axis, to Donji Ratis -- or rather, my unit
1 reached the area of Krst Rakovica [as interpreted].
2 Q. And just turning to the legend you have there --
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Re, for the record, the last location mentioned,
4 Krst Rakovica appears on the map just north of the northern tip of Lake
6 Please proceed.
7 MR. RE:
8 Q. The legend there, it's in the bottom right-hand screen. It says
9 "Legenda" -- you've got "STS," I can't read what the other two are.
10 One's blue, red, and green. Is it the same as the legend on the earlier
12 A. It's also a key, and this is trig 509, Krst Rakovica. Perhaps you
13 can't see it on the map.
14 Q. What I'm asking you about is the key to the red, green, and blue
15 positions. Have you used the same colour scheme as you used on the map
16 for August? Blue for the -- blue for the KLA?
17 A. Yes, blue for the KLA; green for the MUP; and red for the VJ.
18 The green arrows indicate the missions, how far the MUP forces
19 were to advance with the support of the VJ. The same type of indication
20 was used in the actual documents.
21 Q. And are the green lines with arrows pointing from them, are they
22 from -- are they the positions from where the VJ units started in the
24 A. Yes, the green lines or semicircles or semi-spheres with an arrow.
25 Behind them were the VJ units. The -- the military was never at the head
1 of the advancing forces. It was always at the back ready to provide
2 support where needed.
3 Q. To clarify too, in the top right-hand corner of what's displayed,
4 it says: "BG-15-2," and there's a -- a red semicircle with an arrow next
5 to -- in between two green lines, indicating MUP, with "5.Od," what's that
6 one referring to?
7 A. This means these were the forces of the 5th Detachment of the PJP
8 supported by the Combat Group 2 of the 215th Brigade of the Pristina
10 Q. And on the bottom right, to the left of the legend, near -- I
11 think it says "Rakovina," there's a red line between a green arrow and a
12 green one pointing towards two blue half circles just in the area of
13 Maznice. Which unit was that?
14 A. I'm not sure what you're referring to. Rakovina?
15 Q. Yeah, just where you are. Just there.
16 A. No, no, this is a key which says what this line means: "VJ
17 forces." That's part of the key of the legend.
18 Q. Oh, I see. I see.
19 Can you go to the left, please, to the left of the lake, and near
20 Gramocelj there's a red line underneath two green ones. I can't read
21 which unit you've placed there. Can you please tell us which one that is.
22 A. I should have had a black marker. I had a ball-point pen. This
23 is BG-243-1, which means the combat group of the 243rd Mechanised Brigade.
24 Q. And on the main road above "Rastavica", to the left of this
25 diagram, just above the road to Prilep, there's another red line with two
1 green lines. Which unit is that?
2 A. The green lines indicate the 1st MUP Detachment or the 1st PJP
3 Detachment; whereas, the red line stands for the combat group number 2 of
4 the 125th Motorised Brigade.
5 Q. How far did that particular unit go in those combat operations
6 described on -- on this map?
7 A. Do you mean the 125-2?
8 Q. Yes.
9 A. It came out to this line, which stands for the canal going on to
10 Lake Radonjic. It did not go any further toward Dasinovac.
11 Q. And the blue lines, semicircular with little hatches on the top of
12 them like crowns, like the one near Ljumbarda, what do they indicate?
13 A. These are detected positions of the Siptar terrorist forces that
14 were fortified with shelters and an artillery system. This marking with
15 an arrow stands for Papracane, where there was a barracks. And we had
16 information that around 200 terrorists were present there who could
17 intervene toward our left flank. This stands for "HQ," headquarters. We
18 believe that there was a headquarters at Papracane and in the village of
20 Q. What about the one which is just to the left, lower left of
21 Papracane. There's another one there, just above "Crnobreg." Which one
22 does that refer to? I think it's just above "Beleg."
23 A. Is this what you're referring to?
24 Q. Yes.
25 A. This is also a defence system that was set up by the Siptar
1 terrorist forces.
2 Q. Can -- perhaps could we just scroll across the top to see whether
3 there are any other markings on this document.
4 You've marked it "8th to the 9th of September, 1998." Can you
5 please just scroll to the left and right. Okay. Now the other way. And
6 up. Okay.
7 MR. GUY-SMITH: For purposes of clarification, in -- in both of
8 the places where there is marking in red, there is on the red line both a
9 square with a line and one of them has a diamond on it. Could we
10 understand what that means. I think it might mean "motorised brigade."
11 It might signify that. But I'm not sure.
12 That would be up on the upper right-hand side near the Bandera,
13 between those green lines. There is a box and a diamond shape in red.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Do you see that, Mr. Zivanovic? Just north-east of
15 the other "Glodjane" there's this red line with a box and with a
16 diamond-type of ... Could you tell us what that means.
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Yes, I will tell you. This
18 means -- well, this diamond here means that this is a tank unit. And this
19 part here means that it's a mechanised unit.
20 And now, tank. I assume that you all know what a tank is. It is
21 an armoured carrier, an APC, or a combat vehicle of the infantry. There
22 are no other markings, not in this case.
23 In this particular case, they all had something. Where there is
24 nothing else, it means that it is pure infantry.
25 MR. RE: May that be received into evidence too, please.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. -- yes, first there seem to be some questions
2 before we move on.
3 MR. EMMERSON: Certainly no objection to it being received into
5 I noticed that to the left or west side of the lake and
6 immediately to the left of that -- of Donji Bites, the witness has marked
7 the letters "SAJ." I'm assuming that that refers to the specialist
8 anti-terrorist police group, the SAJ. What's not clear to me is whether
9 that annotation relates only to the green line immediately above it or to
10 any other of the formations that have been drawn in green, as distinct
11 from PJP formations.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Zivanovic; you've heard the question. Could you
13 please answer it.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, this part here is -- I mean,
15 both pertain to the special anti-terrorist units, as Mr. Emmerson said
16 just now.
17 JUDGE ORIE: So that refers to the green bended lines, both just
18 above "Gramocelj" and a little bit east of that, where "SAJ" is written.
19 Mr. Harvey.
20 MR. HARVEY: And are we therefore to assume that all of the other
21 green O-shaped lines refer to PJP?
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. But I would kindly ask you to
23 follow this.
24 See, this is what the task of this unit was. See? That is one
25 task, one assignment. And it involved these two green lines within the
1 accomplishment of this assignment.
2 See the rest? The arrows. All of it is drawn exactly what was
3 supposed to be done by these two green lines, conditionally speaking. In
4 these particular cases, it is the SAJ.
5 And up here it is the PJP. Wherever it says "MUP Detachment," it
6 is a PJP.
7 JUDGE ORIE: When the witness referred to the arrows, he was
8 referring to the five open arrows just north of the two bended green
9 lines, SAJ.
10 Mr. Re.
11 MR. RE:
12 Q. And do the green arrows indicate the direction or the task that
13 these units had?
14 A. That's right.
15 MR. RE: Could that receive an exhibit number.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Registrar.
17 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that becomes P1104.
18 JUDGE ORIE: If there are no objections, then P1104 is admitted
19 into evidence.
20 MR. RE:
21 Q. The other document I wish to show you is 65 ter 1215, which is the
22 overhead satellite map of the Dukagjini area, including Lake Glodjane --
23 sorry, Lake Radonjic.
24 I just want to ask you: In general term, as a experienced
25 military officer involved in the conflict there in 1998, and looking at
1 the -- this map showing the geographical layout, to describe where the
2 advantages lay to either side from the -- in the terrain, that is,
3 including the populated areas, the mountainous areas, and the flatter
4 areas, and the lake.
5 A. At any rate, the area that can be seen here, the satellite image,
6 that is, it is my conclusion that it's the terrorists that prevailed,
7 because they are on edges of the built-up areas, the settlements, and it
8 is very hard to approach these areas without being very noticeable or
9 without coming across some natural or manmade obstacles, perhaps.
10 MR. RE: Could we get a pen and the witness mark on that the areas
11 where the terrorists had the -- or the advantage or prevailed, and the
12 areas where the military would have had the advantage.
13 Mark in -- before you mark, I want to use different colours. And
14 if you could use blue for terrorists.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson.
16 MR. EMMERSON: I'm entirely in the Trial Chamber's hands as
17 whether the questions and answers as framed are of any assistance. For my
18 part, reviewing the record, the questions and answers put in that very
19 general fashion, without time frame, without specifics, without events but
20 simply as an overall assessment of the topography, are difficult to
21 interpret and apply and of relatively limited usefulness. But it may be
22 that -- I simply raise it at this stage so that if -- if an answer of
23 clarity is sought, that the opportunity is there to seek it.
24 MR. RE: Colonel Crosland gave a lot of evidence about terrorist
25 and counter-terrorist actions and what the MUP were doing and what they
1 should have been doing the way that, for example, control units were -- or
2 check-points were placed on the roads, and so on, and the advantages that
3 one had side had against another. I'm simply asking this witness in
4 general terms and given -- given the time limitations, just to describe in
5 general time -- in general terms in that period, because the geography
6 doesn't change, as to where the natural advantages lay with one side or
7 the other. That's as far as I take it.
8 If I wished to do it, it would take a long time doing it plotting
9 it month by month. I simply can't do that.
10 JUDGE ORIE: I do understand. At the same time, you also will
11 understand that if it's done in a rather general way that, of course, it's
12 more difficult to use that -- the answers for any conclusions.
13 Let me just see ...
14 Yes. You are mainly referring to the geographical features that
15 would favour one or the other party. Yes.
16 MR. RE: Including -- including human -- sorry, including urban
17 geography and physical geography.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The witness may answer the question.
19 If you can do so. I take it that since the geography and since
20 the populated areas did not -- although there may have been some
21 movements, but there were villages, there were towns, that you take that
22 into consideration for the whole of the period you were present.
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] May I? I don't know what colour is
24 active now. I need blue, please.
25 MR. RE:
1 Q. Blue is active.
2 A. I'll try. Yes, it is blue. Right. Thank you.
3 Let me put a circle here, roughly what the advantage of the
4 terrorists is. At this point in time, this is it. It's this part.
5 Why? Because of the forest there in part. Then there's a
6 settlement. Then also it is above the terrain that one crosses when
7 approaching the area.
8 And could I have red now, please. Is it there? Red?
9 Now, what is suitable for the army in this case? This -- this
10 part here and this other part, towards Erecka Suka. All the rest is not
11 exactly amenable as far as the army is concerned or, rather, the MUP.
12 That is what I have to say in response to this question.
13 Q. Unless any further clarification is sought by my colleagues on the
14 other side of the courtroom or by the Trial Chamber, I just ask that this
15 be tendered into evidence.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar, that would be number?
17 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that would be P1105.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
19 Please proceed, Mr. Re.
20 Then that's the number. No further clarifications. Any
21 objections against admission? I see nodding "no" three times.
22 Therefore -- therefore P1105 is admitted into evidence.
23 Please proceed.
24 MR. RE: That's my examination-in-chief.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Re.
1 MR. EMMERSON: Your Honour, I'm going to ask, if I may, for the
2 Trial Chamber to take the break a little earlier than normal. I can make
3 a start, but I would like to have an opportunity to briefly consult with
4 my client --
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
6 MR. EMMERSON: -- in the break on the evidence that has just been
7 given, in particular the maps.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Now, I have received a request to have the break at
9 3.30 in order to fix the broadcast issue. But may I take it that an
10 earlier break would not be a problem? So I take it that rather not later
11 than 3.30.
12 Yes, that's well understood.
13 Mr. Emmerson, we can have a break if not later than 3.30.
14 MR. EMMERSON: Yes. Thank you very much.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
16 You'll now be cross-examined by Mr. Emmerson, who's counsel for
17 Mr. Haradinaj.
18 Mr. Emmerson, please proceed.
19 Cross-examination by Mr. Emmerson:
20 Q. Mr. Zivanovic, I just want to start, if I may, by understanding
21 the testimony that you have given about the constitutional responsibility
22 of the VJ and how that changed over the first half of 1998.
23 You told us in your testimony last week that initially - and I'm
24 looking here at page 9293, for those who are following - that initially
25 under the Constitution it was the responsibility of the VJ to guard the
1 border, including a 100-metre belt along the border, and that everything
2 else was within the jurisdiction of the MUP. Is that correct?
3 A. Yes, up to the month of May.
4 Q. Yes. And then if we move to the month of May. And I am reading
5 here from your 92 ter statement at paragraph 68. You say that in -- in
6 May 1998, the Assembly of the FRY passed a law giving the military control
7 over the area south of the Rozaj to Pec to Decani to Gjakova to Prizren to
8 Dragash road and extending up to the border. You say it was approximately
9 a 5-kilometre strip -- I apologise, a 5-kilometre belt or strip to the
10 border. And I just want to understand that.
11 First of all, do you remember now whether this occurred at the
12 beginning of May, the middle of May, or the end of May, or roughly when in
13 May it was that your constitutional responsibility expanded from 100
14 metres to the 5-kilometre belt you described?
15 A. I think it was the second half of May. I don't know the exact
17 Q. When we look at the maps you've been marking and focusing in on
18 the main Peja to Gjakova road in particular. As it appears on the map,
19 we're speaking about the area to the west of that main road; is that
20 correct? Between the main road and the border.
21 A. That's right.
22 Q. Okay. So until that point in time, in the second half of May,
23 your area of -- was 100 metres. Then from the second half of May, it
24 became a 5-kilometre strip to the west of the main road. Correct?
25 A. That's right.
1 Q. And then you told us in your testimony last Thursday that in June
2 the Supreme Defence Council authorised the VJ to become involved in
3 anti- terrorist activities. This is page 9310 to 9312. And in
4 particular, in answer to a question from Judge Orie, you said that:
5 "Although no state of emergency had been declared, that from June 1998
6 the units of the VJ could be deployed to support the MUP forces in the
7 anti-terrorism struggle," in your words.
8 Is that correctly understood?
9 A. That is correct. The Supreme Defence Council -- it's not that
10 they approved it. They made a decision to use the army in support of MUP
12 Q. And, again, can you help us as to when in June that occurred?
13 A. The end of June. I don't know the exact date.
14 Q. Thank you. Thank you for that basic instruction. I'm going to
15 look in -- in some more detail with you at some of the deployments that
16 occurred in that first half of the year and ask you to explain how they
17 fit in with that framework, if I may.
18 But, first of all, can I ask that you be handed out copies of a --
19 of a binder of documents which are going to be used in the course of
20 cross-examination. Some of them, so that you understand, are documents
21 that are already exhibits to your 92 ter statement. But for ease of
22 reference, I've gathered them together into a single bundle for the
23 purposes of cross-examination.
24 Could you turn, please -- for the witness, Madam Usher, to tab 3
25 in the bundle. Tab 3 is Exhibit D168, and it is annex 9 to
1 Mr. Zivanovic's 92 ter statement and is the document of the 27th of April,
2 which Mr. Re asked some questions about last week.
3 If you could turn to tab 3, please, and to paragraph 5, where
4 there is a record of the contact that took place between your officials
5 from the 125th and the special unit under the command of Frenki Simatovic
6 that was deployed at around that time to Deqan and Istog.
7 I just want to understand your evidence in relation to this
8 correctly, if I can. You told us last Thursday that this unit was a unit
9 of the JSO. Is that correct?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And you said their task was to find out precisely where the
12 illegal border crossings were in order to enable other forces to prevent
13 those crossings. Is that right?
14 A. Yes, and larger groups, in terms of illegal crossings.
15 Q. So presumably it must follow that if they were going to assist in
16 identifying where crossings were taking place so that other forces could
17 prevent them, there must have been some liaison established between that
18 unit and your unit, whose task it was to prevent those crossings from
19 occurring. Is that correct?
20 A. I am sorry. It's not quite correct, and I did not have any
21 liaison with them and they did not provide for such liaison. We could
22 react within a 100-metre belt and it was only after the 2nd of May that we
23 could react within a 5-kilometre belt.
24 Q. Yes, I understand that. But let me just read to you the testimony
25 you gave last Thursday about this grouping. You said: "Their task at the
1 time, which was late April, May, and June, was to find out exactly where
2 the illegal border crossings were taking place in order for all the other
3 forces to be engaged in preventing these crossings."
4 Now, you've already told us that your primary function was to
5 patrol the border. Correct?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. And to prevent illegal border crossings.
8 A. What we cannot do within 100 metres, then we have the MUP forces
10 Q. I understand that, but you're describing here a task performed by
11 this unit in April, May, and June, at a time when, as you've told us, the
12 VJ's area of responsibility moved from 100 metres to a 5-kilometre belt.
13 And what I'm trying to understand is how would that unit convey to your
14 forces the exact positions where illegal border crossings were taking
15 place and how would your unit then respond in preventing them if there
16 wasn't some form of regular liaison between you?
17 A. Perhaps we are not understanding each other. When I say that they
18 detect them, that means that then they take action as well. And then
19 there's a different matter: If they notice this and if they feel the need
20 to convey that to the military units there, then they would convey that to
21 the ministry and then it would come down the corps communications.
22 Q. So if information was conveyed to the 125th, it was conveyed via
23 the ministry rather than directly between this JSA -- JSO unit and your
24 officials; is that correct?
25 A. Correct. So not through direct contact. Not through the ministry
1 for me. For me it is my corps commander that mattered. He conveyed
2 information to me and members of his command.
3 Q. See, this document which you -- bears your signature,
4 Mr. Zivanovic, it refers to this group as "the so-called Frenkijevci,"
5 which if I've understood correctly, is Frenki's Boys. Is that a correct
7 A. Probably. Up until that time, I didn't even know who and what
8 these Frenkijevci, Frenki's Boys were.
9 Q. Presumably, though, at the time you wrote this report, you'd
10 understood what the term "Frenki's Boys" had come to mean, because you
11 refer to it as "the so-called Frenki's Boys"; is that correct?
12 A. Not necessarily. I found out then that I was supposed to
13 establish communication with Frenki's Boys. Who they were, what they were
14 I found out only later.
15 Q. So having established communication on one occasion, you then cut
16 it off from that point onwards; is that correct?
17 A. No. When I felt it was necessary to communicate with them, then I
18 reported to my corps commander, who enabled this contact. So then I would
19 go there or I would receive a person from that unit.
20 Q. Well, that's what I wanted to be clear about. So you -- you would
21 visit them and they would visit you. Is that right?
22 A. I told you that I followed some of their activities.
23 Q. Well, can I just seek some clarification on that answer as well,
24 because you told us in your evidence last Thursday that you saw them on
25 three occasions in July and August in active combat in the Drenice region
1 on three separate days. Is that right?
2 A. Not in July and August all three times. In Drenica, near the
3 Devic monastery, for the most part. And then once from Decani to Voksek
4 along the road of the Decani brook towards the border.
5 Q. When Mr. Re in your in evidence chief last Thursday showed you a
6 document dated the 8th of August which referred to the Brazil Group and
7 their involvement in a wedging and burning operation, what was the
8 relationship, if any, as you understood it, between the Brazil Group and
9 the JSO based at Deqani and Istog?
10 A. I cannot give you an exact answer with regard to that. Actually,
11 I can tell you that the JSO did not work -- I mean, they just coordinated
12 things, but I don't know who they got their tasks from.
13 Q. But the Brazil Group that you referred to in the document on the
14 8th of August, the Brazil Group is part of the JSO, isn't it?
15 A. No. That's a special anti-terrorist unit of the MUP. I already
16 said that, a special anti-terrorist group. SAJ.
17 Q. So just look behind tab 2 in this volume, at that document of the
18 8th of August, just before we break. Mr. Re took you on Thursday to the
19 entry that refers under paragraph 1.2 to the Brazil Group carrying out
20 deep-wedging and burning operations.
21 Could I ask you, please, to look at the very last three lines of
22 the document under tab -- under paragraph 4. This is D165 we're referring
23 to, for the sake of the record. And in the English translation it reads:
24 "Troops in PJP units, particularly the 3rd and 7th PJP Detachments, are
25 not well trained, while JSO, particularly the Brazil Group, are very well
1 trained for conducts of all b/d, particularly to protect our b/v," combat
3 You refer, don't you, Mr. Zivanovic, in this very document to the
4 fact that the Brazil group are a constituent part of the JSO?
5 A. This "O" was probably added, but it's special units. You know,
6 sometimes mistakes are made in the Morse code when one uses that form of
8 Q. I see. So where -- just to be absolutely -- does the original say
9 "JSO"? Could you just read, please, the last three lines of the original
10 document for us from the word "dok su." Could you read it aloud for us so
11 that we can have a translation, please.
12 A. I am sorry. I'm just trying to find the context. I'm trying to
13 find the section that you've referred me to. It's at the very end, you
15 "One of the main problems is the cooperation between the MUP and
16 our combat vehicles, because members of the MUP are not trained for acting
17 in concert with combat vehicles and also there is fear from possible
18 consequences. In the case of PJPs, especially the 3rd and 7th Detachment
19 of the PJP, the manpower haven't been trained properly, while the units of
20 the JSO, especially Brazil Group, are very well trained for carrying out
21 all combat activity, especially in protecting our combat vehicles."
22 I am telling you the Brazil is SAJ.
23 Q. I see.
24 MR. EMMERSON: Yes. Would that be a convenient moment?
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I said yes, that's a convenient moment.
1 Before we have a break, Mr. Zivanovic, there was some other
2 homework we invited you to do, that is, to re-draft the wedging and
3 burning operations with colours. I don't know whether you managed to do
5 You may have forgotten about it. It was not as explicit as ...
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I am sorry, but you weren't very
7 specific or unequivocal when giving me that task.
8 I did do something, and I hope that will be right.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. If you'd give it to Madam Usher, then the
10 parties will have a look at it and see whether it assists.
11 We'll have a break until 4.00.
12 --- Recess taken at 3.32 p.m.
13 --- On resuming at 4.04 p.m.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson, please proceed.
15 MR. EMMERSON:
16 Q. Mr. Zivanovic, I want to come back just to an answer you gave
17 shortly before the break. When you said in relation to this JSO
18 contingent stationed near Deqani, you said: "When I felt it was necessary
19 to communicate with them, then I reported to my corps commander, who
20 enabled this contact. So then I would go there or I would receive a
21 person from that unit."
22 Can I ask you, please: Between the 27th of April and the middle
23 of the year, how frequent were those contacts?
24 A. If you're referring to the middle of the year, end of June, then
25 there were two contacts.
1 Q. And who did you understand, then, to be in command of that
2 detachment of JSO officers in Deqan?
3 A. I will give you his name. He was Colonel Rajo Bozovic, a colonel
4 in the police.
5 Q. Thank you. You say "a colonel in the police." Do you mean a
6 colonel in the regular MUP forces?
7 A. Well, I don't really understand this division between State
8 Security and the police that well. To me that's all Ministry of the
10 Q. Thank you. Now, the -- the British military attache to Belgrade,
11 Colonel Crosland, is that a gentleman that you came across from time to
13 A. Unfortunately, no.
14 Q. He has testified in this case and has produced a number of his
15 daily situation reports. Now, I don't call them up at this stage, but in
16 a report dated the 1st of June - that is, for the record, Exhibit P96 - he
17 records the VJ barracks in Pec, as, to use his words "brimming with MUP,"
18 and saying that as he passed the barracks in Pec, he saw a JSO camouflaged
19 communication vehicle inside the VJ barracks and a MUP helicopter. Can
20 you help us about that? Were there contacts, then, with JSO communication
21 vehicles attending the Pec barracks at the beginning of June?
22 A. It's a bit arbitrary to say that the barracks were brimming with
23 MUP. It's true that in Kosovo in every barracks there was a building set
24 aside for the police. The helicopter or a military helicopter could only
25 land in a clearing, where normally the units fall in line.
1 As for the communications, I can't really say that with any
2 certainty. Normally where there are barracks, then the communication that
3 is provided is wire communication.
4 Q. Yes. Just to be clear, it -- the record is of a JSO camouflaged
5 communications vehicle being located within the VJ barracks in Pec. Can
6 you comment on that at all?
7 A. I can. I don't know what "camouflaged" means. We are in the
8 military also had camouflaged vehicles.
9 Q. Yes. So, again, to be clear, were there visits by JSO at the
10 beginning of June to your barracks, so far as you recall?
11 A. No.
12 Q. I see. He also has filed or filed a report on the 13th of July,
13 which again, for the record, is D76, in which he describes 150 JSO driving
14 around Pec and seeing JSO officers openly drinking close to the VJ
16 Do you -- do you recall seeing the presence of JSO officers
17 driving openly around Pec in the middle of July?
18 A. I can't claim that with any certainty. Whether they were the JSO,
19 PJP, or SAJ, they had similar uniforms.
20 Q. Did you notice amongst the MUP officers evidence of them drinking
21 alcohol close to barracks?
22 A. I can't say that with any certainty. I wasn't dealing with these
24 Q. Can you tell us, please, who to your knowledge is Milorad Ulemek,
25 also known as Milorad Lukovic, also known as Legija?
1 A. Yes, I can. Is it important?
2 Q. Please. If you could just explain to us what his role was, as far
3 as you understood it, in Western Kosovo in 1998.
4 A. I can tell you that he was the commander of the unit for special
5 operations. But what his role was is a question you should put to
6 somebody from State Security when they come to testify here. I am not
7 familiar with that.
8 Q. I see. We'll come to that in a moment. But when you say "the
9 unit for special operations," here, are you referring to the JSO or the
11 A. JSO.
12 Q. Thank you. Could you look behind tab 7, please, for a moment.
13 This is a translation, first in B/C/S and then in English, of a letter
14 written by Colonel General Perisic to Mr. Milosevic on the 23rd of July.
15 And I just want to ask you about whether you can shed any light on two
16 passages in this letter.
17 First of all, if you could find point 3(a), that is 3, little (a),
19 The English translation reads as follows: "Constant aspirations
20 by members of the MUP to have some VJ units subordinated to them leads to
21 misunderstandings if the units are not given, and if they are given, this
22 represents unauthorised and unprofessional use which has counter-effects,
23 the best examples being Decani and Orahovac."
24 Now, pausing there for a moment. Deqani on the 23rd of July was
25 within your area of responsibility, was it not?
1 A. Yes, this was a peacetime area which entailed quite some other
3 Q. Yes. Well, can you help us, please. Do you know what Colonel
4 General Perisic is referring to there when he says that "there have been
5 attempts by the MUP to have VJ units subordinated to them" in July or by
7 A. I don't know exactly. I know that I was never given an assignment
8 to re-subordinate a unit to the MUP, nor did I give -- nor was I given an
9 assignment the other way around, for a MUP unit to be re-subordinated to
10 me. There was the planning of coordinated action; whereas, commanding was
11 always a separate matter. There was the commanding over the MUP and over
12 the VJ.
13 Q. I think -- I think we probably all understand the difference
14 between coordination and subordination. But this letter is referring
15 quite specifically to subordination of VJ units to the MUP and gives an
16 example of a situation in which VJ units have been given which you --
17 represents unauthorised and unprofessional use which has counter-effects,
18 and the best examples of that include Deqani. Can you help us, please,
19 from your recollections as to what General Colonel Perisic might have been
20 referring to as "unauthorised unprofessional use with counter-effects in
21 Decani" of the subordination of VJ units to the MUP.
22 A. I can't help you there. I've been thinking about it now, and I
23 did not have such a case involving my units. I can't tell you what
24 Perisic had in mind when thus referring to Decani.
25 Q. Were you at this stage reporting to Perisic?
1 A. At the time, Perisic was the Chief of the General Staff of the
2 Army of Yugoslavia. In case he called me directly, I would have the
3 obligation to execute the order, but this did not happen.
4 Q. We've heard testimony from Colonel Crosland that on the 28th of
5 July - so five days after this letter was written - he came across a joint
6 strike force poised to launch a strike on Malisevo, which included VJ,
7 JSO, and PJP officers, all of them commanded by Milorad Ulemek or Legija.
8 Can you help us with that at all? Was there an occasion at the end of
9 July where you subordinated forces to Milorad Ulemek as the overcall
11 A. No, never. Malisevo is not in my area and I can't tell you
12 anything about Malisevo.
13 Q. We'll come to your deployments in that area a little later on.
14 For the record, it's 3048 to 3050 and 3094 in the testimony of
15 Colonel Crosland?
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Emmerson, should this document which --
17 MR. EMMERSON: Yes, please.
18 JUDGE ORIE: -- and according to your list has not yet been
20 MR. EMMERSON: Could it be MFI'd. It's Defence document
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
23 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours that will be marked for
24 identification as D179.
25 JUDGE ORIE: One additional question, Mr. Emmerson, if you would
1 allow me. You -- I'm not a native speaker.
2 MR. EMMERSON: Whenever Your Honour says that, I generally find
3 that I'm the one who's in the wrong, so ...
4 JUDGE ORIE: Well, let's not anticipate on how you learn -- how to
5 understand the English language.
6 Mr. Emmerson, when I read 3(a) --
7 MR. EMMERSON: Yes.
8 JUDGE ORIE: -- and it seems in your line of questioning you
9 interpreted that in a very special way. It says "constant aspirations by
10 members of the MUP to have some VJ units subordinated to them leads, A, to
11 misunderstandings if the units are not given.
12 MR. EMMERSON: Yes.
13 JUDGE ORIE: And if they are given, it leads to unauthorised and
14 unprofessional use which has counter-effects. And it said the best
15 examples, in the plural, being this and this. So there are two options;
16 either you give it or you don't give it. So one of the examples
17 exclusively referred to the second option is linguistically not clear for
19 MR. EMMERSON: Well, I take Your Honour's point. And on this
20 particular occasion - and it may be a matter of linguistics - but on this
21 particular occasion, certainly as -- as I read it naturally, if the
22 examples intended -- were intended to be examples of a situation in which
23 units were not given, they would appear after the first comma rather than
24 after the second.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Or examples of both situations. For example, Decani,
1 for the one situation, or Orahovac for the other one. But I just -- I
2 just wondered whether my -- whether that is a reading which for linguistic
3 reasons should be excluded, because you ignored it more or less in the
5 MR. EMMERSON: Well, I take Your Honour's point.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Guy-Smith.
7 MR. GUY-SMITH: I believe that the comma qualifies the second --
8 would qualify the second phrase.
9 JUDGE ORIE: That's the issue, yes. That's the issue, yes.
10 MR. EMMERSON: I can -- it is a matter of, I think, from my point
11 of view, the natural reading of the sentence. But I take Your Honour's
12 point, but it's a translation in any event, so --
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that's another problem. But --
14 MR. EMMERSON: Exactly.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Although, I certainly do not exclude that your
16 reading of it would be right or -- but I'm just --
17 MR. EMMERSON: I understand.
18 JUDGE ORIE: -- ask myself whether it could be excluded to read
19 it another way.
20 MR. EMMERSON: I understand.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
22 MR. EMMERSON: Let me just see if I can just cover both options.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
24 MR. EMMERSON:
25 Q. Was there an occasion, Mr. Zivanovic, when you were asked to
1 subordinate VJ forces to the MUP but refused to do so?
2 A. No. Such a request or order was never given to me by the corps
4 Q. Colonel Crosland has also testified that he --
5 JUDGE ORIE: Again, this answer is not unambiguous. You said
6 never an order was given to you by the corps commander. The question is
7 whether anyone ever tried to achieve a situation in which VJ units would
8 be subordinated to MUP units. So apart from what the corps commander told
9 you or did not tell you to do, was there any attempt in that direction as
10 far as you know? By whomever.
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] What I know is that there were no
12 such demands or attempts to influence my position. And I am not allowed
13 to do anything without the approval of the corps commander.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Emmerson.
15 MR. EMMERSON:
16 Q. Colonel Crosland has also testified that on a number of occasions
17 in Western Kosovo during 1998 he saw VJ vehicles that had been re-painted
18 so as their -- to appear blue and re-allocated to the MUP. Can you help
19 us with that? Were there occasions within your brigade when VJ equipment
20 was painted blue and provided to the MUP so as to appear to be part of an
21 anti-terrorist operation, rather than a military operation?
22 A. I can help you further with this matter in this way: The Pristina
23 Corps did not give its assets to the MUP to use them. This was done at
24 the state level in Belgrade.
25 Q. So would it be the position, then, that there would be VJ
1 equipment painted blue but that would have been authorised from Belgrade
2 rather than at the level of your command? Is that the position?
3 A. If you have a truck painted in blue, then this is an asset of the
4 MUP, regardless of whether it was also used by the VJ. It is true,
5 admittedly, that the VJ gave some of its -- some of its assets, but it was
6 decided in Belgrade and then went down the line.
7 Q. Whilst we are on this document and lines of command, if we look,
8 please, to paragraph 4 - correct me if I'm wrong - but there is what
9 appears to be a complaint by General Perisic that President Milosevic is
10 bypassing the chain of command within the VJ.
11 It reads as follows: "Passing over command levels in official
12 conversations with VJ members; according to VJ Service regulations,
13 you" -- that is, President Milosevic -- "have the right to conduct
14 official conversations with all members of the VJ. However, you sometimes
15 do this without the knowledge of the Chief of the General Staff, which is
16 contrary to military subordination and unity of command. Violation of
17 these principles leads to the break-up of the unity of the VJ."
18 Now, pausing there for a moment. Colonel Crosland has testified
19 in this court that he had conversations with General Perisic and with
20 General Dimitrijevic at around this time in which they told him that they
21 were being cut out of the chain of command because they disagreed with
22 what had been happening over the summer in Kosovo and were not prepared to
23 go along with the use of VJ forces in operations that involved the
24 disproportionate destruction of civilian property. This is transcript
25 3062, line 15 and following.
1 And Colonel Crosland testified that General Perisic and
2 General Dimitrijevic told him that there was a direct line of command
3 being established between Major General Pavkovic and Mr. Milosevic which
4 excluded them and excluded General Perisic as Chief of the General Staff.
5 Now, can you help us, were you aware that General Perisic was
6 expressing concerns that he was being bypassed in the chain of command?
7 A. No, I was not aware of that, because I was in the territory of
8 Kosovo and Metohija. As far as I'm able to see, this is correspondence
9 between the President and the Chief of the General Staff.
10 Q. I want to ask you, if I can, please, to help us just to identify
11 some vehicles, and I want to play you a short piece of film, the
12 transcript for which is behind tab 30(b). And this piece of film shows
13 the MUP operation in the aftermath of events in Prekaze on the 5th of
15 What I want to do is just to let you know what you're going to see
16 is to look at the vehicles that are shown in this piece of film and help
17 us, if you can, to identify them. And so that you understand what to
18 expect, you will see an armoured vehicle involved in the destruction of a
19 house, followed by a shot of two other pieces of heavy equipment. And I
20 want you just to help us, if you can, to identify them.
21 [Videotape played]
22 MR. EMMERSON: I think we have a technical difficulty with the
24 JUDGE ORIE: I hear some text spoken. I do not see any image.
25 And could I also ask our interpreters to follow the usual, that if
1 there's any -- if it goes too quickly to translate into French, that one
2 reads the transcript.
3 Are the booths provided with the transcript?
4 MR. EMMERSON: Yes. If --
5 JUDGE ORIE: And that the other interpreter, even if a little bit
6 behind from that transcript, translate.
7 MR. EMMERSON: That's tab 30(b) for the assistance of the booth.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And 30(b) is not yet --
9 MR. EMMERSON: It is not yet marked for identification.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Could we first mark 30(b) for identification.
11 Mr. Registrar, that would be.
12 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that would be document ID 1D36-0019.
13 And it will be marked for identification as D180.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
15 Let's hope that we get the images of the BBC News as well.
16 [Videotape played]
17 THE NARRATOR: The Serbs say their security operation is over but
18 for the Albanians in Drenice the terror continues. The Security forces
19 claim to have destroyed the core of the outlawed Kosovo Liberation Army,
20 killing the group's leader and these did appear to be mopping-up
21 operations. The homes of suspected KLA members are burned or bulldozed by
22 armoured vehicles as both a punishment and a warning to the rest of the
23 village. The Serbs say they are fighting terrorism but there is no
24 military necessity for this. Scenes like these will bring more
25 international condemnation of Belgrade.
1 The only way into these villages is across country through the
2 Serbian lines. Our cameraman was fired on. He was hit. A mobile phone
3 and a money clip probably saved his life. Many of the villages in Drenice
4 are deserted. People have obviously left in a hurry. It's not clear if
5 they fled or were forced out, but the main ethnic Albanian political party
6 has accused the Serbs of carrying out a new campaign of ethnic cleansing.
7 Refugees are still leaving the area. Many families have been forced to
8 spend the night in the hills.
9 "We have to run away," she says. "It's war here. People are
10 being killed, even children, and nobody does anything."
11 The Kosovo Liberation Army says its members living abroad are
12 returning here to join the struggle against the Serbs. There have also
13 been expressions of sympathy from Albania itself and from ethnic Albanians
14 in neighbouring Macedonia. This highlights what Western governments fear
15 most, that continuing violence in Kosovo could destabilise the whole
17 Paul Wood, BBC news, Drenice, Central Kosovo.
18 MR. EMMERSON:
19 Q. Mr. Zivanovic --
20 JUDGE ORIE: No, no, no.
21 MR. EMMERSON: Sorry.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Re.
23 MR. RE: [Microphone not activated] I note that it's received an
24 MFI number. I'm just asking: Is the Defence attempting to tender the
25 transcript which contains an awful lot of opinion by the BBC journalist as
1 truth of the matters therein asserted or as a general commentary on some
2 BBC film footage?
3 MR. EMMERSON: Well, at the moment I'm tendering the transcript,
4 because that's the procedure that we've adopted for identifying video
5 material. I'm going to ask the witness some questions about the passage
6 that we've just seen, and in particular, as I indicated before, the
7 vehicles that were involved.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
9 MR. EMMERSON:
10 Q. Mr. Zivanovic, we saw in that piece of film three heavy vehicles,
11 one of which, as we saw, was demolishing a building and two of which were
12 in the field. You can see now a still of the two that are in the field.
13 The top vehicle appears to have Caterpillar tracks. Can you help
14 us as to what those vehicles are?
15 A. Can you make the image a bit better? And I'm actually wondering
16 whether it's a tank or an armoured combat vehicle. Can you zoom in a bit,
18 Q. We can't, I don't think, zoom in on the video. We can play it
19 again so that you can see the vehicles moving, just that short passage.
20 A. Judging by what I can see here, this is an APC, normally carrying
21 nine to ten men.
22 Q. Thank you. That is the vehicle involved in the destruction of the
23 building; is that correct?
24 A. No. This is a vehicle transporting men from position to position
25 in order to protect them from infantry fire, and it has a 20-millimetre
1 gun mounted on it.
2 Q. If you'd just play that short passage with the vehicles in again,
3 please. And you can help us as far as you can with the identification of
4 the vehicles involved.
5 [Videotape played]
6 MR. EMMERSON: And just run it through.
7 Yes, thank you.
8 Q. Now, are you able to help us at all as to whether there are main
9 battle tanks involved in that operation, from what you can see on that
11 A. No, I can't help you with that. This is only one footage, and it
12 can be made anywhere.
13 Q. But -- never mind where it's made. I'm simply asking you if you
14 can assist with identifying the vehicles. And is the answer to that
15 question that you can't?
16 A. No, Mr. Emmerson. As I said, this can be filmed during an
17 exercise of the military.
18 Q. If you could focus just for a second on the question that I'm
19 asking you. Never mind where it was filmed. The question that I'm
20 putting to you is: Do you know what the vehicles are and to which force
21 they belong? Now, you used the word "military" a moment ago, "an exercise
22 of the military." Do any of those vehicles appear to you to be VJ
24 A. On this footage - and it is quite blurred, the image. I don't
25 want you to misunderstand me - the vehicle was filmed from the rear end
1 and on the basis of what I can see here, this is the combat vehicle of the
3 Q. The infantry of which force? The MUP or the -- or the VJ?
4 A. Both had it.
5 Q. I see. And can I ask you this: Did you yourself authorise or
6 witness that type of property destruction in the aftermath of military
7 operations where vehicles were used to destroy houses in that way?
8 A. I don't understand the question, I'm afraid. Can you please
10 Q. Did you yourself ever authorise or observe forces of the VJ or of
11 the MUP using heavy vehicles to destroy Albanian properties in the way we
12 see depicted in that piece of film?
13 A. Yes, I observed that, but only if the building concerned was a
14 military target, because it was occupied by terrorists or because fire
15 was opened from it.
16 Q. So after an operation had concluded, would there then be a
17 destructive phase in which buildings would be destroyed like that?
18 A. No.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson, it strikes me that you do rely to some
20 extent on the opinion given by the journalist. You are referring to it as
21 after -- that's not visible from the images itself. Neither is it that
22 these are places where civilians are living.
23 I mean, there was no objection. But, of course, Mr. Re earlier
24 said, for what reasons? Then you said, "I'd like to ask a few questions
25 about the images."
1 MR. EMMERSON: Yes.
2 JUDGE ORIE: And that is what you did. But you intertwingled --
3 intertwined with that part of the -- of the opinion commentary of the
5 I -- just for you to know that I am aware of that and that would
6 certainly be better to refrain.
7 MR. RE: The -- the Prosecution is also aware of it. And it was
8 clearly apparent from the questioning and the answering. But we certainly
9 want to know when this was taken and where it was taken. It's not
10 apparent from the footage or the -- or the commentary.
11 MR. EMMERSON: Well, I think it is -- I think it is tolerably
12 apparent from the commentary, if I may say so.
13 MR. RE: But where? Which village? Where? When? Town?
15 MR. EMMERSON: It was in fact --
16 MR. RE: Roadside?
17 MR. EMMERSON: It was in fact an incident that was videoed in the
18 immediate aftermath of Prekaze on the 5th of March. Now --
19 JUDGE ORIE: That's what Mr. Emmerson said before, that he would
20 show some pictures of that. But I do understand that Mr. Re would like
21 to --
22 MR. EMMERSON: Very well.
23 JUDGE ORIE: -- to know the reasons why you consider this to be a
24 footage taken at that time, at that place.
25 MR. EMMERSON: Yes. Well, I -- I'm very happy to communicate the
1 position with Mr. Re, if I may. It's not -- it's not the identification
2 of it as being Prekaze as opposed to Drenice is not apparent from the
3 transcript. I accept that.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
5 MR. EMMERSON:
6 Q. I want to turn, if I may, to some of the evidence that you've
7 given and documents you've produced about VJ positions in the first half
8 of 1998, and in particular VJ positions in the area to the east of the
9 main Pec to Gjakova road.
10 In your 92 ter statement at paragraph 8, you indicate that the
11 military police battalion was stationed at a filtration plant at the
12 southern end of Lake Radoniq. That's the 52nd Military Police Battalion.
13 Can I understand, please, from where -- from what point in 1998 was the
14 52nd Military Police Battalion stationed at that location?
15 A. I don't know exactly from what point in time. And it's not only
16 that it was positioned there, we were also engaged in mobile camping in
17 March and April.
18 Q. Sorry, could you explain what "mobile camping" means in this
20 A. It means exercising everything that was learned up to a given
21 point in time and blending it all together out in the field, in accordance
22 with the curriculum taught.
23 Q. Well, that's helpful. Specifically, I am inquiring about the
24 location of the 52nd Military Police Battalion and asking for some
25 clarification of your witness statement at paragraph 8, where you say
1 that -- that that battalion was posted at the filtration plant at the
2 southern end of Lake Radoniq.
3 Now, do I understand the position to be that that -- that was a
4 mobile operation or -- or that the 52nd Military Police Battalion were
5 posted there continuously? And if so, from when?
6 A. I can say that I saw it there twice; that is to say, on two
7 successive days. Now, whether it was there all the time, I cannot say
8 with any degree of certainty, because it's not my unit. It is a unit that
9 is commanded by the corps commander.
10 Q. And -- and, again, for the assistance of the Trial Chamber, on the
11 two occasions that you saw it based there -- or I'm sorry, that you saw it
12 stationed there, when were they?
13 A. I think it was sometime on the 7th or 8th of May, 1998, when I was
14 transferring my own unit, which was also involved in training, from the
15 village of Bec, the area of the village of Bec, to the barracks in
17 Q. Thank you. And just to come back to the expression you used a
18 moment ago, "mobile camping." Where were your units engaged in mobile
19 camping during March and April?
20 A. Combat Group 2, on the Pec-Klina road,
21 Kramovik-Bec-Djakovica-Morina, that axis. Combat Group 1, in the broader
22 area of Kosovska Mitrovica. I don't think that it really matters as far
23 as this trial is concerned.
24 Q. If you could just turn, please, behind tab 1. There is a map
25 there which was marked by General -- sorry, Colonel Bozidar Delic in the
1 Milosevic trial which bears a legend which is behind tab 1B, indicating
2 that it relates to deployments between the 22nd of April and the 10th of
4 For the sake of the transcript, this is Exhibit D42.
5 And we can see there that Mr. Delic has marked three areas in red
6 on the terrain surrounding Lake Radoniq: One with a flag to the bottom
7 right or south-east; one semicircle just beneath the "B" of Boka; and a
8 further flag on Donji Bites with a figure "6" in it. Can you help us
9 to -- with those deployments, please, and what they signify.
10 A. Since this is colleague Delic's zone, then it was his right to
11 mark that and to indicate this to you or to whoever.
12 You asked about the south-east, the little flag. That is the 52nd
13 Battalion of the military police. And as for the west -- you interrupted
14 me. Did you want to say something?
15 Q. No, I'm simply thanking you for the clarification.
16 A. As for the area of the village of Bites, I see that it is an
17 interrupted line, so I'm not sure what it is. He should have said so in
18 the key. Does it have to do with the 52nd Battalion or some other unit?
19 Q. I think the key makes it clear that these are VJ deployments. I
20 wonder if you could help us interpret the marking.
21 A. I am sorry, but I don't really have a translation of the key into
23 Q. Let me put it to you this way, Mr. Zivanovic: Were you aware of
24 VJ forces being stationed on Donji -- were you aware of --
25 A. Just a moment, please.
1 Q. That's simply a larger version of the other map.
2 Were you aware of VJ forces being stationed on Donji Bites? And
3 if so, from what date?
4 A. No, I'm not sure about Donji Bites. That is why I am asking for
5 clarification. What this interrupted red line means within the red circle
6 in the area of Donji Bites. It is customary that if there is an
7 interrupted line, then this is an area that is yet to be entered.
8 Q. Well, let me ask you, then, from your own knowledge about
9 deployments in this area, if I may. First of all, if we could just look,
10 please, behind tab 8 in the green file, which you describe in your witness
11 statement at paragraph 62.
12 Tab 8 is Exhibit P1023, marked for identification with this
13 witness, and is annex 5 to the 92 ter statement.
14 If we could look, please, at, in the -- in the B/C/S, the second
15 page under figure "2" and in the English at page 3 under figure "2". This
16 document is dated the 24th of April and is signed by Colonel Lazarevic.
17 And in paragraph 2, it identifies various deployments: "The
18 schedule and tasks of all the units stand as previously organised, with
19 the exception of BG-2 of the 125th Motorised Brigade, which was redeployed
20 to the Boka sector during the day (one kilometre south-east from Kramovik
21 village) and issued with the following task:
22 "Take control of the axes Kramovik village to Kramovik ravine and
23 Rakovina village to Djakovica.
24 "Break up and destroy the DTG in Crmljane village and;
25 "Secure the right flank of the 52nd bVP and fire at enemy forces
1 along the axis Crmljane village to Rakoc village."
2 Now, in your witness statement you indicate that BG-2 was based in
3 Gjakova until the end of May. Is that correct?
4 A. Until the 23rd of May, when they went to the village of Ponosevac;
5 that is to say, the area of the Morina border post.
6 Q. And so here on the 24th of April, do I understand that the whole
7 of BG-2 is being redeployed to the Boka sector or a part of it?
8 A. I would kindly ask for -- for time for a broader explanation.
9 When I said "mobile camping," I mentioned Kramovik as an axis.
10 Kramovik was always well known as our training ground. And when one
11 engages in mobile camping, then units are issued with tasks that resemble
12 wartime tasks, so that command of units and preparation of units would be
13 taught and learned.
14 You see that these tasks are only on paper. They were not
15 actually carried out in practice, in the field.
16 Q. So when a unit is tasked to break up and destroy the terrorist
17 group in Crmljane and to secure the right flank of the 52nd Military
18 Police Battalion, that was, what, an exercise on paper only?
19 A. Yes. As a small-scale staff wartime training in order to train
20 commanders and soldiers.
21 Q. Were the soldiers physically deployed or not?
22 A. The complete unit was in the Boka area; that is, this area of
23 Kramovik. And they did not enter a single village or town except for
24 Klanica Bec, where they were stationed later.
25 Q. And just to be clear, when they're tasked to engage in military
1 action against the DTG, is that a serious order? Were they intended to in
2 fact engage in military action against the DTG?
3 A. I would kindly ask you to understand this as a staff wartime
4 exercise, and then it will be readily understandable to you that we are
5 just exercising this particular action. We did not engage in any actual
6 combat as far as this is concerned.
7 Q. Well, you see, in your witness statement at paragraph 62, when you
8 comment on this document, you say that "BG-2 was tasked with controlling
9 the axis from Kramovik village to Kramovik ravine and Rakovina village to
10 Djakovica," and you say "the aim was to break up the KLA forces in
11 Crmljane village."
12 A. It primarily means observation, this word "controlling." Since
13 you assist on active action, I am telling you that that was not the case.
14 We did not actually enter these settlements. This was just on paper,
16 Q. And so when it says in the order and in your statement that the
17 BG-2 are to fire at enemy forces along the axis from Crmljane to Rakoc,
18 that is an order you never intended to be carried into effect; is that
19 right? Is that how we're to understand it?
20 A. Correct. This order was not carried out. The first time my
21 soldier opened fire was by the village of Smonica on the 23rd of May.
22 Q. So why do you record in this document an order that fire should be
23 opened? Just explain to the Trial Chamber what the purpose of putting
24 that in an order is if you don't intend it to occur.
25 A. I am telling you that this is an order which is part of war games.
1 I don't know how else to explain this to you. Coming from the superior
3 Q. I see. And nonetheless, the route that would be taken would be
4 from the barracks at Djakovica up towards the area at the south of the
5 lake. Is that correct?
6 A. Yes. Yes, that would have been the case had that been happening.
7 Q. Thank you. And if we could just look briefly, please, at tab 9
8 for a moment. This is the 26th of April. Again, an order signed by
9 Colonel Lazarevic, which is P1025 and annex 7 to your witness statement.
10 Could I ask you just to look at paragraph 3.2 in that order,
11 please, which in the English reads as follows: "The 3rd bVP is to perform
12 in-depth security of the state border on the cross section right Koznjar
13 border post to Decani. Left Kosare border post to Junik, with the
14 following task: In cooperated action with the 53rd border battalion and
15 the MUP forces prevent the violation of the border regime and ensure
16 combat readiness for intervention along the axis of Decani-Junik to
17 Smonica and Decani to Istinic village to Celopek village."
18 Do you see that?
19 A. Yes, I see that. I see what is written there, yes.
20 Q. Is that -- was that war games as well or was that an intended
21 deployment? For military purposes?
22 A. Well, through war games the unit was brought to the border posts
23 of Kosare and Morina to provide security at the state border.
24 Q. Yes, I can see that part of it. What I'm interested in is the
25 combat readiness for intervention along the axis from Deqan to Istinic to
1 Cellopek on the eastern side of the road by some very considerable
3 Can you help me with that, please. Was there, first of all, a
4 planned deployment from Deqan across to Cellopek on the 26th of April?
5 A. No. No, there was no planned deployment.
6 I would like to note that the army units did not go east of the
7 Pec-Djakovica road at all into the area of Dukagjin up until, I don't know
8 what date, in July.
9 Q. Well, we -- with the greatest of respect, Mr. Zivanovic, on your
10 own evidence that cannot be right, because the 52nd Military Police
11 Battalion at the very least was stationed in the area of the lake, was it
12 not? Or at least, was positioned in the area of the lake. So it's --
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Yes. Now, what I'm asking you to explain to the Trial Chamber, if
15 you would, please, is what it means in this order that you have exhibited
16 where combat readiness is required for intervention along an axis that
17 goes from Deqani to Cellopek.
18 A. I can say that the unit did not go along that route or it did not
19 engage in any activity. It is true that the 52nd Battalion was in the
20 area of Lake Radonjic, but I am not the superior officer of that unit. I
21 am sorry, but you're asking me about professional comments in respect of
22 orders issued by a superior. If you -- and I'm a witness here. Now, if
23 you put me in a different position, then perhaps I will be able to say
25 Q. Well, the position that you're in, Mr. Zivanovic, is as the
1 officer in charge of the VJ forces in the area of responsibility to which
2 this particular part of the order is directed. And I'm asking you to tell
3 us what you understood by it. "Combat readiness for intervention along an
4 axis from Deqan to Istinic to Cellopek." What did you understand that
5 order to be requiring you to do, if anything?
6 A. If we look at the entire situation that it was, namely that Combat
7 Group 2 was in the area of Kramovik, then it was only logical to issue a
8 task as an alternative task to another unit that is in Decani so that they
9 could give support to Combat Group 2 if they are threatened in the ravine.
10 You don't really think that a military unit is going to take a road where
11 combat readiness is -- well, I mean, where there is full combat readiness
12 and that they cannot open fire if they are in jeopardy.
13 Q. I understand your answer. I'm simply asking you to explain what
14 you thought you were being ordered to do, and you've given an explanation
15 as far as it goes.
16 Could you turn behind tab 10, please, for a moment. This is an
17 order signed by you dated the 16th of May, 1998. This is Exhibit D70 and
18 it's annex 29 to your 92 ter statement.
19 And the first item in this order directs BG-2, Combat Group 2, to
20 be at the ready in the current redeployment sector for operations along
21 the following axes: From the barracks to Smonica village to Ponosevac
22 village to Gornja Morina village, first of all. Secondly, from the
23 barracks to Erecka Suka. And thirdly, from the barracks to Zrze village.
24 And fourthly, from the barracks to Radonjic Lake.
25 And the task that you have allocated to BG-2 reads: "In
1 coordinated action with the neighbouring forces of the Republic of Serbia
2 MUP, break up Siptar sabotage and terrorist groups and secure supply
3 routes for VJ units."
4 Now, pausing there for moment, can you help us, please. These
5 deployments from the barracks in four different axes, would they be
6 deployments from the barracks in Gjakova, where BG-2 was then based?
7 A. Correct. Combat Group 2 was in the barracks in Djakovica.
8 However, these axes are not deployments. They are alternate routes for
9 activity if necessary.
10 Q. And the activity that you're authorising is coordinated action
11 with the MUP to break up the DTG and secure supply routes; is that
13 A. When I give an alternate route, then I also give a task. And a
14 task is received in this way: If Group 52 is threatened in the area of
15 Lake Radonjic, then the corps commander would issue an task to me to
16 intervene in that area. Certainly there would be somebody else on that
17 axis, not only me.
18 Q. Yes. But it appears, does it not, to contemplate military
19 engagements? Do I -- have I understood that correctly?
20 A. You are right. How else could we operate if we already had
21 terrorist activity?
22 Q. Now, the first two of the axes that you've referred to here, from
23 the barracks to Ponosevac and Gornja Morina, that is a deployment on the
24 western side of the main road, but the remaining deployments from the
25 barracks to Erecka Suka and the barracks to Zrze and the barracks to
1 Radonjic Lake, those are deployments on the east side of the main road; is
2 that correct?
3 A. It is correct that these are alternate routes. However, I am
4 telling you that it is not deployment. These are possible alternate axes
5 for use.
6 Q. Which one did they take or which ones did they take?
7 A. Number one on the 23rd of May. This group went from the barracks
8 to Smonica, Ponosevac, and Gornja Morina.
9 Q. BG-3 on this order is to be ready in the current redeployment
10 sector for operations along axes from Pec-Decani-Rastavica-Junik-Ponosevac
11 and from Pec to Zahac to Klina to Iglarevo and from Pec to Rausic to
12 Barane to Celopek. Are you indicating that those are alternate axes as
14 A. Likewise, alternate routes, because they did not act along these
15 axes. You see the task number 1 here is for them to link up with the
16 combat group in Ponosevac. Combat Group 2.
17 Q. And you then delegate to the unit commanders, is that correct, how
18 they are to interpret these orders?
19 A. They interpreted the way it was. They also issue alternate or
20 alternative tasks.
21 Q. Who is it who chooses which of the three alternate routes they
22 should take?
23 A. Depending on the level of command, who has order issuing
24 authority. I was given my orders by the corps commander. Without his
25 orders, I could not have used them along any axis.
1 Q. And so far as BG-3 is concerned, what was the axis taken on that
3 A. Not a single one.
4 Q. I see. I want to turn, if I may, to the second half of May and
5 ask you to look, please, at paragraphs 81 to 83 of your witness statement.
6 Now, you describe in paragraph 82 an order from General Pavkovic
7 forbidding movement along the Gjakova-Deqani road. And at paragraph 83, a
8 joint VJ-MUP operation aimed at unblocking the main roads in the Mehotija
9 area at the end of May.
10 I just want to ask you some questions, please, if I may, about
11 that phase of operations. We have heard that on the 25th of May there was
12 a PJP sweep operation conducted involving the entering of villages on both
13 sides of the main road following the disappearance of two PJP officers in
14 the vicinity of Rastavica on the 23rd of May. Is that the joint operation
15 that you are there referring to?
16 A. I'm not sure. On the 23rd of May, I reached the village of Donja
17 Morina. I'm not sure about this, because the Decani-Erec-Djakovica road
18 was not used by the military.
19 Q. Can I ask you just to look, please, briefly behind tabs 11 and 12
20 in this bundle. Particularly behind tab 11. We have seen certain
21 evidence that relates to an operation that took place in Ljubenic on the
22 main road on the 25th of May in which a number of people were killed. And
23 behind tab 12 - I don't ask that it be brought up on the screen - is a
24 situation report from Colonel Crosland, who arrived in the area very
25 shortly afterwards.
1 The relevant documents, for the record, are D72, P6, page 23; and
3 Were you aware of an operation in Ljubenic at the end of May in
4 which a number of civilians were killed?
5 A. No, I wasn't aware of that, because I was dealing with the
6 problems in the area of Morina.
7 Q. I wonder if we could just have a look at tab 14, please, briefly,
8 where Colonel Lazarevic decides on certain deployments on the 28th of May.
9 And tab 14 is P1051 and is annex 35 to the 92 ter statement.
10 If we look at the fourth bullet point in that document: "BG-3 of
11 the 125th Motorised Brigade is ordered to lift the blockade of Pec -- of
12 the Pec to Decani to Ljubenic road." Do you see that?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Did that deployment occur?
15 A. No.
16 Q. Why not?
17 A. I don't know. I don't know. I can't tell you this now. I don't
19 Q. How do you know it didn't occur?
20 A. I know that the action didn't take place. Why, I don't know.
21 Q. Well, who decided to countermand this order? Was it you?
22 A. No. The one who issued the order to begin with, Lazarevic.
23 Q. I see. And did he communicate that decision to you, as far as you
24 can recall?
25 A. There are quite a few events that I can't really recall, and you
1 keep insisting on the documents by my superior.
2 Q. I see. So when you say in paragraph 83 of your statement that a
3 joint VJ-MUP operation aimed at unblocking the roads in the Metohija area
4 took place at the end of May, that operation didn't include the carrying
5 out by BG-3 of the order that's recorded here.
6 A. On the first day, on Thursday, I did not want to claim that some
7 elements of the statements ought to be corrected, because -- this was not
8 early May. This was end of July. It wasn't either early May or end of
10 Q. Sorry, are you telling us that your 92 ter statement is wrong but
11 you chose not to correct it?
12 A. That's correct.
13 Q. Why didn't you correct it when you noticed it was wrong?
14 A. It was probably due to the time constraints. When I arrived here,
15 there wasn't enough time. I had to prepare myself.
16 Q. Did you notice any other errors?
17 A. There are several more. If we come across them, I'll draw your
18 attention to them.
19 Q. Did you --
20 A. These errors are not significant ones.
21 Q. That's not, with respect, for you to judge.
22 When you began your evidence, you were asked by Mr. Re whether if
23 you were asked the same questions again you would give the same testimony
24 as is recorded in your 92 ter statement. Do you remember that question?
25 A. I do remember that, and that was the answer I gave.
1 Q. So you'd like to correct paragraph 83. Is it the position, then,
2 that there wasn't in fact joint VJ and MUP operation attend of May to
3 clear the main road? Is that the position? It didn't happen till July?
4 A. Yes, in July.
5 Q. Mr. Zivanovic, forgive me for suggesting this to you, but is it
6 the position that you are in some difficulties in answering frankly to all
7 of these questions because you know that you were not authorised to
8 conduct joint operations with the MUP in anti-terrorist operations until
9 late June?
10 A. No.
11 Q. Well, let's look back, please, at this document behind tab 14.
12 Whether it happened or not, Colonel Lazarevic is ordering a coordinated
13 action between the MUP and the VJ. Would you agree with that? Look at
14 the first words, please.
15 A. The first paragraph?
16 Q. Yes. Just look at the first words under "I have decided."
17 It reads: "In coordination with MUP forces, lift the blockade of
18 the Sisman Ponosevac-Molic-Junik and the Ponosevac-Donja Morina-Potok
19 Molic roads." Do you see that?
20 A. Yes, that's correct.
21 Q. Were you aware at the time in May that there was such a plan for
22 joint operations with the MUP?
23 A. There existed a police station in the village of Ponosevac.
24 Q. Were you aware that orders were being issued by Colonel Lazarevic
25 for joint MUP-VJ operations at the end of May?
1 A. I don't understand was I aware. I can see the order.
2 Q. Did you read it at the time?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. And if we just look, please, if we can, at the sixth bullet point.
5 That orders the -- I'm sorry, the 2nd bVP to carry out a diversionary
6 advance along the Radonjicka Jezero to Donji Bites village axis, doesn't
8 A. Yes. This was -- this was also alternative task. If necessary,
9 if a unit of the 52nd Battalion is in jeopardy, then this element should
10 assist it.
11 Q. And assist it by conducting a diversionary advance? Could you
12 explain for us, please, what that means in this context?
13 A. Yes. A diversionary attack. A "diversionary attack" means moving
14 along the axes and displaying the force of one's unit with a view to
15 reaching another one of its units.
16 Q. And did that occur?
17 A. No.
18 Q. Again, it's referred to in your witness statement at paragraph 84.
19 Is that another of the areas where you noticed that you had recorded
20 orders that did not in fact come -- become carried into effect? Is that
21 the position?
22 A. Yes. These orders contain alternate routes that could either not
23 be used or were simply not used.
24 Q. Oh, I see. Could we look at tab 15, please, which is Exhibit D75,
25 annex 46 to your 92 ter statement. And this one is dated the 23rd of June
1 and orders the formation of temporary Combat Group number 5.
2 And if we could just look, please, at paragraph 2. BG-5 is to be
3 deployed to the Donji Bites village sector, Radonjicka Suka by 1500 hours
4 on the 23rd of June, and in coordination with the 52nd Military Police
5 Battalion and making use of Radonjicka Suka to prevent operations by the
6 DTS along a series of axes, Rznic to Glodjane to Donji Bites to Gornji
7 Ratis to Donji Ratis to Rakoc and Gramocelj to Donji Bites. Do you see
9 A. I see that. This is an order of Colonel Lazarevic asking that the
10 group be set up.
11 This has to do with what you asked me a couple of hours ago when
12 you asked me about the red circle and what it meant. Well, this is the
14 Q. And was the group then deployed as described in this order?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. And we can see that that -- at paragraph 4 the order specifies
17 that Radonjicka Cuka is to be taken over, as is a section of the features
18 in Donji Bites by the Gjakova SUP units.
19 A. Yes, that's fine. A record is taken of that so that something
20 would not be recorded incorrectly.
21 Q. So just so that we understand the effect of this operation, that
22 would be a MUP force going in first, would it? Followed by Combat Group
24 A. It cannot be understood that way. MUP forces were already there
25 at Cuka, and this area had to be taken over from them.
1 Q. Well, then help us with that. Which MUP forces were already
3 A. It says here precisely, there were forces from the Djakovica MUP,
4 the regular forces from the town of Djakovica.
5 Q. And they were already in Donji Bites and on Radonjicka Cuka, were
7 A. At Radonjicka Cuka, but they were not in Donji Bites in the
8 village itself. They were, rather, on a clearing near Bites.
9 Q. And at this point BG-5 is deployed from -- we can see the route at
10 paragraph 3 -- from Gjakova, if I can take it shortly, via Paljabarda to
11 the village of Donji Bites; is that right?
12 A. No. Only two small areas, and that's Cuka and this clearing or
13 an -- or a plain on higher ground near Bites.
14 Q. Okay. Do you notice the -- we obviously have at paragraph 1 the
15 composition of Combat Group 5. Were the MUP forces evacuated at that
16 point on their arrival, or did the MUP forces remain in that area?
17 A. There remained only one MUP patrol at Cuka. The others were
19 Q. So from that point onwards, there would be a joint VJ and MUP
20 operation based there; is that correct?
21 A. That's what it seems. But these forces were not either planned
22 for the operation or capable of seeing it through.
23 Q. Sorry, could you explain that answer again, please. Just explain
24 what you mean by that.
25 A. Only on one place. If you can see Combat Group 5 was supposed to
1 replace the men from the 52 -- 52nd Battalion in the area of the
2 filtration plant.
3 Q. Yes. You told us, I think, a moment ago that going back to
4 Mr. Delic's map this deployment reflects the broken line around Radonjicka
5 Cuka. Is that a correct understanding of your testimony?
6 A. Could I have a look at the map again? I apologise.
7 Q. Behind tab 1. And the order is, to remind you, behind tab 15:
8 "Deploy BG-5 to the Donji Bites village sector, Radonjicka Cuka."
9 The first map behind tab 1. I think -- Witness, it's even further
10 forward than that. There it is.
11 A. Yes, that's correct. This is Recka Cuka [as interpreted].
12 Q. We are to understand that those forces were based there from the
13 23rd of June. Is that the position?
14 A. Yes, that's correct.
15 Q. And finally on this topic - and just before I suggest a break --
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson.
17 MR. EMMERSON: I'm sorry.
18 JUDGE ORIE: The witness says this is Recka Cuka. That's not
19 entirely clear to me.
20 MR. EMMERSON: Yes. Let me clarify it.
21 Q. You have the map in front of you on the screen. We can see the
22 flag with the figure "6" upon it and a broken circle around Erecka Suka.
23 I'm sorry, it's my mistake. Around Radonjicka Cuka and Donji Bites. Is
24 that the location that you're referring to? Yes.
25 A. Yes, Erecka Suka is a dominant feature and a very important one.
1 Whoever had it under their control would control the situation.
2 Q. Well, let's -- we need to be absolutely clear about this, because
3 Erecka Suka is a hill close to the village of Baballoq, near to the main
4 road. Radonjicka Cuka is the hill which we see both on the map and in the
5 order that we have just looked at, adjacent to the village of Donji Bites.
6 You can see on the map the deployment and the broken line is around
7 Radonjicka Cuka and Donji Bites. And in the document behind tab 15, the
8 deployment of BG-5 is to Donji Bites, Radonjicka Cuka, making use of
9 Radonjicka Cuka to prevent DTS operations.
10 So to be absolutely clear, it is Radonjicka Cuka that is referred
11 to here.
12 A. You're right. You're right.
13 Q. Thank you.
14 And finally, if I may, before moving to another subject, could you
15 please look behind tab 16 for a moment. Tab 16 is Exhibit D83 and annex
16 66 to the 92 ter statement.
17 If you could just look briefly, please, at paragraph 3.9. This is
18 an order from General Pavkovic dated the 18th of August. And at paragraph
19 3.9, it orders the withdrawal of the 52nd bVP from Radonjicko Jezero to
20 the Kosovski Junaci barracks and the transfer the positions to the MUP
22 Now, first of all, 52nd bVP is translated here as "bomber
23 regiment." Do you understand the 52nd bVP to be the Military Police
25 A. Yes. Yes, Military Police Battalion.
1 Q. So would you agree this order of the 18th of August is directing
2 the withdrawal of the Military Police Battalion and its replacement by MUP
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Did that occur?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. And what MUP forces were they, please?
8 A. It doesn't say here, so I can't tell you really. I suppose PJPs.
9 Q. Yes. Yes, thank you.
10 MR. EMMERSON: Would that be a suitable moment to take the next
12 JUDGE ORIE: It certainly would.
13 We'll have a break until five minutes to 6.00.
14 --- Recess taken at 5.35 p.m.
15 --- On resuming at 5.57 p.m.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Emmerson.
17 MR. EMMERSON:
18 Q. Mr. Zivanovic, I want to ask you some questions about the evidence
19 you've given in relation to MUP patrols during 1998 and the information
20 that came to you about what they had discovered.
21 Last Thursday you testified that during the first half of 1998,
22 between the 28th of February, when the incident at Likoshan occurred, and
23 the middle of the year, MUP patrols in the area to the east of the main
24 road would come across evidence of KLA military training, and you said
25 that that was something that occurred all the way down from Prapacan via
1 Isniq, Dashinoc, and Gllogjan. Is that correct?
2 A. Correct.
3 Q. And how frequently would you receive information of that kind from
4 the MUP during the first half of 1998?
5 A. Two or three pieces of information on the whole.
6 Q. In -- in the six-month period?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. You have specific recollection, then, of such patrols reporting
9 back from the areas of Dashinoc and Gllogjan.
10 A. Well, yes, because there were so few of them.
11 Q. And you also said that during the second half of 1998, from June
12 onwards, MUP forces found medical materials while conducting searches or
13 tracking down terrorists in different villages.
14 Can you give us a sense, please, of how frequently you would hear
15 of MUP patrols conducting searches or tracking down terrorists in the
16 villages to the east of the main road.
17 A. I think it was twice.
18 Q. Thank you. And I wonder if you could just look for us briefly at
19 tab 17 in the bundle, which is Exhibit P1046 and annex 30 to your
21 Do you have it? Tab 17.
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Yes. Now, this is a document signed by you dated the 20th of May
24 and addressed to the Pristina Corps command and is described as a regular
25 combat report. Can I understand this is you reporting to the overall
1 corps command in Pristina and seeking both to inform them and to receive
2 instructions from them. Is that correct?
3 A. Yes, I was duty-bound to report to them every day.
4 Q. Yes. If we could just look, please, at the penultimate bullet
5 point, which should be, I think, in your copy the -- the B/C/S version,
6 the last bullet point on the first page and in the English translation,
7 the third bullet point on the second page. It reads: "MUP forces are
8 currently carrying out a serious operation in the sector of the villages
9 of Gornja Grabanica, Dolovo, Ceskovo, and Kpuz. They want to know whether
10 VJ units would be able to support them if need be. They are deploying
11 their mortars in the Donje Cuprevo village sector."
12 Now, in reporting this request to the corps command, are you
13 seeking instructions as to whether or not VJ units would be able to
14 support the MUP if need be?
15 A. This only has to do with information that they were asking for
16 that, but I did not explicitly ask for approval as to whether I should
17 give support or not.
18 Q. But just to be clear, on the 20th of May you could not have
19 lawfully given support to that operation, could you?
20 A. That's right. No, I am sorry -- according to the law -- well, no,
21 without an order issued by the corps commander. He is the law for me.
22 Q. I understand that, but you've told us, have you not, that it
23 wasn't until the end of June that the VJ was given authorisation to
24 conduct joint operations with the MUP against the KLA? Is that correct?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Are you not here conveying to the corps command a request
2 specifically to put your own units at the disposal of the MUP if need be?
3 A. I've already said "no." I was not explicit in asking.
4 Q. Well, I'm going to summarise, if I may, to you four key points to
5 have emerged from the overall testimony of Colonel Crosland, who, as you
6 may or may not be aware, was visiting your area of responsibility and
7 bordering areas of the 549th throughout 1998.
8 First of all, he has testified that during 1998 and 1999 he
9 personally saw between 200 and 300 villages burnt with crops wantonly
10 burned by Serb forces, businesses of all sorts, petrol stations, shops
11 looted within towns like Decani, Pec, and Gjakova. He testified that he
12 had observed VJ as well as SAJ, PJP, JSO, and others, engaging in this
13 destruction. And that he saw animals shot and crops and animal feed
14 stacks being burned and deliberately destroyed.
15 So that's the first overall heading. And the references for that
16 are 3058 to 3060.
17 Secondly -- I'm putting these four points to you because I'm going
18 to give you an opportunity to comment on them.
19 Secondly, he testified that the British ambassador on the basis of
20 his reports conveyed to President Milosevic the British government's
21 assessment that the military campaign over the summer of 1998, in which
22 your forces participated, amounted to the commission of crimes against
23 humanity and amounted to a widespread and systematic campaign against the
24 Albanian civilian population.
25 That's page 3061.
1 Thirdly, he has testified that the role of the VJ was to provide
2 long-range shelling cover for these operations; that there would be a
3 destructive phase of bombardment of a village by the VJ from a distance
4 and that paramilitary police formations would then enter the village and
5 conduct burning operations.
6 And fourthly, that the VJ forces that were involved in those
7 actions were the forces commanded by General Bozidar Delic of the 549th
8 and by yourself, of the 125th and that, in his opinion, the involvement of
9 your forces in those operations could not have occurred without your
11 And the reference for that is 3063 to 3068.
12 I'm going to invite you, first of all, to comment on that series
13 of allegations overall, if you wish to.
14 A. As for the allegation made that we were torching, destroying,
15 looting, damaging, and I don't know what all the expressions used were, I
16 claim that only if there were a building that was a target, where a
17 terrorist had been or where fire had been opened from, that is the only
18 kind of building that would have been targeted.
19 And how should I put this? It would be checked.
20 Furthermore, it is possible, due to the use of different kinds of
21 ammunition, that there can be a fire. So the -- so it appears that it is
23 Also, every third or fourth bullet could be an incendiary one. We
24 strictly got orders not to allow soldiers to enter and take other people's
25 things, as we say; that is to say, to loot. If we caught anyone, if we
1 observed any such thing, we would bring such a person into custody or take
2 disciplinary measures.
3 Further on, as for Metohija, our two units, Bozidar Delic's and
4 mine, were deployed there but we did not do anything that constituted a
5 violation of international humanitarian law.
6 Over 200 villages burnt? I'm not aware of that. I know that over
7 200 villages were in the Pec district and were cleansed of Serbs and
8 Montenegrins. That would be it. I don't know whether there's anything
9 else that I have not commented upon.
10 Q. Thank you for that.
11 I then want to ask you, please, in the light of those answers
12 about some specific documents to see if you can help us with them.
13 Could you look behind tab 18, please. Tab 18 is Exhibit P -- or
14 marked for identification as P1053 and is annex 38 to your statement.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson, before we continue, has the witness
16 commented on all the things you said, especially the last one, that the --
17 such operations, even if they have not taken place, could not have
18 occurred without the authority?
19 Was your control such that such things could have happened without
20 you knowing it? And when I say "such things," I'm talking about the
21 crimes allegedly committed: Looting, burning, cattle being shot. Could
22 you imagine, was your control such that you'd say, "No, no, if that would
23 have happened, I would have known"? Because that was the last comment, I
24 think, by Colonel Crosland.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As for killings and persecutions, I
1 would have known about that. As for looting, I cannot say anything with
2 100-degree certainty. But when we would review our units, after having
3 carried out activities, if we would find anything on a particular soldier,
4 then we would hold that soldier accountable or we would send an
5 appropriate document to the military court in Nis in order to have
6 criminal charges brought against such a person.
7 I haven't got any of this here with me now, but we handed over
8 quite a bit of material to judiciary organs for them to deal with this.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Could you give an estimate about -- about how many
11 Are we talking about tens of -- or hundreds or ...
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can. It's tens. And it primarily
13 pertains to the later part; that is to say, on the eve of the aggression.
14 And in these actions, it is up to ten; in 1998, that is.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. Please proceed.
16 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Do you mean 1998? Because I think the whole
17 question was referring to general statements, meaning 1998 and 1999.
18 MR. EMMERSON: Yes.
19 JUDGE HOEPFEL: This is what -- how you formulated it.
20 MR. EMMERSON: Yes. I think what the witness has just indicated
21 it that there were up to ten criminal reports filed during 1999 -- I'm
22 sorry, during 1998.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
24 MR. EMMERSON: And tens filed in the run-up to the NATO military
25 action in 1999. That's as I understood his testimony.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Well, we could ask you. You said
2 "approximately ten or up to ten in 1998." And the total number including
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As for 1998, up to ten.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes and for 1999? Could you give us an estimate?
6 You said it was more than?
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As far as my unit is concerned,
8 about 20. I cannot tell you exactly whether it was, say, 19 or 23. I
9 cannot tell you exactly now.
10 JUDGE ORIE: And do you know whether sending in such a report ever
11 led to prosecution of those you at that time reported to be responsible?
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, particularly higher-ranking
14 JUDGE ORIE: But no soldiers on the ground?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't understand that. An officer
16 would be punished with a year in prison. That kind of term, for instance.
17 And a soldier would not be punished then but once he completed his
18 military service.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
20 MR. EMMERSON:
21 Q. I want just to look very briefly with you, please, at a number of
22 orders at around this period of time. Could you look, then, at tab 18. I
23 think I've put the references on the record.
24 This is an order dated the 30th of May and signed by
25 Major General Pavkovic. And at item number 4, he orders as follows:
1 "Provide support to MUP units from the units' deployment area, using
2 combat equipment from a distance, in accordance with their
4 Now, this obviously predates the authorisation for the VJ to act
5 jointly with the MUP in anti-terrorist operations, does it not?
6 A. Yes, this was issued, but it has to do with the decision-making
7 powers of the corps commander. It does not have to mean that this was
8 actually carried through.
9 Q. Yes, I understand that. But it was an order that you saw at the
10 time, was it? It's addressed to the 125th, for example.
11 A. Yes. Yes.
12 Q. So I want to understand, then, what you understood at the time by
13 an order to provide support using combat equipment from a distance.
14 What -- what do you understand by the expression "using combat equipment
15 from a distance"?
16 A. My understanding of that was in the spirit of the last sentence;
17 that is to say: "Provide support only in accordance with the decision of
18 the commander." Support "from a distance" means primarily by using
20 Q. And so just so that we're clear, on the face of this order,
21 Major General Pavkovic is directing, is he not, a state of affairs where
22 VJ forces could be used to provide long-range artillery support for MUP
24 A. Yes. Yes. Those are the kind of tasks he is issuing. I don't
25 know whether he was ordered by someone else to do that. I don't know and
1 I'm not going to interfere in terms of his competency.
2 Q. When you saw this order at the time, did you not think that it was
3 inconsistent with the constitutional role you understood the VJ to be
4 performing at that time, which was confined to the area to the east of the
5 main road involved in border operations alone?
6 A. Over here it is not stated specifically what the area in question
7 is; however, it can be assumed that the MUP can be supported within a
8 5-kilometre belt.
9 Q. So that's how it would have been understood.
10 Could we look at tab 19, please.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson, before we continue. Could you tell us
12 who the commander of all forces in Kosovo and Metohija refers to. It
13 says: "Provide support only at the request of the commander of all forces
14 in Kosovo and Metohija according to my decision."
15 Who is that, "commander of all forces"?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The commander of the Pristina Corps
17 is Major General Pavkovic at this point in time, and he is referring to
18 his own overall forces. And it says down here "to," and it is actually
19 all the units of the Pristina Corps.
20 You see underneath the signature all the units that this was sent
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But what I do not understand - but please help
23 me - why doesn't he say provide support only if I give specific orders?
24 Or is that just a linguistic ...
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, I assume that General Pavkovic
1 had received a request from the very top that it is possible to provide
2 such support and that he should be ready in that sense, and he issued this
3 then as a preparatory order.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Would -- if you say "the top," is that the political
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Not political. I am only talking
7 about the military top.
8 JUDGE ORIE: That's why I'm -- since in this paragraph here
9 talking about MUP and about the military, because the military is expected
10 to provide support to the MUP; therefore, the language "all forces"
11 has ...
12 So that's not military and police forces together? Because I was
13 then wondering who was in command of those forces together, taken
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] May I? The commander of the
16 military forces is General Pavkovic in Kosovo and Metohija. Above him is
17 the commander of the 3rd Army, who was in Nis together with his command.
18 And in part there was the forward command post in Pristina.
19 General Pavkovic and we, at the lower levels, were never in a position to
20 command the police.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Do I have to understand that "commander of all
22 forces" refers to the superior to Pavkovic -- to General Pavkovic?
23 Military superior.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, it can be put that way too,
25 but it was my understanding that he was the commander of the overall
1 military forces in Kosovo and Metohija within the Pristina Corps.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Emmerson.
3 MR. EMMERSON:
4 Q. If we just look, please, if we may, behind tab 19 which is Exhibit
5 P1055 and annex 40 to your statement. This is a 1st of June direction by
6 Major General Pavkovic. And I'm interested, please, in the text that
7 appears in the B/C/S version as the last three lines in paragraph 5 on
8 page 2. And in the English version in the last three lines, again, of
9 paragraph 5 appearing on page 2.
10 It reads: "With a tank platoon of the 125th Motorised Brigade
11 BG-3, provide assistance to MUP forces along the Crnobreg-Prilep village
12 road in crushing strong resistance points on the line of attack."
13 Now, first of all, this also is an order that predates the
14 authorisation to engage the VJ in anti-terrorist operations, is it not?
15 A. Yes, this is an order that precedes it.
16 And if you look at who it was sent to, it is not a classical
17 order. It is addressed to the commander of the 3rd Army,
18 General Pavkovic's superior; that is to say, for his information. And if
19 he approves of it, then it will be carried through.
20 Q. And do I understand the evidence you gave last Thursday to be
21 this: That where Major General Pavkovic speaks about a tank platoon
22 providing assistance to the MUP in crushing strong resistance points on
23 the line of attack, that the role of the tank platoon was purely for
24 psychological support?
25 A. Yes, that is the way it was supposed to be.
1 Q. Well, do you know whether that's the way it was?
2 A. I think that that did actually happen, that the tank did not fire
3 a single projectile.
4 Q. Can we look behind tab 20 for a moment, please.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Can I ask one additional question. Mr. --
6 Mr. Zivanovic, your answer here again is that "if he approves of it, then
7 it will be carried through." You always leave open whether such
8 coordinated action actually took place, yes or no, or whether it was just
9 ordered but not ...
10 Is -- is that your testimony, that you are not aware that this
11 actually happened or is it -- or do you say yes, yes, of course we -- on
12 his orders, on General Pavkovic's orders, we -- we did such coordinated
13 actions? Because you make a reservation there that...
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. You have to understand me. I
15 really would like you to understand me. I'm a soldier. That is to say,
16 that I cannot do anything on my own. If I do something that way, then I
17 have to explain very well to my superior what I did.
18 You noticed this right. There are quite a few orders that say
19 "engage along the axis," et cetera. That is to say, this is an alternate
20 task. When something is done, then there is a report, a specific one.
21 And that is why it seems that I have reservations. That's the way it
22 looks to you. I cannot claim anything that had not been done. Do you
23 understand what I'm saying?
24 JUDGE ORIE: I do understand. But then quite a simple question
25 is: Were such -- did such coordinated actions finally take place or did
1 they -- were they ordered several times and did they never take place?
2 I'm just trying to find out what -- what actually happened.
3 I mean, if you give a military order, it's not uncommon that such
4 an order finally is -- is -- is followed by the subordinates.
5 Now, you say again and again "if he would approve," then
6 so-and-so. I'm now asking you: Were such coordinated actions approved,
7 did they actually take place, yes or no?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Activities in the roads, Smonica,
9 Ponosevac, Batusa, Kosare. There was cooperation between the MUP and my
10 unit or the battalion that was providing security at the border.
11 As the cooperation referred to here as alternate tasks, that was
12 carried out as well by way of psychological support to the MUP forces.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Please proceed, Mr. Emmerson.
14 MR. EMMERSON:
15 Q. Yes. I'm turning now to tab -- bear with me just one moment --
16 tab 20, which is Exhibit P1063 and annex 49 to the statement.
17 Mr. Zivanovic, we're now in July. This is an order of the 17th of
18 July signed by yourself. And it refers to a planned operation which we
19 see in paragraph 1 is to take place between the 17th and the 20th of July
20 involving active operations from a distance on a daily basis aimed at
21 exposed terrorist forces in the area of responsibility which are engaged
22 in attacks on the VJ units located in the field and on the road
23 communications, and so on.
24 First of all, did -- do you remember this order?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Were these operations carried out?
2 A. In part. When I say "in part," I mean -- well, if you wish, we
3 can have a look at this part of the plan. This is an integral part of
4 this order.
5 Q. Yes. I'm -- I'm going to look at the targets in a moment with
7 If we can just pick up some of the details of the report. At
8 paragraph 3, there is a reference to "ensuring only targets outside of
9 populated areas."
10 Do you see that?
11 A. Yes, I do.
12 Q. Yes. Paragraph 5, I just wanted to seek your assistance with
13 that. The second sentence suggests that troops should carry out these
14 operations without displaying unit or VJ insignia. Was there a particular
15 reason for that?
16 A. I don't think so. You know, when an operative of mine drafts an
17 order, I sign it even if there are some errors if they don't really go
18 against the implementation of the order.
19 Q. And at 6: "Operations are not to be carried out in the areas
20 where representatives of embassies and consulates, journalists, observers
21 and representatives of humanitarian organisations, regardless of the
22 activities and intensity of the terrorist forces."
23 Can I ask you, was there a particular reason why you would choose
24 not to conduct activities where they might be seen by international
1 A. This refers to activities from a distance upon terrorist forces.
2 The problem here was that I -- we didn't have anyone who could provide us
3 with the information as to the exact positions of the terrorist forces,
4 and we prepared this with reservations.
5 Of course, we were given the following assignment: Should a
6 diplomatic representative or anybody else bearing the insignia of -- of
7 the UNHCR be present there and if there is terrorist activity, regardless
8 of our possible losses, we should not open fire.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Re.
10 MR. RE: I'm just seeking a slight clarification. It's at page
11 85, line 6. In the document at paragraph 3, one word is illegible.
12 Mr. Emmerson read onto the record the word "ensuring." It says: "In the
13 course of operations, only/illegible/targets outside of population areas
14 -- populated areas."
15 I'm just asking if Mr. Emmerson has understood the word in Serbian
16 to be "ensuring" or if not perhaps the --
17 MR. EMMERSON: I'm sorry.
18 MR. RE: Perhaps the witness could read the document and tell us
19 what it says.
20 MR. EMMERSON: I was paraphrasing and summarising. There's a
21 photocopy blip on the original. But maybe the witness can read paragraph
23 JUDGE ORIE: We could ask him.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Item 3? I can't make this out now.
25 I'm trying to put this into context. I think that it says: "In the
1 course of activity exclusively to spell out or" -- I can't really make
2 this out.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Then we can't --
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can't read it either.
5 JUDGE ORIE: We can't expect you to read the illegible.
6 Please proceed, Mr. Emmerson.
7 MR. EMMERSON:
8 Q. Can we look, please, then, at the attached list of targets, and in
9 particular at item number 3 on the list in the context of the injunction
10 to avoid populated areas. We can see that -- that the target there is
11 listed as a school in Orahovo village. Can you help us with that at all?
12 A. Yes, I can. This relates to school holidays, so the schools are
14 Second, information was received of the possible presence of
15 terrorists there.
16 And, third, I can only see the objective under number 1, to fire
17 from a distance because the Stari Trg repeater came under fire.
18 Q. I understand that. But -- it may have been school holidays,
19 presumably the schoolchildren would have been at their homes in the
21 A. Yes. But if terrorists are present in the school building, then
22 this can be regarded as their barracks and as an appropriate target.
23 Q. And you would then fire at that from a distance using long-range
24 artillery. Is that the position?
25 A. If I had had reliable information about terrorists being present
1 there, I would have fired.
2 Q. And is that target consistent with the order to target -- seek
3 targets outside of populated areas, in your view?
4 A. But wherever there are terrorists present, that is a target.
5 Q. Yes. I see. Tab 20A, which is the list of targets is Exhibit
6 P1064 and is annex 50 to the witness's 92 ter statement.
7 Can we have a look at tab 21 now, please?
8 JUDGE ORIE: Let me ask one additional question. Mr. Zivanovic,
9 what Mr. Emmerson apparently is asking you is why target a school, even if
10 there are terrorists in that school, with a weapon from a long distance, a
11 120-millimetre mortar, at least as far as I'm aware of, is not a weapon
12 that you fire from close range. And he didn't say it, but isn't the
13 mortar considered to be an area weapon rather than a weapon which attacks
14 very precise targets, that is, in -- within 10, 20 metres? That's, I
15 think, the question Mr. Emmerson is putting to you.
16 Correct me if I'm wrong, but schools often are in villages in
17 populated areas. Of course, you have also schools outside of villages. I
18 don't know whether you have any specific knowledge about this school, but
19 if -- if it is a school just in the middle of a village.
20 Then the question of Mr. Emmerson is: Why target such a school
21 with a 120-millimetre mortar?
22 A. Only because of the target. I said, if terrorists are present
23 there, then that is a military target. I really can't say where the
24 school building in question is, whether it's on the edge of the village or
25 in the centre of the village. The 120-millimetre mortar is an appropriate
1 weapon for that, regardless of your opinion. You thought that it could
2 not hit the target spot on, but it can, yes.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I'm not saying it can't hit it. That is not
4 what I said. I gave you an opportunity to comment on a question I think
5 Mr. Emmerson put to you and when he mentioned the mortar, that's what I
6 thought he had in mind. So by making this more explicit, I gave you an
7 opportunity to -- to comment on that. But I've heard your answer.
8 Please proceed, Mr. Emmerson.
9 MR. EMMERSON: Can we turn now, please, to tab 21, which is
10 Exhibit P1007, and it's annex 67 to this witness's statement.
11 Q. This is an order dated the 19th of August signed by you and
12 addressed to the commanders of Combat Groups 1, 2, 3, and 4.
13 I just want to ask you about two matters, please, if I may. After
14 the specific deployments of the combat groups that are there set out,
15 on -- the -- just about halfway down the first page of text in the B/C/S
16 and at the very bottom of the first page of text in the English, there is
17 a paragraph that reads: "Exercise complete combat control of the area
18 abandoned by the sabotage and terrorist forces, put into effect complete
19 control, take security measures against all kinds of surprises, and
20 preclude any kind of infiltration by the sabotage and terrorist groups."
21 Can I understand, please: This obviously is an order issued after
22 the offensive that you have drawn for us on the map of the 11th and 12th
23 of August. This is issued about a week after that. Can you help us as to
24 the areas that you are there referring to as the areas abandoned by the
25 sabotage and terrorist forces over which complete control is to be
2 A. Yes, I can. Combat Group 1 was in the area of the hunting rifle
3 ammunition in Srbica at the time, which is in the area of Drenica.
4 Combat Group 2 was above Junik from the village of Jasic toward
5 the Zar Kolibe, by the border.
6 Combat Group 3 was on the firing range at Belo Polje, which is our
7 training grounds.
8 And Combat Group 4 was at the Kosovska Mitrovica barracks.
9 The tasks relate to these axes, to these routes that I mentioned
11 Q. Can I ask you, please, just to explain to us that the concluding
12 words of this order, which in the B/C/S will be the last two lines above
13 the letters "JV" and in the English read as follows: "I disallow any
14 subsequent activities of the units in the areas of villages and on the
15 axes where media representatives carry out their activities."
16 What -- what in that context do you mean by "subsequent
17 activities" that you're disallowing in this particular order?
18 A. We had problems with the way in which the anti-terrorist combat
19 was portrayed in the media. The aspirations of the terrorists was to
20 internationalise the conflict and we were not really convinced that the
21 events were reported about in a proper way by all. I said therefore -- I
22 ordered that we should not open fire if there are representatives of the
23 mass media present, even at the cost of the terrorists possibly spilling
24 over from one area to another.
25 Q. Could you just turn, please, to tab 28 in the bundle for a moment.
1 This is an extract from the minutes of the Joint Command for Kosovo and
2 Metohija for the 7th of August, so 12 days before this order that you
3 have -- you have issued.
4 And is there is an entry there against the name of Mr. Sainovic
5 which reads: "The greatest damage to us is caused by burning the houses
6 without any need, which could cause pressures to the country."
7 Do you see that entry?
8 A. I'm sorry, but under what item is that? What bullet is that?
9 Q. It's the second bullet point under the heading of Mr. Sainovic's
11 A. Yes, I see that.
12 Q. Thank you. And, for the record, that is D85, page 46 in the
13 English translation.
14 Were you aware that at the political level concern was being
15 expressed that houses were being unnecessarily burnt in the summer
17 A. I allow for the possibility of such cases existing. But as I said
18 a moment ago, as part of the army, I tried to sanction this whenever I
19 learnt of this.
20 And I would have an additional explanation concerning the Joint
21 Command, if you deem it helpful.
22 Q. I'm not going to ask you any questions about it. Mr. Re can ask
23 them to you if he wishes to in re-examination, unless the Trial Chamber
24 wishes me to seek the clarification.
25 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber does not encourage you to further go in
1 that direction.
2 MR. EMMERSON:
3 Q. I want, if I may now, please, to ask you, in the context of the
4 answers that you've given, some very specific questions about deployments
5 that you ordered on the 23rd and 24th of July. And for this, you will
6 need to look behind tab 1C. And it might be of assistance if you were to
7 take out the map that appears behind tab 1C and to have it available to
9 Do you have the map available, Mr. Zivanovic? Behind tab 1C is a
10 map that looks like this. It's -- it's Exhibit D105.
11 Can I suggest, Mr. Zivanovic, that you take the map out of the
12 bundle and have it available to you beside the remainder of the documents.
13 A. Thank you.
14 Q. Thank you.
15 Now, if we can just put that map to one side. If we can please
16 look behind tab 23, which is Exhibit P1065 and annex 51 to your witness
18 Now, this is an order dated the 23rd of July and signed by you.
19 And we can see that at paragraph 2 of the order you order the commander of
20 BG-3 to deploy part of their forces, a tank platoon, to support active
21 operations of the PJP, 6th and 7th Detachment, aimed at clearing and
22 unblocking the road communications on the axis Dolac village, Kukavica,
23 Iglarevo, Stepenice to Kijevo.
24 If we can just look at the map for a moment. At the time of this
25 deployment, where would they have started from, please?
1 A. This is the first action that was carried out as part of the joint
2 action at the end of July. The forces of Combat Group 3, the tank
3 platoon, would set out from the area when you cross the bridge at the
4 juncture to Klina and Djakovica, along the Pec-Pristina road.
5 Q. Thank you. Now, if we can just plot the route that you have
6 ordered them to take. Just south on our map of Klina, we see, I think,
7 the village of Dolac; is that correct?
8 Your glasses.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Could we perhaps also have the exhibit in e-court so
10 that we can more easily zoom in and -- because it is an existing exhibit,
11 from --
12 MR. EMMERSON: I think it is the -- it's certainly on my screen.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Oh, it is -- oh, I'm -- yes. But then we could
14 perhaps zoom in --
15 MR. EMMERSON: Yes, I see, for the witness's assistance.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I was pushing the wrong button.
17 MR. EMMERSON: We'll move -- we'll need to move up the map some --
18 a little further, please. And then -- and then heading -- heading in the
19 opposite direction; in other words, show a portion of territory further
20 west until we see Klina.
21 I'm afraid we're on the wrong part of the map at the moment. We
22 need to move --
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I think we have to move it north.
24 If the map is in its totality in e-court, there should be a
25 possibility to -- if we move up north.
1 MR. EMMERSON: Yes. I think -- I think it's possible, looking at
2 the area that's sectioned in e-court, but there may be a technical error
3 with the scanning, so we may need to work from the paper copy.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Let's move --
5 MR. EMMERSON: Perhaps we can work with paper for the moment,
6 Mr. Zivanovic.
7 Q. You can see -- just so that we can see the axis, please. Just
8 south of Klina, do you see the village of Dolac? It's south and very
9 slightly to the east.
10 A. [Indicates]
11 Q. Just there. Exactly so.
12 And if we just travel -- if we travel in an easterly direction
13 along that road, do we then come to the village of Iglarevo, and following
14 Iglarevo in the same direction, we come to the village of Kijevo. Is that
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Thank you. And if we just look back to the order, we can see that
18 item number 5, you have ordered BG-2 to block the village of Junik and to
19 support activities of the PJP aimed at mopping up Siptar gangs in the
20 village of Junik.
21 Do you see that?
22 A. I can see that.
23 Q. Thank you. And then at item 6, if I can paraphrase it this way,
24 the -- the order is for the BG-3 commander together with the commanders of
25 the 6th and the 7th Detachments of the PJP to conduct reconnaissance along
1 the axis we've just looked at and also along the axis from Pec to Decane
2 to Junik. Is that correct?
3 A. That's correct.
4 Q. And just, if I can on this dual operation, to be absolutely clear.
5 If we look behind tab 24, there's a further order for the following day.
6 Tab 24 is Exhibit P01 -- I'm sorry, P066, and it's annex 52. I won't go
7 through the details of it, but can you look, please, at the first and
8 second paragraphs of that order and do they confirm that the manoeuvres
9 set out in the order of the 23rd of July should be carried into effect?
10 A. Yes, the first bullet point was carried out. Combat Group 3 had
11 one tank platoon. One went to Krgjalevo [as interpreted], the other one
12 to Junik. Junik was -- or had been blocked for a longer while at the
14 Q. And -- and the second paragraph deals with the deployment towards
15 the village of Iglarevo and then towards Kijevo, does it not?
16 A. Correct. The second paragraph reads: "Provide support to the MUP
17 forces in the liberation of Kijevo." Because Kijevo had been blocked by
18 the Siptar forces and that was where the MUP was deployed.
19 Q. Now, if you could turn, please, behind tab 25, which is -- needs
20 to be not shown on the screen, because it is a situation report produced
21 by Colonel Crosland about which he has given some oral evidence.
22 This is a situation report, and it's D78 as an exhibit - filed by
23 Colonel Crosland on the 30th of July concerning a tour of duty in this
24 area on the 28th and 29th of July.
25 And you can see in the summary, having toured the area, he
1 concludes in the last line of that summary: "How do Serb authorities
2 explain wanton damage to towns and villages."
3 I wonder if I may, with the benefit of the map in the few minutes
4 that remain, just to go through the route that he took. You can see that
5 he began in -- under detail 1, he --
6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson, I am afraid that three minutes might
7 not be enough, since I would need two minutes as well.
8 MR. EMMERSON: Well, it might be better to start this part of the
9 exercise, if I may, tomorrow. And I --
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, let's do that. And perhaps you could also
11 provide -- because there's now some discrepancy between the map we find in
12 our binders and the map which is in e-court to the extent it can be
13 manipulated in e-court. It seems like it's a more limited map in e-court.
14 So if you would take care of that as well.
15 Then we have a late start tomorrow. And perhaps I'll already
16 allow you, Mr. Zivanovic, to leave the courtroom but not until I've
17 instructed you that you should not speak with anyone about your testimony
18 whether already given or still to be given.
19 I would like to see you back tomorrow at quarter past 4.00 in the
21 Then, Madam Usher, could you escort the witness out of the
23 [The witness stands down]
24 JUDGE ORIE: I'd like to know how much time is further needed.
25 MR. EMMERSON: I will certainly conclude cross-examination within
1 the -- the hour.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Within the hour. So if we start tomorrow at 4.15,
3 that would bring us to 5.15.
4 I'm looking at other counsel. Mr. Guy-Smith?
5 MR. GUY-SMITH: Half an hour to 45 minutes.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Half an hour to 45 minutes. Let's keep on the safe
7 side. That brings us to 5.45, then a break, and then after the break
8 another 50 minutes brings us to 6.30.
9 Yes, Mr. Harvey.
10 MR. HARVEY: I will need at least half an hour.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Half an hour. That would bring us to 7.00 tomorrow.
12 Mr. Re --
13 MR. HARVEY: Your Honour, I'm sorry, I must emphasise "at least."
14 JUDGE ORIE: At least, yes.
15 MR. HARVEY: Half an hour to 40 minutes.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Well, we will stop anyhow at 7.00.
17 MR. HARVEY: I know you will stop at 7.00.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Harvey, I'm not only asking in relation to this
19 witness -- Mr. Re. But also in relation to the remainder of the programme
20 this week, because we have -- we have Professor Aleksandric and another
21 witness scheduled for this week.
22 We are not sitting on Thursday, as you may have noticed.
23 Could you tell us how much time would still be needed for
24 Professor Aleksandric? That's -- and how much time would the witness
25 still on the list take?
1 MR. RE: The witness still on the list, we've managed to get -- to
2 come -- I've sent an e-mail to Chambers saying that she was coming
3 tomorrow morning, hopefully to testify tomorrow afternoon.
4 I -- our estimate is about 45 minutes.
5 In relation to Professor Aleksandric, I'd have to speak to
6 Mr. Dutertre, who's not here today. I think about half an hour or so. I
7 think. Given that it's -- the main issue left over was in relation to
8 Professor Lecomte and Mr. Dourel's report.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And for Defence?
10 MR. EMMERSON: In terms of the lay witness, if I can use that
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
13 MR. EMMERSON: I at the moment can't envisage having very much, if
14 anything, for her.
15 As far as Professor Aleksandric is concerned, I'm reviewing my
16 notes in that regard. Obviously, I will need to deal with the issue as
17 between himself and Professor Lecomte and one or two other matters, and I
18 would have thought somewhere in the region of one and a half hours. He,
19 of course, hasn't been cross-examined at all.
20 JUDGE ORIE: And other counsel, for Professor Aleksandric and the
21 lay witness.
22 MR. GUY-SMITH: With regard to the lay witness, I think there will
23 be virtually no examination whatsoever.
24 JUDGE ORIE: I didn't hear you very well.
25 MR. GUY-SMITH: With regard to the lay witness, there will be
1 virtually no examination whatsoever.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
3 MR. GUY-SMITH: With regard to Professor Aleksandric, it's really
4 going to depend on the state of play after direct and the cross prior to
5 mine, but I don't think it will be terribly long.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That answer is fully correct and doesn't help
7 me entirely out.
8 Mr. Harvey.
9 MR. GUY-SMITH: I'm sorry, it's --
10 JUDGE ORIE: No, no, no.
11 MR. GUY-SMITH: I'm somewhat -- I'm somewhat dependent on my
13 JUDGE ORIE: You're not -- I'm not blaming you for it but ...
14 MR. HARVEY: In the spirit of helpfulness, I think I will be 10 to
15 15 minutes with the lay witness at most, and I am reasonably confident
16 that after Mr. Emmerson I am not likely to have many, if any, questions
17 for -- for Professor Aleksandric.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I then would very much encourage the parties to
19 see that tomorrow in the short session that we would deal with the present
20 witness and to see whether we can make the further examination as
21 efficient as possible so in order to ...
22 That means that if you'd use all of the time you indicated now,
23 that we might not manage to do that. If you all could save 10 per cent,
24 12/13 per cent, there's a fair chance that it would steal some time for
25 Mr. Re in re-examination as well.
1 Yes, I see you, Mr. Re, you are nodding "yes." You see, I thought
2 about you already.
3 MR. RE: Well, it's not really icing on the cake. It's part of
4 the process if we need to clarify something.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Let's see how far we can come tomorrow, because
6 for Wednesday then, I think that the lay witness and Professor Aleksandric
7 together should be possible to -- to finalise their examination,
8 especially if -- if someone would have to wait, then, for another -- if we
9 can't sit on Thursday, then to wait for another Thursday -- do we have to
10 explore the possibility of sitting on Friday? That's, of course, usually
11 not scheduled. We'll give that some thought and we'll see what would be
12 the best to do.
13 At this moment, I cannot announce anything else. Then we'll
14 adjourn until tomorrow, 4.15 in Courtroom III.
15 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.05 p.m.,
16 to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 16th day
17 of October, 2007, at 4.15 p.m.