1 Tuesday, 22 August 2006
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness entered court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 2.15 p.m.
6 JUDGE BONOMY: Good afternoon, Mr. Kabashi.
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good afternoon.
8 JUDGE BONOMY: The solemn declaration to tell the truth which you
9 took at the beginning of your evidence continues to apply to the evidence
10 today. Do you understand that?
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
12 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.
13 WITNESS: EMIN KABASHI [Resumed]
14 [Witness answered through interpreter]
15 JUDGE BONOMY: Now, Mr. Ackerman, had you concluded or are we
16 still with you?
17 MR. ACKERMAN: No, Your Honour, I have just a few more questions.
18 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.
19 MR. ACKERMAN: There is a procedural matter I would like to take
20 up with the Chamber at the Chamber's convenience, maybe when this witness
21 finishes or something like that.
22 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Ackerman, I like to know in advance by
23 indication through the -- either the court deputy or our own legal officer
24 what these issues are so that I can assess whether that's the right way
25 to deal with them. So if at the break you would indicate what it is and
1 that will be relayed to me and we'll decide how best to deal with it
3 MR. ACKERMAN: Thank you. Along that line, Your Honour, if I take
4 it it's something I feel needs to be part of the record that I'll be able
5 to make a record about it.
6 JUDGE BONOMY: Yes. There are ways different ways of doing that
7 in this Tribunal, of course, Mr. Ackerman, so horses for courses.
8 MR. ACKERMAN: If I don't know them all I'm in some kind of
10 JUDGE BONOMY: Well --
11 Cross-examination by Mr. Ackerman: [Continued]
12 Q. Sir, yesterday when we finished, we were talking about the
13 testimony you gave in the Milosevic trial and we were talking about
14 somethings that you said at page 4039 of that testimony.
15 One thing that you said there with regard to that you were asked
16 if the people that threw the bomb in your house had entered your house and
17 what you said was, "they did not enter the house, they had not come to
18 enter the house but to kill." So it's your position they came there to
19 kill you?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. I didn't hear the answer but that's because I need to turn this
22 on. Okay. Thank you.
23 A. I said yes.
24 Q. You told us that there were quite a number of them yesterday. I
25 think you said eight or ten right in front of your house and more in the
1 neighbourhood. If they were there to kill you I'm wondering why they
2 didn't accomplish that. Were you heavily armed and shooting back or was
3 your house heavily defended or what kept them from doing what you say they
4 came there to do?
5 A. And I'm rather surprised they didn't kill me too. At the moment I
6 was -- at that moment I was not armed.
7 Q. Well, I guess you have to leave room in your mind then for the
8 possibility that you're wrong, that they didn't come there to kill you or
9 they would have done it, right?
10 A. Well, they certainly didn't come with arms, grenades and
11 Kalashnikovs to have coffee with me.
12 Q. I suspect that's true but the only thing that kept them from
13 killing you was what they decided in their own minds. You didn't keep
14 them from doing it, did you?
15 A. I don't know. You'd have to ask them what was in their minds, if
16 you can find them. I don't know what they were thinking.
17 Q. Well, that would be nice to ask them what was in their minds but
18 what you're doing is you're telling us what was in their minds. You're
19 telling us they came there to kill you. So you're claiming to know what
20 was in their minds. Now you're saying we have to ask them if we want to
22 MR. HANNIS: Your Honour, he answered the question and said he
23 didn't know what they were thinking.
24 JUDGE BONOMY: Indeed, that seems to be the position,
25 Mr. Ackerman.
1 MR. ACKERMAN: Well, that's today's position. It was a position
2 in the Milosevic transcript that they came there to kill them and that he
3 somehow knew what was in their minds.
4 JUDGE BONOMY: All right. Well --
5 MR. ACKERMAN: I'm finished with that.
6 JUDGE BONOMY: Oh, yeah. Well, I was going to say if you feel
7 it's likely to yield results then carry on but I think you've got as much
8 as to be given from this.
9 MR. ACKERMAN: I could probably ask more questions but I agree it
10 wouldn't be that productive.
11 Q. I want to ask you about the area of Drenica. First of all, it's
12 true, is it not, that there was a period of time when the Drenica
13 municipality was under the control of the KLA?
14 A. I don't know. I was not in the municipality of Drenica at the
15 time. I only went to Drenica when I had something to do there.
16 Q. Apparently you've forgotten since your testimony in Milosevic. At
17 page 4046 you were asked if all of Drenica was under KLA control for a
18 while and you said for a time it was. So then you must have known that it
19 was. Does that refresh your memory in some way?
20 A. You asked me about the municipality of Drenica. There are
21 actually two municipalities. For the territory of Drenica I do know that
22 for a time it was under the control of the KLA, yes.
23 Q. And do you know what period of time it was actually controlled by
24 the KLA?
25 A. I would think from September, October, 1998 until the beginning of
2 Q. And it's also the case, isn't it, that the territory of Drenica,
3 as you call it, represents about 27 per cent of the territory of Kosovo,
5 A. That's what I've read in geography books.
6 Q. You have no reason to believe the geography books are lying to
7 you, do you?
8 A. I have never doubted them.
9 Q. During your time in the KLA, from the time you joined up in 1997
10 until the end, you wore civilian clothes, didn't you?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. And other KLA persons also wore civilian clothes, correct?
13 A. Some of them did. Some of them who did not need to wear
15 Q. And there were women who were part of the KLA too, weren't
17 A. Yes, there were women and girls.
18 Q. And they were -- some of them were armed, some of them wore
20 A. Yes. Those who were on the front were armed and had uniforms.
21 Whereas the others were busy with other things and they had no need to
22 wear uniforms and did not have arms with them.
23 Q. And you had four sons who were fighters in the KLA, didn't you?
24 A. You're talking about my sons, my children?
25 Q. Yes.
1 A. As far as I know, my wife has only given birth to one son.
2 Q. Well then the information I have is wrong, then. I apologise.
3 You know a person by the name of Nusret Pilana [phoen]?
4 A. You probably mean Nusret Plana [phoen], not Pilana but Plana.
5 Q. That's who I mean. That's correct. My Albanian pronunciation is
6 pretty poor. Do you know that person?
7 A. Yes, I do.
8 Q. Did you have anything to do with a book that he wrote?
9 A. I was the editor of that book.
10 Q. And just tell us generally what that book was about?
11 A. I don't know which -- exactly which book you're referring to
12 because he wrote several books.
13 Q. All right. Let me give you a title. I think it's called The
14 Terror of Invading Serbia over Albanians, 1844 to 1999. Familiar with
15 that book?
16 A. Yes. I actually proofread that book together with others, and
17 it's written on the cover of the book who was the proofreading editor.
18 Q. And would that be you?
19 A. Yes. And I also authorised publication of the book.
20 Q. Now, when you say you authorised publication, what does that mean?
21 A. Well, that's what an editor does.
22 Q. And what is the book about, basically?
23 A. The book talks not in general terms but specifically about Serb
24 occupation and massacres which were carried out from 1844 until 1999, and
25 it's in three languages. The titles, the captions are in three languages.
1 There is a preface which was written and it's illustrated with quite a few
3 Q. All right. I think that's all I have for you. Thank you very
5 A. Thank you.
6 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you, Mr. Ackerman.
7 Mr. Fila?
8 Cross-examination by Mr. Fila:
9 MR. FILA: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I don't have questions per
10 se. I just wanted to clarify a few things from the transcript. I was
11 also pretty much convinced that this witness had four sons and, according
12 to the information we've received, that was so. It was in the statement,
13 in the transcript, and all of a sudden I learn he has only one.
14 Q. Therefore, Mr. Kabashi, I wanted to ask you something. My name is
15 Toma Fila and I represent Nikola Sainovic. We will attempt to clarify
16 some things, otherwise I have no questions for you. Therefore, you had
17 only one son. Was he a member of the KLA?
18 A. No, he wasn't.
19 Q. I'm not trying to make things up. We were advised by the OTP that
20 you actually have four sons.
21 The second question: I can see that you were born in 1941, is
22 that so? Were you born then?
23 A. In 1949.
24 Q. It says here 1941. No further questions. I just wanted to
25 explain. It reads there that you graduated from university and you were
1 probably three years old according to the information provided at the time
2 when you graduated. I just wanted to point that out. I have no further
4 A. If I might, I would like to make a small explanation here. In the
5 press in Belgrade and in Serbian TV, after the bomb was thrown into my
6 house, they wrote that a certain terrorist was killed with my name and
7 then with four children. It was also said a certain terrorist was killed
8 with 11 members of his family. And another version which was on Tanjug
9 was that a certain terrorist was killed with my name, with eight members
10 of his family, all of whom were members of the KLA, like my mother and all
11 the rest. This information was given about me in March of 1999 in the
12 Serbian press.
13 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you, Mr. Kabashi.
14 MR. FILA: [Interpretation] By your leave, Your Honour.
15 Q. Mr. Kabashi, since you can understand Serbian, we just wanted to
16 make sure that this was not our information. This was OTP information on
17 you. It says that you were born in 1941, the same year I was born, and
18 that you have four sons. It was information provided by the OTP. And I
19 ask myself where is all this taking us? I was about to ask you if we
20 attended the same university at the same time. Thank you.
21 A. You're welcome.
22 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, Mr. Ackerman, you have a problem.
23 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, it's a mystery. We were given a
24 supplemental information sheet by the Office of the Prosecutor which says
25 at the bottom --
1 JUDGE BONOMY: When did you receive this?
2 MR. ACKERMAN: It's dated 17 August so we received it around then,
3 and one assumes when you get this it's because they have had additional
4 conversations with the witness and this is new information they've learned
5 from the witness. Now, I don't know now whether the witness told them
6 this or they just got this out of some press release and threw it in here
7 thinking it was him. I don't know. But it might be important to find
8 out. If he told them that it could be pretty crucial, I think.
9 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, Mr. Hannis, can you resolve this conundrum.
10 MR. HANNIS: Your Honour, I'm informed that our supplemental
11 information form that did indicate he had four sons was a mistake on our
12 part. I don't know how it happened now but I'm told that was our mistake.
13 As for his date of birth I know the English -- his ICTY statement does
14 have his birth date as 1949 but it appears that the Serbian translation
15 has his birthdate date as 1941. I can't explain how that error occurred
16 but I can understand that's where Mr. Fila had 1941.
17 JUDGE BONOMY: That seems to clarify the point.
18 Now, Mr. Bakrac, have you questions for the witness?
19 Mr. Cepic?
20 MR. CEPIC: Yes, Your Honour. Thank you, Your Honour.
21 Cross-examination by Mr. Cepic:
22 Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Kabashi. My name is Djuro Cepic, one of the
23 counsel for General Vladimir Lazarevic, and I will have a few questions
24 for you.
25 Yesterday we discussed the bombing of Pristina and in your
1 statement given to the investigators on the 24th of April 1999, the same
2 thing is mentioned.
3 You re-confirmed what you had stated previously, and that was that
4 the NATO bombing did not cause any damage in residential parts of Pristina
5 and that there were no military installations and facilities in Pristina.
6 You also said that only the prison, the district court building as well as
7 the police building were bombed. Is that correct?
8 A. I'm not sure about the prison, whether it was damaged or not. But
9 the state security building, not the police building, was damaged. They
10 are two different buildings and still are. It was bombed, the building of
11 state security, where investigations were carried out and people were held
12 in custody. If you have photos of the buildings I can show you which one
13 it was.
14 Q. Thank you. Did you know that between the 24th and the 25th of
15 March 1999, during the night, the building of the public housing company,
16 as well as the residential parts of Rudnik and Gavalija [phoen] were
18 A. No, I don't know anything about that, and I don't know where you
19 got the name of Aja [phoen].
20 Q. Thank you. Ajvalija?
21 A. Yes, Hajvalija [phoen] does exist as an area.
22 Q. Thank you. I apologise but in the transcript, we don't have the
23 toponym spelled out. It is A-j-v-a-l-i-j-a.
24 Thank you.
25 On the 26th of March 1999, in the village of Gornji Dobrovo, which
1 is the in the territory of the Kosovo Polje municipality, there were six
2 people killed by NATO bombing, four of which were women. All six were
4 A. I wasn't there at that time. I can't tell you anything about it.
5 Q. Did you know that in Pristina, the post office and four
6 residential buildings were destroyed and that several people were killed
7 on the 7th of April 1999?
8 A. I know that but I wasn't in Kosova on the 7th of April.
9 Q. Thank you. Did you know that several residential buildings were
10 destroyed in the neighbourhood of Dardanija, as well as the plastics
11 factory in Pristina and the bus station in Pristina on the 12th and the
12 13th of April 1999?
13 A. I read about that, and the neighbourhood of Dardanija and the bus
14 station and the plastics factory are in perfect condition now as they were
15 at the time. None of them were hit, as far as I know. In fact, you can
16 still see writing in Cyrillic on all those buildings as they were at the
18 Q. Thank you Mr. Kabashi.
19 Did you know that during NATO bombings, Pristina and its environs
20 were bombed for 406 times and that over 1.000 projectiles landed on
21 Pristina and its environs?
22 A. The numbers you gave I'm not sure about. I don't know. But that
23 military facilities were bombed around Pristina because Pristina was one
24 of the most military cities in all of the Balkans, that is well known, all
25 the military facilities around Pristina were bombed, yes.
1 Q. Dr. Kabashi, I didn't ask you about military facilities. I asked
2 you about civilian buildings and all those I had listed were actually
3 civilian buildings.
4 JUDGE BONOMY: Well --
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, I don't.
6 JUDGE BONOMY: Are you saying your question about 406 bombing
7 raids and over 1.000 projectiles is confined to civilian buildings?
8 MR. CEPIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, it was a total number of
9 the projectiles in the raids against -- on Pristina.
10 JUDGE BONOMY: In that case, the answer was quite proper then. He
11 did not misunderstand the question.
12 MR. CEPIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
13 Q. During your examination yesterday, as well as in -- on page 4, the
14 last paragraph in the English and in the B/C/S, and in the Albanian, this
15 is page 7, paragraph 3, as well as in yesterday's transcript, at page 71,
16 lines 13 and 14, you mentioned that, as you were moving along in that
17 column towards the train station, that a tank was there at the bridge
18 which divided the column. Since this was amidst all the bombing and since
19 you said that military facilities and targets were targeted, how could it
20 be? And I believe you will agree that there was a tank standing in the
21 middle of a bridge amidst all the bombings? Wouldn't it be illogical?
22 MR. HANNIS: Well, Your Honour, I'm not sure that accurately
23 states the evidence. I don't know that we have evidence that bombing was
24 going on while he was going towards the railroad station.
25 JUDGE BONOMY: Is there a factual basis for this question,
1 Mr. Cepic?
2 MR. CEPIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the time that the witness
3 mentioned is the time during which NATO bombings went on, and I just
4 mentioned a number of times Pristina was bombed.
5 MR. HANNIS: Your Honour, I don't think we've had evidence about
6 whether the bombs was occurring 24 hours a day every day or only at night
7 or --
8 JUDGE BONOMY: It's a question that really isn't for the witness
9 to answer. It's the sort of thing that you might present as an argument,
10 but unless you're going to give him chapter and verse suggesting that
11 there was a bombing raid going on at the same time, then the question
12 doesn't really -- isn't really likely to lead to an answer that will
13 assist us.
14 MR. CEPIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I think that we will deal
15 with this question later during these proceedings. Now I would like to
16 deal with something else, if you permit me to do so.
17 Q. Mr. Kabashi, do you know that on the 29th of January 1999, there
18 was a terrorist attack in Pristina in the following way: An explosive
19 device was thrown into a cafe called galleria, eight persons were wounded
20 due to this, and the incident was verified by the OSCE mission? Are you
21 aware of that?
22 A. No. I was not in Pristina at the time and I wasn't really
23 interested in who was being killed in the coffee houses in Pristina.
24 Q. So you're not interested in that? I'm talking about January 1999.
25 Where were you in January 1999, Mr. Kabashi?
1 A. Do you mean the January after the war?
2 Q. No. January 1999, before the bombing, before the NATO bombing.
3 A. I was busy working, doing the jobs that I had to do in the KLA.
4 Q. Where were you, then, in January 1999, as a member of the KLA?
5 A. I could have been in one of several locations, in Drenica,
6 Malisheva, Dukagjin, or in Lap. I would have -- could have been in
7 Zllashe, near Pristina.
8 Q. And of course, as a member of the KLA, you're not interested in
9 the fact that civilians are getting killed in Pristina; is that right?
10 A. What I meant is I was not paying attention at all to people who
11 were being killed in coffee houses.
12 Q. Thank you. I'm not interested in opinions.
13 Do you know that on the 31st of January 1990, there was yet
14 another terrorist attack?
15 THE INTERPRETER: I apologise. 1999 was what I meant.
16 MR. CEPIC: I said 31st of January 19 --
17 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: It has been corrected.
18 MR. CEPIC: Thank you.
19 Q. [Interpretation] Thank you. A terrorist attack on the Beca
20 cevapcici shop, one person was killed and two were wounded. Are you aware
21 of that perhaps?
22 A. I don't know where the -- that Vienna shop is.
23 Q. So to conclude, Mr. Kabashi, as for all incidents where civilians
24 were the casualties in Pristina are concerned, you know nothing about
25 that, right?
1 MR. HANNIS: Your Honour, I don't think that's an appropriate
2 question. He's asking him about two and then he says for all incidents,
3 you don't know. Are two the total number of incidents involving
5 JUDGE BONOMY: Yes. The point is well made, Mr. Cepic but I
6 wonder in any event where this is leading. Because I'm certainly not
7 going to follow up Mr. Hannis's intervention as an invitation for you to
8 go through all the civilian deaths in Pristina. So really what is the
9 point that you're trying to make? Or what does it relate to, if you can
10 tell me that?
11 MR. CEPIC: [Interpretation] Precisely, Your Honour.
12 Your Honour, precisely. I don't want to waste the Court's time.
13 I meant -- I thought that in this way, I could deal with this particular
14 set of questions because when all my questions were put about civilians
15 being killed or wounded in Pristina before the bombing, the witness said
16 that he did not know about that.
17 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, we've had two incidents referred to.
18 MR. CEPIC: [Interpretation] I mentioned incidents during the
19 bombing previously.
20 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, I think, Mr. Cepic, the arguments can wait
21 for later. You've got the answers to the questions you asked and you
22 can build your argument on these answers. Let's move to your next
24 MR. CEPIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
25 Q. Dr. Kabashi, are you aware of any incident before the 24th of
1 March 1999 in which civilians were killed due to terrorist attacks in
3 A. No, I don't.
4 Q. Thank you. No further questions.
5 MR. CEPIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
6 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you, Mr. Cepic. Mr. Ivetic?
7 MR. IVETIC: Thank you, Your Honour, yes.
8 Cross-examination by Mr. Ivetic:
9 Q. Dr. Kabashi -- excuse me, Dr. Kabashi, good day. My name is
10 Dragan Ivetic and together with my colleagues, Mr. Branko Lukic and Mr.
11 Ozren Ogrizovic, I represent Mr. Sreten Lukic, one of the accused in this
12 case. Today I'll have some questions for you relative to your recollection
13 of pertinent for these proceedings, and I would ask that you pay close
14 attention to what I'm asking so we can try and move through this as
15 smoothly as possible. Is that fair enough, sir?
16 A. Yes, of course.
17 Q. First of all, let me follow up on the questions that my colleague,
18 Mr. Cepic, was asking about regarding attacks against civilians in
19 Pristina. In the Milosevic proceedings, you testified under oath at page
20 4019, lines 20 through 25, that in fact no operations were undertaken in
21 Pristina by the KLA in which civilians were killed. Do you recall that
22 testimony, sir?
23 A. Yes, that's true.
24 Q. Okay. And now the incidents that Mr. Cepic went through regarding
25 attacks on civilians that took place in terms of bombings, that is
1 precisely the type of question that Mr. Milosevic asked you about and
2 which you denied, that those types of operations had taken place, is that
4 A. Of course.
5 Q. So it would appear that that portion of your testimony during the
6 Milosevic proceedings was not accurate, isn't that true, Dr. Kabashi?
7 A. What part of the testimony do you mean?
8 Q. That no such attacks against civilians took place in Pristina.
9 Where we have now heard that in fact there were multiple attacks of which
10 several were identified by my colleague, Mr. Cepic?
11 JUDGE BONOMY: And do we have evidence of these at the moment?
12 MR. IVETIC: At the moment we do not, Your Honour.
13 JUDGE BONOMY: That's an argument for you to advance later once
14 we've heard the whole story, I think.
15 MR. IVETIC: Okay.
16 Q. Now, Dr. Kabashi, turning first to some technical details, looking
17 at your statement dated the 24th of April 1999, that statement was read
18 back to you in the Albanian language verbatim before you signed it; is
19 that correct?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. And after hearing the statement read back to you in the Albanian
22 language you proceeded to sign the statement and certify that the
23 statements that the matters put, set forth therein, were true to the best
24 of your knowledge and recollection; is that correct?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Okay. And the Prosecutor has also tendered your testimony from
2 the Milosevic proceedings. Is it accurate to state that you made a solemn
3 declaration to speak the truth in the Milosevic proceedings just as you
4 did yesterday in these proceedings before this Trial Chamber?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Okay. And during your testimony in the Milosevic proceedings, the
7 transcript page 4047, lines 15 to 16, you confirmed that in addition to
8 being a member of the KLA, you in fact at times were armed and in the
9 field as a KLA insurgent; is that correct?
10 A. Yes, that's right.
11 Q. Okay. And are you telling us now that as an armed member of the
12 KLA, you did not ever take part in the armed attacks undertaken by the KLA
13 in Pristina against civilians?
14 A. Neither against civilians nor against armed soldiers.
15 Q. Okay. What specific KLA formation or unit were you a member of?
16 A. It was a logistics unit or formation with its headquarters in
17 Pristina and it was responsible for guerrilla duties in Pristina.
18 Q. When you say guerrilla duties, would that include guerrilla
20 A. Yes. It would.
21 Q. And in fact the KLA logistics base in Pristina had many members,
22 is that not correct?
23 A. It had several members.
24 Q. Well, previously you mentioned that you had been to Drenica at
25 some point in time and I believe you then clarified that you had been to
1 several places as part of your duties as a member of the KLA. Isn't it a
2 fact that sometime prior to the commencement of the NATO bombings in 1999,
3 as part of your official duties within the KLA, you visited the KLA
4 command in Drenica with several other prominent members of the KLA from
5 Pristina, including representatives of the league of Albanian women and
6 including your good friend Ms. Brovina; isn't that correct, and several
7 others from Pristina?
8 A. Yes, that's true.
9 Q. Okay. And when we are talking about this KLA subgroup that was in
10 the Pristina area, where, geographically, was the base located?
11 A. In several places but mainly at the clinic of Dr. Brovina, but
12 also at other places in Pristina.
13 Q. Could you name the neighbourhoods in Pristina where the KLA was
14 active or based, to the best of your recollection?
15 A. There were no headquarters but there were groups of people who
16 carried out different duties, to help with logistics, in several
17 neighbourhoods of Pristina, Matrican, and Vellushi, Sofali, maybe in other
18 districts or neighbourhoods as well but I can't remember all the
19 neighbours now at this moment.
20 Q. Were there any KLA groups active in the Vranjevac neighbourhood,
21 for instance the KLA group G-o-l-a-k?
22 A. I don't know how many KLA groups were in Pristina but I know that
23 there was a logistics group in Vranjevc [Realtime transcript read in
24 error, "franities"].
25 Q. And that group in Vranjevac was preparing uniforms for the KLA
1 fighters, was it not, among other supplies?
2 A. Among other things, yes, the uniforms.
3 MR. IVETIC: Your Honours I see a typographical error on the
4 transcript page 19 line 14 it says "franities," which I believe the
5 witness said "Vranjevac," which -- and I asked him a follow-up question,
6 he confirmed, so I think it's pretty clear.
7 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you, Mr. Ivetic.
8 THE INTERPRETER: Well, the witness said Vranjevc.
9 MR. IVETIC:
10 Q. I think we are talking about the same place, is "Vranjevc"
11 Vranjevac in Serbian, sir? I see you nodding your head. Is that a yes?
12 We have to have an oral response.
13 A. Of course, yes.
14 Q. Thank you. Now you indicated that multiple groups were going
15 around doing their different duties. I take it then those duties included
16 organising and participating in terrorist attacks against the Serbian
17 state. Is that accurate?
18 A. No. I don't think it was terrorists attacks against a state.
19 This was open war.
20 Q. You do concede that the KLA, the group that you were a part of, in
21 Pristina engaged in armed battles with components of the Serbian state, do
22 you not?
23 MR. HANNIS: That's what open war means.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, I didn't say that.
25 JUDGE BONOMY: Sorry, what did you say, Mr. Hannis?
1 MR. HANNIS: I didn't catch the -- Your Honour, I said I thought
2 that's what open war meant, engaging in armed battles.
3 MR. IVETIC: That's what I thought so too but as you can see your
4 witness seems to think otherwise so I'm trying to get clarification.
5 JUDGE BONOMY: Yes, carry on, please, Mr. Ivetic.
6 MR. IVETIC:
7 Q. Mr. -- Dr. Kabashi, isn't it true that for the time period of 1998
8 through 1999 in and around the region of Pristina, that your KLA groups
9 conducted guerrilla attacks in that region?
10 A. What do you mean guerrilla attacks and against whom.
11 Q. Guerrilla attacks against anybody.
12 A. If there were guerrilla attacks, these guerrilla attacks were
13 against military facilities and uniformed soldiers but I was not part of
14 those groups.
15 Q. But did you have knowledge of the activities that other members of
16 your organisation were undertaking?
17 A. No. The group I was part of, with whom I worked, was mainly a
18 group that dealt with logistics problems.
19 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Kabashi, logistics suggests to me that you are
20 providing material supplies and material aid to active participating
21 members of the KLA, and that your only reason for existing is to support
22 armed activity. Now, have I got that wrong?
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. But we could not supply the
24 KLA with weapons because we couldn't, we didn't have those weapons, but we
25 supplied them with things like paper or medicine or things like that.
1 JUDGE BONOMY: And not uniforms, which were raised earlier?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes, uniforms, but not weapons.
3 JUDGE BONOMY: Not food?
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Clothes, food, sanitary
5 equipment, and other things.
6 JUDGE BONOMY: And was all that not done so that they could, in
7 fact, carry out their armed activities?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
9 JUDGE BONOMY: All right. Now, counsel is anxious to know whether
10 you're aware that the KLA were carrying out attacks. Let's forget the
11 fancy footwork around the words like "guerrilla" and "terrorist" and all
12 the other words that seem to upset people in this courtroom, and let's
13 just get down to basics.
14 He wants to know whether you were aware that KLA people attacked
15 other people in the Pristina area. Now, what's the answer to that
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In the Pristina area, there was not
18 such fighting. I have no information that the KLA attacked anyone.
19 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Ivetic?
20 MR. IVETIC:
21 Q. Okay. Was one of the other duties of your logistical unit
22 preparing identification, IDs, for members of the KLA?
23 A. No.
24 Q. How about forging identity documents from humanitarian
25 organisations to allow KLA fighters to pass freely through territories?
1 A. No.
2 Q. Okay. Now, during your testimony at the Milosevic trial, you
3 claim that reports about abductions of both Serbs and Albanians by the KLA
4 were not true, that they were fabrications of the Serbian propaganda. Is
5 that your -- is that accurate, is that your testimony?
6 MR. HANNIS: Could we have a page reference.
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] To this day, yes.
8 JUDGE BONOMY: We would all be helped by the page number. If
9 that's a problem, it can be given later once someone assisting you has
10 found it. But it does help if each time a quotation is selected from
11 previous transcript, that we are given the page number.
12 MR. IVETIC: Yes, Your Honour, I apologise although the witness
13 did confirm that was his testimony. That's at page 4041, lines 9 through
14 14 of the Milosevic transcript and I believe I can ask the witness again.
15 Q. Am I accurate in stating that you -- your testimony is that
16 reports of abductions of both Serbs and Albanians in 1998 were -- by the
17 KLA were fabrications by the Serb propaganda? Is that your testimony,
19 MR. HANNIS: Well --
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
21 MR. IVETIC:
22 Q. I take that to mean that the KLA did not engage in any policy or
23 goal of abductions or kidnappings of any persons on the territory of
24 Kosovo Metohija in either -- well, let's limit it to 1998. Is that
1 A. As far as I know, so to my knowledge, this is what happened.
2 JUDGE BONOMY: I've allowed that question to proceed to be
3 answered, Mr. Ivetic, but really we don't have time, the luxury of the
4 time necessary in this Tribunal to underscore a pretty clear answer
5 several times over in the way that might be appropriate when you're
6 putting something to a jury. I think we have to make more rapid progress
7 through points like this.
8 MR. IVETIC: I will try to, Your Honour.
9 Q. The point I want to make, sir, is we have seen evidence here from
10 the OSCE, that's the Organisation of Security and Cooperation in Europe,
11 and from Human Rights Watch, citing Adem Demaqi, the political spokesman
12 of the KLA, among others, as stating that such abductions in fact were
13 undertaken by the KLA during the relevant time period. How do you
14 reconcile that fact with your testimony, sir?
15 A. Well, you have to ask Adem Demaqi about that. He is alive. You
16 can call him to come here and he can testify.
17 Q. Okay. Now, what I'm getting at, sir, is that much of your
18 testimony is either inaccurate or biased in favour of the KLA. Isn't that
20 MR. HANNIS: Your Honour, I object to that. That's an argument.
21 JUDGE BONOMY: Pretty pointless question, Mr. Ivetic in the
22 situation that we are in here. It's one that you might ask in other
23 jurisdictions, I suspect but --
24 MR. IVETIC:
25 Q. Now, sir --
1 JUDGE BONOMY: Perry Mason probably once got somebody to break
2 down and admit to that but let's move on.
3 MR. IVETIC: True enough.
4 Q. Now, sir, the fact that you are a member of the KLA, and from what
5 you've testified to in the last two days, a fairly active member of the
6 KLA, that appears nowhere in your sworn statement provided to the Office
7 of the Prosecutor as part of these proceedings, does it?
8 MR. HANNIS: Your Honour, is there evidence that he was asked that
10 MR. IVETIC: Well there is a lot of confusion as to what he was
11 asked and wasn't asked. We've received proofing notes from the Office of
12 the Prosecutor, from Mr. Hannis, stating that he was present for --
13 JUDGE BONOMY: Look, Mr. Ivetic, this falls into exactly the same
14 category as the last. I mean -- it either is or it is not, and it will be
15 clear from the statement itself.
16 MR. IVETIC: It goes towards confronting the witness and
17 establishing whether in fact the witness has credibility or what probative
18 value ought to be given to statements made by the witness.
19 JUDGE BONOMY: But that depends whether the question was relevant
20 to the interrogation that was taking place at that stage or whether it
21 arose. You know, if you can show perhaps a part of the statement where
22 inevitably that should have been said, then there might be something in
23 your point but we don't know at this moment exactly what was being asked
24 of him at that time and we know what he said in the Milosevic trial which
25 is now, what, four years ago and more, and his motion was clear from then.
1 So let's get to things that are material now, please.
2 MR. IVETIC: Okay. I will do that, Your Honour, thank you.
3 Q. Now, let's turn to your statement and in the second paragraph of
4 the statement which I believe is the second paragraph in all the various
5 translations, you talk about policemen who you describe as
6 having "military style" uniforms with White Eagles on their sleeves and
7 berets. Is it your testimony that members of the Ministry of the Interior
8 or MUP had such emblems on their uniforms?
9 A. No, I didn't say that.
10 Q. Okay. Can I direct your attention to the second paragraph of your
11 sworn statement which is dated the 24th, I believe, of April, 1999 given
12 to the Prosecutor of this Tribunal?
13 MR. HANNIS: I have a hard copy we can hand the witness.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I didn't say -- I did not say that
15 these were --
16 MR. IVETIC:
17 Q. All right. I have the English language version of that
18 transcript -- of that statement in front of me. And in the middle of the
19 second paragraph of that statement, in English it says, "There were police
20 in standard uniforms, police in military-style uniforms, some of which had
21 a White Eagle badge on their shoulders and a beret with a White Eagle
23 And I'm asking you, sir, if you -- first of all, now, since you've
24 put that into doubt, did you in fact say that to the Office of the
25 Prosecutor as part of your interview with them?
1 A. Yes, yes.
2 Q. Okay. And my original question was is it your testimony that
3 members of the Ministry of Interior had such emblems on their uniforms or
4 are you talking about -- answer that question. Is it your testimony that
5 members of the Ministry of the Interior or MUP had such --
6 A. No. I did not say that and in fact I don't know what the MUP
7 members had as their emblems. I don't know whether they were members of
8 the police or not.
9 Q. Okay. I think that's clear enough answer.
10 Now, you also claim in this paragraph that there were armed
11 civilians. Did you see that with your own eyes?
12 A. Not only I saw them with my own eyes, but I felt it and -- because
13 my house was attacked and everybody knows that.
14 Q. So you're saying your house was attacked by armed civilians?
15 A. Including armed civilians.
16 Q. Okay. Now, you stated that on the day of the 25th of March 1999,
17 you received a telephone call from someone stating something to the effect
18 of -- well, referencing NATO. I want to ask you about that telephone
19 call. Did you perceive that as a threat against your life, some sort of
20 reaction from somebody relative to the NATO bombings?
21 A. I perceived that as a threat to my life, my family, and time
22 proved that that was right.
23 Q. And you did not report this threat to your life and to your family
24 to the police or other law enforcement authorities, did you?
25 A. Well, I would like to ask you, were you there in Kosova in March
1 1999? Who could I report to? There was no police station. Everything
2 was being carried out by the force of the gun and everybody was trying to
3 shelter their families in the -- in a safe place where the guns could not
4 reach them.
5 Q. I take that then that you did not report the threat to the police
6 authorities. Am I correct in that assumption?
7 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Ivetic, surely you read that into that answer.
8 This is another example of what I mentioned earlier on.
9 MR. IVETIC: I'm trying to make sure everything is clear and a
10 simple -- I'm just asking for a simple yes or no answer. I'm not --
11 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, you have to treat us as having a measure of
12 common sense.
13 MR. IVETIC: Okay.
14 Q. Now, in the second paragraph of your statement, all versions, you
15 talk about two policemen that you stated you knew from before, I believe
16 Simic and Pedza are the names that you gave for them. Am I correct in
17 understanding your testimony to be that you saw them patrolling the
18 streets in the afternoon and that you did not see them take part in the
19 attack against your home?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Okay. And near the middle -- near the middle of page 3 of the
22 Albanian version of your statement, which is I believe paragraph 3 of page
23 2 of both the English and the B/C/S, you stated at the top -- that at the
24 time of the explosion at your home, you told two other relatives in the
25 room who were with you to lay down. Did you in fact also lay down to
1 protect yourself?
2 A. I was sitting behind the door, having a telephone conversation
3 when the bomb exploded.
4 Q. And did you remain in that position after the bomb exploded,
5 sitting behind the door, having a telephone conversation?
6 A. No. Of course, not. I could not stay there sitting. The door
7 fell on me. The telephone line was broken. Well, I think you can imagine
8 what a bomb does when it explodes.
9 Q. I can and that's why I asked if you were on the ground with your
10 other family members after the bomb exploded.
11 A. Well, you could say I was lying down, yes.
12 Q. Okay. Now, where exactly was this room located in relation to
13 your house? For instance, what floor was it on?
14 A. On the ground floor, on the right of the main door.
15 Q. And is your home surrounded by any walls or gates or other
17 A. There was an iron gate, an iron fence around the yard at that
19 Q. And was there any street lighting that was operative on that
20 night, 25 March 1999?
21 A. No. There wasn't.
22 Q. In fact --
23 A. There never was.
24 Q. Okay. Now, what about inside your home? Was there any
25 electricity in your home on that night, 25 March 1999, in the evening?
1 A. No. The electricity was cut off at certain times, especially in
2 parts that did not belong to the town. But this did not happen only that
3 night. This happened all the time.
4 Q. Okay. And that happened all the time after NATO started bombing,
5 is that accurate?
6 A. Even before the NATO bombing there were many power cuts.
7 Q. Okay. And I believe you set forth in your statement that after
8 the explosion, there was a lot of smoke in the air from the explosive
9 itself; is that correct?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And was it dark outside already when the event occurred? I
12 believe you said it was 9.45 p.m. Was it dark at that time?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. And when is the first time that you saw the vehicle that you first
15 describe as a car and then as a jeep? That is to say, where were you when
16 you first saw that vehicle?
17 A. I was inside my home and I went from room to room, as I told you,
18 my mother was ill and I was doing errands, trying to help her. I saw it
19 several times but I also saw it before dusk that day.
20 Q. Now, would you concede that given the fact that it was dark
21 outside, that there was no light either outside your home or inside your
22 home, that there was dust and smoke in the air from the explosive, that
23 you were, I would presume, emotionally quite traumatised by this
24 occurrence, you would concede, would you not, that it would be very
25 difficult for you to positively identify a dark vehicle in the dark night,
1 would it not?
2 A. At the time of the explosion at my house -- I don't know whether
3 the vehicle was there but after the explosion and after the shots, there
4 was this vehicle that came and part of the people who had surrounded the
5 house got on to that.
6 Q. So you can not confirm that the vehicle took part in the explosive
7 attack on your home; is that correct?
8 A. It was a very narrow alley so I don't think the vehicle could get
9 in there.
10 Q. You state later in your statement, in the same paragraph, that on
11 the Friday evening your house was burned. Now, you did not see the
12 persons who burned your house or in fact how your house was burned, did
14 A. No, I didn't.
15 Q. Okay. Now, starting at the bottom of page 3 of the Albanian
16 version of your statement and going on to the next page, page 3, paragraph
17 1 of both the B/C/S and the English versions, you list a series of deaths
18 or killings of persons and I just want to make sure since it wasn't clear
19 to me from reading it: You were not actually an eyewitness to any of
20 these occurrences, were you?
21 A. These events happened the next night, when I left Fushe Kosova.
22 So during that night the people I mentioned here in my statement were
24 Q. But you did not see any of those deaths. You only heard about
25 them from others. Is that accurate, yes or no?
1 A. How could I see them?
2 Q. Fair enough. Now, in the next paragraph of your statement you
3 talk about your stay in Dragodan which you claim was interrupted when army
4 and special police broke down the door. Now, yesterday you conceded to my
5 colleague that you had heard of paramilitaries misusing army uniforms and
6 insignia and I'm asking you, did you also hear of and could the same be
7 true for paramilitaries or criminals misusing police uniforms and
9 A. I had not heard about such misuse because I had no occasion, in no
10 occasion did I hear about a distancing of these forces from the army and
11 the police. They worked together. They acted together. It could have
12 been misuse of uniform of a certain force or not. I don't know.
13 Q. You're speculating that you don't know. Is that your answer?
14 A. Whether it was a misuse of uniform or not, I don't know, because I
15 did not deal in those things but I know that they cooperated.
16 Q. Now, with respect to your interview on the 15th of August 2006
17 with Mr. Hannis and others from his office, I am told that you described
18 the special police as having badges on their sleeves which
19 stated, "Special police." Is it your recollection and your testimony that
20 the badges of these persons you saw who broke into the door had the words
21 in Serbian on their sleeves, "Specialna Policija"?
22 A. It was the initials that they had on their sleeves and we knew
23 that they were the initials of the special police.
24 Q. Okay. Which initials were there on the sleeve that you are
25 talking about?
1 A. SJ, or something like that.
2 Q. Okay. Now, in the next paragraph of your statement, you describe
3 identity cards that you claim were taken from your wife and your
4 sister-in-law, ripped and thrown on the floor, whereas another lady gave
5 her card and it was given back to her. Did your wife and sister-in-law
6 have valid official identification documents issued by the Serbian state
7 or were their ID cards issued by the KLA or some other unofficial organ?
8 A. They had official papers which were valid in Kosovo at the time.
9 Q. Were these documents issued by the Serbian state?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Okay. Now, one moment. At the end of March and beginning of
12 April 1999, isn't it true that the KLA was present and actively opposing
13 and fighting with Serbian forces in the neighbourhood of Vranjevc in
15 A. I'm not aware whether it was them who fought in Vranjevc or Kodra
16 e Trimave. What I know is, people fought to defend their own homes.
17 Q. Okay. Now, are you aware of NATO bombs that fell on the
18 neighbourhoods of Dragodan, Ciglani, and Vinogradi on March the 26th, 1999
19 and March 27th, 1999?
20 A. I don't know whether there is a brick factory in Dragodan. I
21 think that there are vineyards in Dragodan.
22 Q. I believe my question was, are you aware of any NATO bombs falling
23 on the neighbourhoods of Dragodan, on the 26th of March and the 27th of
24 March, first of all, and then I'll ask you about the others.
25 A. No. I don't remember that there were.
1 Q. If I recall your testimony you would have been in Dragodan around
2 this time period. Isn't that correct?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. And is not Stara Ciglana another neighbourhood in that area of
6 A. No. I don't know. I don't think it's a neighbourhood in
8 Q. Okay. Fair enough. We'll move on, then.
9 Just a few more points that I want to clear up with you, sir. In
10 paragraph 2 of page 8 of your statement, that's paragraph 2, page 5 of the
11 English and the B/C/S, you stated that the police came and told you to
12 leave the spot where you were standing because there was fighting in the
13 middle of town in Dragodan and you might get hurt or killed. Now, what
14 kind of uniform or insignia did this person that you identified as a
15 policeman have or wear?
16 A. The police had come to the whole neighbourhood, they were going
17 from house to house forcing people out of their homes.
18 Q. I'm asking you specifically about the individual that told you
19 that you had to leave the spot where you were standing because of fighting
20 going on in the middle of Dragodan. What kind of uniform or insignia did
21 this individual have?
22 A. As far as I remember, I did not say that just one policeman came
23 and told me this and that. But I said that we were forced out of our
24 homes, we were told where to go, in the direction of the main street,
25 because allegedly there was fighting and we were at risk and we -- you
1 have to leave from this place.
2 Q. Whoever told you this, what uniforms were they wearing? Describe
4 A. Police uniforms.
5 Q. Could you describe these police uniforms for me? What colour were
7 A. The policemen who forced us into the street, they had
8 dark-coloured uniforms, police uniforms, almost black. They were masked
9 and armed.
10 Q. And did they have any insignia on their sleeves?
11 A. I didn't notice that.
12 Q. Did those uniforms differ from the standard uniforms of the police
13 that you talked about earlier?
14 A. No.
15 Q. Is it your testimony then that all the police officers in Pristina
16 wore these black -- almost black uniforms and were masked?
17 A. I don't know about all of them, but the one that I saw had such
18 uniforms, while the soldiers had lighter coloured uniforms.
19 Q. I want you to focus on the policemen you were talking about
20 because that's what you state in your statement. These policemen, what
21 type of insignia or emblem did you see? Did these policemen have the same
22 uniforms that you described earlier as belonging to the special police,
23 the units you identified as the SJ?
24 A. That day, I saw three groups or police patrols.
25 Q. Sir, I'm not asking about the police patrols. I'm asking about
1 the --
2 A. But it was the same uniform.
3 Q. It was the same uniform as the special police that you identified
4 earlier with the insignia SJ on their shoulder? Is that what you're
6 A. No. I did not see this SJ on the shoulder.
7 JUDGE BONOMY: You got that answer about two minutes ago,
8 Mr. Ivetic. Quite clearly.
9 MR. IVETIC: About the SJ. But is the uniform the same uniform as
10 those uniforms that had an SJ on their shoulder is what I --
11 JUDGE BONOMY: You've had that answer twice already, that it was.
12 MR. IVETIC: Okay.
13 Q. Now, I want to ask you about the general atmosphere in Pristina,
14 especially after the NATO bombings. Would it be fair to say that there
15 was a lot of open hostility from civilians, especially Serbs, towards
16 Albanian civilians after the commencement of NATO bombings?
17 A. I don't know because at that time I did not pay attention to such
18 cultural differences, whether there was enmity. So I cannot speak here
19 about things that I have no information about.
20 Q. All right.
21 MR. IVETIC: One moment, Your Honour, if I can refer to my notes,
22 I think I'm done with the witness, and if I have one or two more questions
23 I'd like to finish them before we take the break so, with your indulgence,
24 I'll take a few moments to just look over my notes.
25 Q. I'm reminded of one series of questions. At the train station,
1 what was the atmosphere like? Were there Serbian civilians harassing or
2 verbally abusing the Kosovo Albanian civilians?
3 A. No. I did not see any. There weren't any.
4 Q. Okay. And you were at the train station for how long that day?
5 Would it be most of the day? Do you have an approximation?
6 A. Not that day, but I stayed there for two or three days and three
8 Q. Okay. And during that time period you did not see any
9 civilians -- you did not see any civilians at the train station?
10 A. No. I did not see any and I don't think there were any.
11 Q. Okay. Do you know what dates you were at the train station, sir?
12 A. On the 27th, 28th, and maybe 29th.
13 Q. Okay. I thank you for your time, sir.
14 MR. IVETIC: Your Honour, I have no further questions for this
16 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you, Mr. Ivetic.
17 Mr. Kabashi, you boarded the train in Pristina; is that right?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
19 JUDGE BONOMY: Did it travel through Fushe Kosova on the way to
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. There are no other tracks.
22 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.
23 Mr. Sepenuk?
24 MR. SEPENUK: Yes, Your Honour, I have maybe five to ten minutes.
25 JUDGE BONOMY: I'd like you to continue with for the moment
1 because it looks as though we may finish this witness in the next 15
2 minutes or so, and it would be convenient if we have a break around that
3 stage because the next witness will be a protected witness who -- oh, no.
4 Sorry. My mistake. Sorry, I'm running ahead of myself. There is
5 no reason why we shouldn't take the break just now. So we'll break now
6 and we'll resume at five minutes past 4.00.
7 --- Recess taken at 3.45 p.m.
8 --- On resuming at 4.06 p.m.
9 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Sepenuk?
10 MR. SEPENUK: Thank you, Your Honour.
11 Cross-examination by Mr. Sepenuk:
12 Q. Dr. Kabashi, my name is Norman Sepenuk and my colleague here is
13 Tomislav Visnjic and we are the attorneys for General Ojdanic. Good
14 afternoon, sir.
15 I have only a few questions for you and it's for purposes of
16 clarifying the record because I think you can help us out here and
17 enlighten us in a few areas and it has to do with some comments that you
18 volunteered after you were being questioned by Mr. Fila here. Mr. Fila
19 was questioning you, you remember, somewhat jocularly about when you
20 graduated from college and how old you were and that sort of thing. You
21 remember that?
22 A. I finished my studies in 63, 1964 and I think I was 23 or 24 years
24 Q. I'm not asking about that. I'm just trying to get you back --
25 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction: 73, 74.
1 MR. SEPENUK: That's fine.
2 Q. It's not important. I'm just trying to get you back into the
3 context of your testimony. And right after that, after Mr. Fila finished
4 with his questions, you said, and I'm quoting from the record now, "If I
5 might, I would like to make a small explanation here. In the press in
6 Belgrade and in Serbian TV, after the bomb was thrown into my house, they
7 wrote that a certain terrorist was killed with my name and then with four
8 children. It was also said a certain terrorist was killed with 11 members
9 of his family, and another version which was on Tanjug was that a certain
10 terrorist was killed with my name, with eight members of his family."
11 So you recall that you testified to that, sir?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. And when you saw those articles and heard the -- what was said
14 on -- or saw and heard what was said on Serbian TV, what was your reaction
15 to those reports? Were you proud of being called a terrorist? Were you
16 offended by being called a terrorist? Or maybe neither. Just tell us
17 what your feeling was at that time when that press came out about you.
18 A. I laughed because I was used to such articles.
19 Q. Have there been other articles about you in the Serbian press or
20 the Kosovo press? Are you a person that the media writes about and knows
22 A. Yes. There were articles from time to time but I haven't
23 necessarily read them all.
24 Q. Were there other articles that called you a terrorist?
25 A. No.
1 Q. So this was the first article to your knowledge that actually came
2 right out and said that one Dr. Kabashi was a terrorist. Is that a fact,
4 A. Yes. It is the first article. They didn't say a certain Dr.
5 Kabashi. They said Emin Kabashi was killed with four of his children and
6 then there were the other versions too where my first and last name were
7 mentioned with various numbers of children.
8 Q. Okay. So I get back then to my question, and that is: What was
9 your reaction to being called a terrorist? Pride? Were you offended?
10 Neither? I want to hear your words, not mine.
11 A. I said I had no reason to be worried that -- by the fact that they
12 were calling me a terrorist. I wasn't necessarily proud. All I did was
13 laugh. And I was happy that I had survived the attack.
14 Q. So did the -- did the press and the media make a mistake when they
15 called you a terrorist?
16 A. Of course it was a mistake. I was not a terrorist. I had never
17 killed anyone.
18 Q. You weren't a terrorist but you were, as you put it in the
19 Milosevic testimony, someone who saw that the only way for our people to
20 win their freedom was by means of the gun, correct?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Okay. Now, I want to get back to the witness statement that was
23 introduced in evidence in this case and I'd like to call your attention to
24 the second paragraph of that statement, on page 2, and at that time you
25 talked about being questioned by two Serbian police, Simic and Pedza. Do
1 you recall that in your statement?
2 A. Yes, I do.
3 Q. And the statement says, "Pedza took me in the police station about
4 4 a.m. one morning in 1998 to be interrogated with two plainclothes
5 policemen I did not know. Two plainclothes policemen I did not know. I
6 was accused of supplying the UCK with medicine and food. They kept me for
7 seven hours." Do you recall that?
8 A. Yes, I do.
9 Q. And what was your answer to the policemen, Pedza, to the question
10 about whether or not you supplied the KLA with medicine and food?
11 A. The policeman Pedza just took me to the station. The other two
12 policemen of course I said I wasn't -- that wasn't -- I wasn't the person
13 they were looking for.
14 Q. But I have a very specific question for you, and I'll say it
15 again. According to this statement, you said that Pedza said you were
16 accused of supplying the UCK with medicine and food. Okay? They accused
17 you of it. Pedza accused you of it. What was your answer to Pedza at
18 that time?
19 A. I said that I was not the person who dealt with such things.
20 Q. Was that true?
21 A. No.
22 Q. So you lied to Pedza, correct?
23 A. Yes, of course.
24 Q. Because you were an operative with the Kosovo Liberation Army and
25 you wanted to keep that secret. Isn't that a fair statement?
1 A. Yes, of course, of course.
2 Q. And how did you feel then, again getting back to that article in
3 the press that took place right after the bomb was thrown, that you were
4 suddenly revealed to the world as an alleged terrorist? What did that do
5 to your effectiveness working within the KLA? Did you get comments about
6 it or what happened at that time?
7 A. Nothing. I didn't make any comment. I had no opportunity to
8 comment the affair. There were no newspapers being published at the time
9 and I had no opportunity to read all the newspapers in Belgrade and I
10 wasn't really interested in dealing with comments, commentaries. I said
11 maybe I laughed and I was happy that the news was not accurate, that I was
12 in fact alive. It was not important to me at all, the whole thing.
13 Q. And how did you find out about those media reports and those press
14 reports? When did those come to your attention?
15 A. One of the articles was reproduced in an Albanian language
16 newspaper in very briefly, on one of the days when there was a newspaper,
17 and I was hiding with my family at the time and then I heard it on Tanjug,
18 from Tanjug, from Belgrade, on TVS, and heard the news also on the
19 Albanian media broadcasting from Tirana.
20 Q. So you would have heard all this shortly after the bomb was thrown
21 on March 25th, 1999, you would have heard this within a few days
22 thereafter; is that correct?
23 A. I heard about it three or four days after the event.
24 Q. Thank you. So you were then interviewed on April 24th, 1999,
25 about three weeks later, by Mr. Tim Kelly of the Office of the Prosecutor,
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. And we know that there is nothing specific in that statement about
4 your membership in the KLA, correct?
5 A. Correct.
6 Q. And you were -- in the latter part of that statement, actually on
7 page 6, last paragraph, it says, "I have been asked specifically about the
8 circumstances surrounding the time I was forced to leave Kosovo in March
9 1999. I have further information about events which happened at this time
10 and prior to these events in Kosovo, and can provide if required."
11 It's a fair reading -- that's a correct reading of your
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. And did it occur to you at all during that interview that your
15 membership in the KLA might have been relevant to the questions that
16 Mr. Kelly was asking you? Do you think he would have liked to have known
17 that information?
18 A. He didn't ask me about my activities and didn't -- I didn't give
19 any responses about that. What I talked about were the events in the
21 Q. He didn't ask you and you didn't think it was appropriate to
22 volunteer any information to you -- to him; is that correct?
23 A. I didn't consider that significant information, that is, my
25 Q. You didn't consider it significant to the objectivity of your
1 statements to Mr. Kelly that you were really a rather high level operative
2 in the Kosovo Liberation Army?
3 MR. HANNIS: I object to the form of that question, Your Honour, a
4 rather high level operative?
5 JUDGE BONOMY: Is there a foundation for that question,
6 Mr. Sepenuk?
7 MR. SEPENUK: Well, I'm just trying to -- I'm just putting it into
8 context of what's already been said, a long time member, a member of a
9 group that supplied, you know, guerrilla fighters and that kind of thing.
10 It's not essential to my question.
11 JUDGE BONOMY: That's really not his evidence. It doesn't
12 characterise it accurately, no. My impression, if anything, is the
13 opposite. But there you go, it just shows you we can form different
14 impressions. But I don't think there is a foundation for a question put
15 that way.
16 MR. SEPENUK: I'll modify it.
17 Q. You didn't think that it would be relevant to the objectivity of
18 the answers that you were given -- giving to Mr. Kelly that you were a
19 member, high or low, of the Kosovo Liberation Army?
20 MR. HANNIS: Your Honour, I guess my objection now is that he's
21 asking him for a sort of legal conclusion about whether it was relevant or
22 not. That's not an answer this witness is competent to make.
23 MR. SEPENUK: I could -- you know, Your Honour, I liked your
24 comment about the fancy footwork before. Let's eliminate the fancy
1 Q. Don't you think it was something that the investigators might have
2 wanted to know, sir?
3 A. I don't think it was important.
4 Q. But you wanted to preserve your anonymity as a KLA member, did you
5 not, sir?
6 A. No, no, not at all. I just did my work as a citizen.
7 Q. Why didn't you tell police officer Pedza the truth then when he
8 asked you whether you supplied the UCK with medicine and food? We know
9 from the testimony here that you did. Why didn't you tell him the truth?
10 A. Well, I'm not that much of a fool to spend the next ten years of
11 my life in prison.
12 Q. So you did want to a preserve your anonymity then?
13 JUDGE BONOMY: Hold on, Mr. Sepenuk. Flogging and horse are
14 springing to mind now. I think frankly you've exhausted this line.
15 MR. SEPENUK: Okay. If I can get two more questions, Your Honour,
16 along a different line.
17 JUDGE BONOMY: All right.
18 MR. SEPENUK:
19 Q. Isn't it a fact that had you been asked about potential crimes or
20 crimes that had been committed by the KLA, that you realised that a
21 witness who decides to testify against crimes committed by the KLA is at
22 great risk?
23 A. They didn't ask me and I don't have any information on such
24 crimes. If I did have such information I would provide and say everything
25 I knew.
1 Q. To this day? Correct?
2 A. Yes, to this day.
3 Q. Who is -- do you know who Zekerijah Qana is?
4 A. Yes, I do.
5 Q. Who is Zekerijah Qana?
6 A. Zekerijah Qana was a professor of history at the Albanalogical
7 institute. A specialist in history, a colleague of mine.
8 Q. Is he a friend of yours?
9 A. No. He was my professor.
10 Q. And do you know him now? Do you have any relationship with him
12 A. Yes. We work together. We are colleagues at the same institute.
13 Q. Is he an honourable man, in your opinion?
14 MR. HANNIS: Your Honour, I need to object. We've gone well
15 beyond two questions. I'm not sure where we are going with this now.
16 MR. SEPENUK: I can assure Your Honour I have a basis for asking
17 these questions.
18 JUDGE BONOMY: You can carry on for the moment.
19 MR. SEPENUK: Thank you, Your Honour.
20 Q. Is he an honourable man?
21 A. I've never thought about it in those terms. I don't see the
23 Q. Well, have you ever had any occasion to question the fact that
24 he's a truthful man?
25 A. I said that I've never dealt with such things.
1 Q. I'm simply asking you whether you have any reason to think that
2 your colleague or your professor is anything other than a truthful person.
3 Very simple question.
4 JUDGE BONOMY: In my opinion he's answered that question,
5 Mr. Sepenuk. There is no reason why he should ever have formed a
6 judgement, according to his evidence.
7 Q. If Mr. Qana made the statement that -- if he said this, "In
8 Kosovo, every witness who decides to testify against the crimes committed
9 by the KLA is at great risk," if Mr. Qana made that statement, would you
10 believe that he was telling the truth?
11 A. I said I never had occasion to deal with such matters or with
13 MR. SEPENUK: That's all I have, Your Honour.
14 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you, Mr. Sepenuk.
15 Mr. Hannis, do you have any re-examination?
16 MR. HANNIS: I have no questions.
17 JUDGE BONOMY: Judge Chowhan has a question for you.
18 Questioned by the Court:
19 JUDGE CHOWHAN: Good afternoon, Dr. Kabashi. Now, first thing
20 relates to your name itself?
21 A. Good afternoon.
22 JUDGE CHOWHAN: Do you know its meaning? Can you tell us the
23 meaning of the word Kabashi? Or that's been a family name for a long
25 A. You mean my first name? It means faithful, and my last name means
1 that I'm from the region of Kabashi which is a geographical area between
2 Shkodra and Ucin [phoen].
3 JUDGE CHOWHAN: That's very kind. My second question was, why
4 were the gypsies with you at the relevant time, what you stated in your
5 statement? The gypsies, why were they with you?
6 A. They were our neighbours for most of the time, and they were the
7 families who refused to have their children sent to Serbian language
8 schools and they were the ones who refused to dress up in uniforms of the
9 police and to work for the police.
10 JUDGE CHOWHAN: Thank you. Now, please tell me what was your
11 subject in your doctorate?
12 A. The subject of my doctorate was the poetry of Jeronim De Rada, who
13 was a major Albanian writer of the romantic period, and I endeavoured to
14 underline the basic features of poetry in the romantic period.
15 JUDGE CHOWHAN: That's very fine. Now, how were you attracted by
16 the ideology of KLA? I mean, you were -- you're more towards romantic
17 poet. I mean, how did this come in to attract you? And what was that
19 A. I wasn't particularly attracted by the ideology of the KLA. I was
20 attracted more by the ideology of freedom.
21 JUDGE CHOWHAN: Did you, sir, have a placement as an office bearer
22 with the KLA?
23 A. No.
24 JUDGE CHOWHAN: No, okay. Could you tell us what was the
25 manifesto or the motto with the KLA which attracted you?
1 A. Freedom for Kosova.
2 JUDGE CHOWHAN: All right. Now, at one stage you were supplied
3 with a list, you saw a list which contained names of different persons.
4 What were the types of these -- what were the kind of these people -- what
5 kind of people were being sought in that list?
6 A. Mostly they were activists, in logistics, or an intellectual.
7 Some of them I knew.
8 JUDGE CHOWHAN: And last question is -- I'm sorry I've asked you
9 so many questions. Last question is: In what activities were you
10 indulging while with the KLA, please?
11 A. Things that had to do with the war, supplies of clothing, of food,
12 of medicine, of movements, of helping the wounded, of mothers giving birth
13 to children, helping people in general who were in a war situation or who
14 were trying to get away from a war situation, and go somewhere else.
15 JUDGE CHOWHAN: So you remained there -- you did not move here and
16 there, you remained there for these activities which you have pointed
17 out. Or did you move to different places with the contingents or persons?
18 A. I moved from time to time to carry out certain duties which I
19 could not carry out in Pristina.
20 JUDGE CHOWHAN: I'm grateful.
21 A. You're welcome.
22 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, Mr. Kabashi, that completes your evidence.
23 Thank you for coming again to the Tribunal to give it. You're now free to
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.
1 [The witness withdrew]
2 JUDGE BONOMY: Now, I want to address just Defence counsel in very
3 general and gentle terms at this stage. We've now had evidence from a
4 number of witnesses who are speaking about the events on the ground in
5 Kosovo, how they affected them and how they affected other people. And
6 you've had an opportunity to assess the results of cross-examination of
7 these witnesses and you must now have a feel for what's the way in which
8 to obtain the most important information from the cross-examination of
9 these witnesses.
10 What I hope you'll do in the light of that is assess the situation
11 to try to judge what questions are essential, what are important, and what
12 questions are of marginal importance. I'm beginning to feel that we need
13 to prune some of the cross-examination, but I equally remain convinced at
14 the moment that it's best to place faith in your judgement rather than to
15 take any particular measures to deal with it.
16 Now, obviously, if you need more time to come to a better
17 evaluation of how to perhaps prune the cross-examination, then obviously
18 the Bench accept that we are in the early days of the trial still and that
19 it may be necessary to allow time to do that but I hope you'll begin that
20 exercise now and with a view to seeing if we can't accommodate perhaps a
21 few more witnesses in the course of a month than it looks as though we are
22 likely to do at the moment.
23 Now, Mr. Ackerman, you want to raise something to do with the way
24 in which evidence is presented.
25 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, the problem is, and I think I speak
1 for all or most of my colleagues at this point, we try to prepare far
2 enough ahead so that we are ready for any witness that comes into the
3 Court so we presume a certain amount of time for each witness based upon
4 what the Prosecution thinks they will take and what we believe
5 cross-examination will take. And so we are not prepared for every witness
6 that might be called and we couldn't possibly be.
7 It creates complete havoc in our preparation when we come into
8 court like today and learn -- I learn for the first time the Prosecution
9 changed the order of witnesses. So witnesses that I'm prepared for have
10 now been moved down, witnesses I'm not prepared for have been moved up.
11 And I understand there was an e-mail that some of my colleagues got around
12 noon advising of that but I didn't learn of it until I came into court
13 because I did not look at my e-mail around noon.
14 My e-mail system was not working or I would have, but it was
15 broken down and I think you have to allow nor e-mail systems being broken
16 down occasionally even. Mine certainly breaks down more often than it
17 should. So that's one of the problems.
18 The second one is with regard to the next witness in this case. I
19 think we were all handed an envelope when we came here into this courtroom
20 at 2.15. I know I was, and I think I observed everyone being handed the
21 envelope of new disclosure materials. And in the new disclosure materials
22 are a statement from the witness that's coming and supposed to come right
23 now, at least I'd never seen it before now and I don't think anyone else
24 has either. I think it was given to us for the first time today. So I
25 feel very uncomfortable in trying to engage in a cross-examination of that
1 witness within the next few minutes without having had at least a minimum
2 of 30 to 45 minutes to consider the effect of that new statement, which
3 I've not had, and I'm sure that some of my colleagues are learning just
4 now about that new statement just by hearing me say it because they
5 haven't opened up their packet and looked at it and seen that's what was
6 in it. But that's what was in it. It's a new statement from the next
7 witness. Not a new statement. I think it was an older statement that was
8 just disclosed.
9 But those are problems and those are problems that -- they go to
10 exactly what you were just saying, that sometimes we might need more time
11 to prepare. It's been my observation over the years, both from this side
12 of the Bench and sitting up there that prepared lawyers tend to move at a
13 faster speed and more efficiently and unprepared lawyers. Unprepared
14 lawyers tend to flop around a lot and take a bunch of time that's
15 unnecessary. I would encourage you to give us an opportunity to be as
16 prepared as we can. I think we will move faster.
17 JUDGE BONOMY: I'll make no comments on the last observation but
18 on the material, are you referring to a statement taken on the 16th of
20 MR. ACKERMAN: I don't know. It's on a disk, and I'm not sure of
21 the date. What was not taken here. It was taken in some other location.
22 And it was taken on 17 May -- no, 14 April of 1999. So this statement has
23 existed for a very long time. I don't know why it just got around to
24 getting to us today but that's when it was taken.
25 MS. MOELLER: Your Honours?
1 JUDGE BONOMY: Yes, Ms. Moeller?
2 MS. MOELLER: If I may assist with that. We disclosed these
3 notes. These are internal investigator's notes of an interview that was
4 done in the camp in Macedonia with this witness in 1999. We have not
5 previously disclosed these notes because it's not an interview, as we
6 consider it, and it's not a statement. We have now disclosed them only
7 for the sake of completeness and the Defence would see if they compare the
8 statement from the statement the witness later gave to an investigator of
9 the ICTY, and these notes that another investigator took a couple of years
10 ago, that they are actually reflecting the same thing. And we disclosed
11 that not under Rule 66(A)(i) as a statement but only for the sake of
12 completeness and because the issue of disclosure of whatever information
13 we have relating to a witness was an issue recently with other witnesses,
14 we did so. We don't consider this to be a statement of the witness at
16 JUDGE BONOMY: So it doesn't record what he said?
17 MS. MOELLER: It records what the investigator talking to the
18 witness took down at that point. That was when he first talked to her.
19 It's just a bullet point summary, and until we had this discussion the
20 other week here in the court we always considered that internal documents,
21 working documents of the OTP. We have now adopted the practice be -- to
22 disclose fully whatever we have but under the -- under the legal
23 assumption that this is not falling under Rule 66(A)(i) or [ii].
24 JUDGE BONOMY: The problem is quite simply that when you hand over
25 stuff immediately before the witness is going to give evidence then you
1 inevitably encourage the sort of submission that we have just received.
2 And it's surprising that you should be doing that when at the end of last
3 week you were able to notify us of an up-to-date statement taken from the
4 same witness.
5 MS. MOELLER: Yes, the statement taken on 16 August we had
6 immediately translated and disclosed to the Defence and this is what we
7 consider her statement, the addendum to her first statement.
8 JUDGE BONOMY: All I'm saying is it would have been helpful to
9 have disclosed the other one at the same time. But as it is, we get it
10 today and at least I haven't seen it at all but Defence counsel have got
11 it and they are concerned that they should have time to consider its
12 implications. Perhaps I could see it and then I might be in a position to
13 make a better judgement on that.
14 MS. MOELLER: Yes. We will certainly try to get a copy to the
15 Court. We haven't sent it to the Court yet because it is not something
16 that we want to tender or something that we consider a statement. It's
17 not signed. It wasn't read back to the witness. There isn't even the
18 name of the investigator on that. It's just an internal document that we
19 found in our files.
20 JUDGE BONOMY: You're fortunate because before cross-examination
21 takes place, there no doubt will be another break or at least it will be
22 very early in the cross-examination and that half-hour break will give at
23 least Mr. Ackerman the length of time he requires to, as a minimum, to
24 consider the position. And it may be then he'll be able to do it in the
25 light of the evidence of the witness as well.
1 Now, the second point that is made is that changing the order of
2 witnesses is unhelpful and, if possible, something to be avoided.
3 MR. HANNIS: Your Honour, I agree with that but I would indicate
4 to the Court part of the reason that we find that necessary to do is
5 because we don't know how long the preceding cross-examination is going to
6 take with witnesses because sometimes that's taken much longer than
7 estimated. We have witnesses who have obligations, who have to return
8 sooner, so we have to shift the order to move somebody up so they can get
9 back to Kosovo on time for some previously scheduled operation or some
10 appointment or some other business, and they have been here waiting maybe
11 five days before they get on. We've tried to minimise that as much as
12 possible but given the current circumstances that has arisen a couple of
13 occasions. And right now we are dealing with witnesses that are fairly
14 simple. One order that we changed with K 62 and 36, whose evidence is
15 closely related and should not pose any great difficulty in doing one
16 before the other.
17 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, Mr. Ackerman, is there anything else to be
18 said at this stage?
19 MR. ACKERMAN: Well, I just learned from a colleague that there is
20 also an addendum to her statement that I've not -- that I don't have.
21 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, that was intimated on Friday.
22 MR. ACKERMAN: That may be my fault that I didn't get it.
23 JUDGE BONOMY: Late on Friday but it was on Friday.
24 MR. ACKERMAN: I've not seen it before.
25 JUDGE BONOMY: I don't think that will give you any great
1 difficulty. It may raise matters that you want to look into but that's a
2 separate issue that we couldn't deal with at this minute any way.
3 MR. ACKERMAN: All right. Thank you.
4 JUDGE BONOMY: Right.
5 Your next witness, then, Ms. Moeller?
6 MS. MOELLER: Yes, Your Honour, we call Mrs. Nazlie Bala as our
7 next witness. We call her under Rule 92 bis (B) and her evidence relates
8 to paragraph 72(G) and 77(A) of the indictment.
9 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.
10 [The witness entered court]
11 JUDGE BONOMY: Good afternoon, Ms. Bala.
12 THE WITNESS: Good afternoon.
13 JUDGE BONOMY: Would you now make the solemn declaration please by
14 reading aloud the document which will be placed in front of you?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will speak
16 the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
17 WITNESS: NAZLIE BALA
18 [Witness answered through interpreter]
19 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you. Please take a seat.
20 Now, Ms. Bala, we have before us principally a statement which you
21 gave to the office of the Prosecution here in June 2001. We have certain
22 other written material so we know a lot about the evidence that you are
23 giving. The purpose of this afternoon's attendance at court is to enable
24 further questions to be asked by the counsel representing the Prosecution
25 and representing the various accused.
1 These questions will vary greatly. Some will be to challenge what
2 you said. That's part of the process under which we operate. Others will
3 be to amplify or clarify. The important thing is that you concentrate on
4 the particular question that is asked and try to confine your answer to
5 the particular issue that's raised in the question. The first person to
6 ask questions of you will be on behalf of the Prosecution, Ms. Moeller.
7 Ms. Moeller?
8 Examination by Ms. Moeller:
9 Q. Good afternoon, Ms. Bala. Could you please state your full name
10 for the record?
11 A. My name is Nazlie Bala. I was born in Pristina in May 1967. I
12 finished my secondary education --
13 Q. Sorry to interrupt you but please try to just answer the concrete
14 question and I will take you step by step, if that's possible. Yeah?
15 Ms. Bala, where did you live in 1999?
16 A. In 1999 I was living in Pristina.
17 Q. And did you give a statement to the Office of the Prosecutor on 30
18 June 2001?
19 A. Yes, I did.
20 Q. And did you given an addendum to the statement to the Office of
21 the Prosecutor on 16 August 2006?
22 A. Yes, I did.
23 MS. MOELLER: Could the usher please take the statement to the
24 witness? Thank you.
25 Q. Ms. Bala, can you have a look at that statement and tell if this
1 is your statement and your addendum to the statement?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Yes. And can you confirm to the Court that this is a correct
4 and -- a correct statement and your evidence in this case?
5 A. Yes. I take full responsibility when I say that this is my
7 MS. MOELLER: Your Honour, at this point we would like to tender
8 the statement. It has Exhibit number P02262.
9 JUDGE BONOMY: Does that number also apply to the addendum?
10 MS. MOELLER: Yes, it's all in one package.
11 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.
12 MS. MOELLER:
13 Q. Now, Ms. Bala I would like to take you to some points of your
14 statement and your addendum to the statement, step by step.
15 In paragraph 3 of your addendum, you set out a little bit about
16 your professional background and I would like to ask you to tell the
17 judges a little bit about your professional experience just in a few
19 A. As I said earlier, I finished my secondary school in Pristina,
20 also the university in Pristina. Now I'm doing my masters degree in
21 international relations and cultural competences -- cultural affairs, and
22 from 1997 [as interpreted] I have been working for the Council for the
23 Defence of Human Rights and Freedoms in Kosovo, focusing on violence
24 against young people, women, and children.
25 By the end of 1998, I joined the OSCE mission in the Pristina, the
1 office for human rights. In the beginning, I was part of the main
2 department, but in two or three weeks -- two or three weeks later I
3 started working in the regional office, what was called RC 5 Pristina,
4 until the 20th of March 1999. After the 20th of March, I went to
5 Macedonia. I was a refugee but I still worked for the OSCE mission in the
6 refugee camps in Cegran, Neprosten, Sanokos, Stenkovec, 1, 2, 3, in Ohrid,
7 Dibra, and other places in Macedonia.
8 After I went back to Kosovo, I was the first local staff member
9 that joined the OSCE mission team. I think this was about 15th of -- or
10 16th of June 1999. I continued working for them until September 1999,
11 department of human rights. I worked mainly on mass graves in various
12 locations in Pristina and around Pristina. In October 1999 I started
13 working as a coordinator of NGOs dealing with human rights until 2001,
14 June 2001, when I started my studies and that takes us to this day.
15 JUDGE BONOMY: Now, one point that perhaps you can clarify. Your
16 statement before us or the addendum to it says that you started to work
17 for the Council for the Defence of Human Rights and Freedoms in 1989.
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. I started in 1989 when this
19 organisation was founded in Kosovo, and I --
20 JUDGE BONOMY: It may be a translation but you've just been
21 recorded as saying that you started in 1997. Any way, you've confirmed
22 the accuracy of the written statement.
23 Ms. Moeller?
24 MS. MOELLER:
25 Q. Ms. Bala, regarding your work for the OSCE that you addressed, do
1 you know Sandra Mitchell?
2 A. Yes, Sandra Mitchell was the director for the department of human
3 rights in the OSCE mission.
4 Q. And you state in your addendum that you took about 300 interviews
5 for the OSCE; is that correct?
6 A. Yes. That's correct. In the course of my work for two months and
7 a half in Macedonia, working for the OSCE mission, during that time, I
8 took about 300 statements from various witnesses. I say approximately
10 Q. Yes.
11 MS. MOELLER: Your Honours, that relates to paragraph 5 of the
13 Q. Ms. Bala, can you tell the Judges a little bit about how these
14 statements were taken?
15 A. The work --
16 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Lukic?
17 MR. LUKIC: I would object at this point and ask the other -- my
18 learned colleague from the other side whether these statements have been
19 disclosed to the Defence or not, if she inquires regarding these
21 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, if she declines to answer that question at
22 the moment, I -- it wouldn't surprise me because that's the question is
23 simply related to the methodology. Whether it's going further than that
24 remains to be seen.
25 Do you want to deal with the matter, Ms. Moeller, or do you want
1 to continue?
2 MS. MOELLER: Your Honours, I would like to continue because this
3 is firsthand experience of the witness herself, how she took statements
4 like that.
5 JUDGE BONOMY: Yes, but Mr. Lukic will no doubt renew this
6 objection when you get to the point, if you get to the point of trying to
7 lead evidence about the contents of these statements. Is that what you
8 propose to do?
9 MS. MOELLER: No, Your Honour, that's not where I'm going.
10 JUDGE BONOMY: All right.
11 Well, I think, Mr. Lukic, at the moment you're that's premature.
12 You can see if anything that you ought to object to does arise.
13 Carry on for the moment, Ms. Moeller.
14 MS. MOELLER:
15 Q. Ms. Bala, as I asked you could you describe to the Judges how you
16 would take such statements for the OSCE?
17 A. As I mentioned earlier, the OSCE mission in Macedonia, especially
18 the human rights department, worked directly with its teams on the ground
19 in the refugee camps. I worked in Cegran, Sanokos, Stenkovec, 1, 2, and
20 3, but we also went to the houses where refugees were sheltered. The
21 teams that took statements were very professional and experienced. In
22 each of these camps, we had our tents. There were tents in these camps
23 and we went from one tent to another to get the information, what happened
24 to those people, until the point when they reached the refugee camps in
1 Q. And before you started conducting interviews for the OSCE were you
2 given a training how to do such interviews?
3 MR. LUKIC: Your Honour, I'm sorry. I'm really sorry I have to
4 interrupt again.
5 JUDGE BONOMY: Yes, Mr. Lukic?
6 MR. LUKIC: We received from the OTP the summary of what this
7 witness should be testifying about and in this summary I cannot find
8 anywhere that this witness will describe the methodology regarding these
10 JUDGE BONOMY: Ms. Moeller?
11 MS. MOELLER: Your Honours, the addendum to the statement in
12 paragraph 4 and paragraph 5 deals with her work for the OSCE and it
13 mentions that she was personally involved in the interviews of 300
14 witnesses so --
15 JUDGE BONOMY: That's not Mr. Lukic's point. Mr. Lukic's point is
16 that there is a procedure to be gone through for disclosure that involves
17 the application of rules and you have -- you were bound to summarise the
18 evidence of this witness which you've done and this is not part of it.
19 MS. MOELLER: We think it is covered by paragraph 4 and 5 in the
21 JUDGE BONOMY: No, no, no, no. We're talking about 65 ter at the
22 moment. You've got an obligation in your summary -- you've got an
23 obligation under Rule 65 ter to summarise the evidence of a witness and
24 there is no hint in your summary, according to Mr. Lukic, that this
25 witness will give evidence about this.
1 MS. MOELLER: I now see your point, Your Honour. The fact is we
2 sent out this notification including the 65 ter summary before we had the
3 witness actually present for proofing, and it only turned out during the
4 proofing. And this is why we put it in the addendum statement at the
5 point which was disclosed and translated for the Defence in time that we
6 included it there. So it's not in the 65 ter summary because we did not
7 have a possibility to inquire into this area with her any earlier before
8 she came.
9 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, you mean you didn't take the opportunity to
10 inquire of her any earlier. But -- which is rather different.
11 MS. MOELLER: If I may add one thing, Your Honour? The fact that
12 Ms. Bala worked for the OSCE and for quite a while is contained in her
13 very first witness statement and first paragraph.
14 JUDGE BONOMY: I'm looking for the bit that says that she did
15 anything between March and June 1999. I can't find it.
16 MS. MOELLER: Yes. This is only in the addendum statement, that's
17 correct, Your Honour. We gave the notice as soon as we found out from the
18 witness during the proofing that she did this additional work in the
19 addendum statement and we considered this to be appropriate disclosure at
20 the time.
21 MR. LUKIC: If I may, Your Honour, we have never seen this
22 addendum because we were not looking for it --
23 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Lukic, just a moment. Thank you.
24 MR. LUKIC: Okay. Thank you.
25 MR. VISNJIC: Your Honour may I add, just for additional
1 information, we never received.
2 JUDGE BONOMY: Just a moment, Mr. Visnjic. I'm trying to
3 understand something at the moment.
4 Yes, Mr. Lukic, what was it you wanted to add?
5 MR. LUKIC: Excuse me, Your Honour. Yes. I wanted to add that
6 this addendum was placed on the e-court but we have never been formally
7 informed about it. So we were not aware, I personally was not aware of it
8 five minutes ago. Our case manager just showed me a few minutes ago that
9 there is an addendum.
10 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Visnjic?
11 MR. VISNJIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour, yes. The
12 procedure so far was as follows.. The Prosecutor would inform us about an
13 addendum or any other information through e-mail or any other way. We
14 would get information either in writing or via e-mail but this time we did
15 not receive any information. I found out just now that it was on e-court.
16 At this point in time it doesn't mean a thing to me if I don't at least
17 get an e-mail saying that it's on e-court. Mr. Ackerman already explained
18 that during the weekend we really have a problem because we do not have
19 proper access.
20 Mr. Petrovic reminded me just now if something new appears on
21 e-court we do not have this information. We have to have a look at
22 everything that's on e-court but we don't know what the most recent things
23 are. It would have been logical for us to receive at least information
24 via telephone or via e-mail, and I assume that they expect us to do the
25 same thing.
1 JUDGE BONOMY: I only really want to hear from other counsel if
2 there is something to be added to this.
3 MR. ACKERMAN: There is, just to further complicate matters. I
4 was struggling to work with e-court on Sunday and it completely went down
5 very early Sunday and stayed down all night. It didn't come back up until
6 8.00, 7.30, 8.00 Monday morning because they were doing maintenance on it
7 or something. Had it completely shut down, so you couldn't get in at all.
8 JUDGE BONOMY: That sounds irrelevant to the point being made at
9 the moment, which is you wouldn't know any way even if you went into
11 MR. ACKERMAN: If you went into e-court and looked up this exhibit
12 and looked at it, you would find that addendum on the end. But there was
13 no notice otherwise that it was there. You would only find it by accident
14 if you did that, and that's if you had lost the disclosure they gave you
15 earlier which most of us probably didn't --
16 JUDGE BONOMY: Yes, Mr. O'Sullivan?
17 MR. O'SULLIVAN: Only point I wish to make and I think it was
18 alluded to previously and I won't go further if it's clear to the Bench
19 but in my submission this procedure, this practice, is a violation of Rule
20 65 ter and the Prosecution's pre-trial brief in which the Prosecution must
21 provide a summary of the facts on which each witness will testify.
22 Now, this trial, this matter has been in pre-trial for four years
23 and we sat in status conference after status conference, where there is no
24 new Rule 66 disclosure, everything's been disclosed to us. We sat through
25 that for years, and now in addition to the summary that was included in
1 the pre-trial brief now we are developing a practice where there is new
2 statements, new addendums, new information. That's highly unfair and it's
3 a violation of the rule under a pre-trial brief.
4 JUDGE BONOMY: How does one deal with it, though, if it is
5 genuinely material that comes to light at the last minute?
6 MR. O'SULLIVAN: Well, Your Honour, there is an obligation on the
7 Prosecution to prepare its case. The pre-trial brief puts this case in
8 trial ready.
9 JUDGE BONOMY: No. Answer, you know, humour me by answering the
10 question I'm asking you. I understand entirely the point you're making
11 but there will be examples of information genuinely coming to light at the
12 last minute. Now, how do you deal with the fact that it's not in a 65 ter
13 summary, for example.
14 MR. O'SULLIVAN: At a minimum there must be a showing of good
15 cause on the party that is bringing this new information. They must show
16 due diligence that they pursued all information, that it was good cause,
17 that something arose at the last minute.
18 JUDGE BONOMY: That suggests then that there should be an
20 MR. O'SULLIVAN: Yes.
21 JUDGE BONOMY: Because there has been a failure to comply with the
22 strict terms and for some sort of modification or at least for the
23 allowance of a late addition to the summary.
24 MR. O'SULLIVAN: Yes, Your Honour.
25 JUDGE BONOMY: All right.
1 [Trial Chamber confers]
2 JUDGE BONOMY: Ms. Moeller do you want to add anything before we
3 deal with this?
4 MS. MOELLER: I would like to add that we were just trying to find
5 out what happened with this addendum, and at this point we cannot find
6 that it went out by e-mail, indeed, which is normally the practice in this
7 case and there were clear instructions that it should go out as soon as it
8 was processed in our system. So it appears at this point that indeed
9 there was no e-mail notice to the Defence in this case, which is very
10 unfortunate and I apologise.
11 That's what I want to add at this point. Thank you.
12 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, there are two separate issues here. The
13 addendum does appear to be genuinely that, and is simply a modest
14 amplification of the information contained in the statement. It tells
15 more about the background and experience of the witness, and that's
16 something that one would not expect any more to be said in a 65 ter
17 summary. On the other hand, the matter now being dealt with is a quite
18 separate issue and of some importance in view of objections already taken
19 to evidence in the case and in relation to that matter currently under
20 active consideration by the Bench. Where there is nothing in the existing
21 material to herald that a witness will be asked questions of such
22 significance to an important issue in the trial, then it's necessary for
23 the party leading the witness to take steps to seek relief from the
24 failure to comply with 65 ter, and that, as a starting point, requires, as
25 Mr. O'Sullivan has indicated, a showing of good cause and that requires to
1 be done in the form of an application to the Trial Chamber. Such an
2 application could, of course, be made orally, but would probably, to give
3 the Defence adequate notice, normally be made in writing.
4 In relation to this point, that is the actual -- or the way in
5 which, the methodology by way these statements were taken, this was no
6 notice given to the Defence and no attempt made to seek relief from the
7 Trial Chamber for failure to notify that in the 65 ter list and summary,
8 and nothing has been said.
9 Today amounts to good cause but, of course, no doubt that's
10 because the issue hasn't been particularly considered. So in the opinion
11 of the Trial Chamber, it would certainly be unfair to the Defence to allow
12 further evidence from this witness on the methodology and therefore her
13 evidence will be confined to issues of which notice has been given. Of
14 course, if the Prosecution were to feel that an adequate explanation could
15 be offered to the Trial Chamber and that it was essential to lead this
16 evidence from the witness, then they could at a later stage seek the
17 relief that we've indicated will be necessary in such circumstances and
18 bring the witness back for that purpose. But as the matter has been
19 presented to the Defence, it would in our opinion be unfair to proceed
20 further with that part of her evidence at this stage. We therefore
21 confine it to what has been intimated in the 65 ter summary.
22 Ms. Moeller?
23 MS. MOELLER: Yes, Your Honour. Just to clarify, regarding other
24 issues in the addendum statement, we would be allowed to lead evidence on
1 JUDGE BONOMY: It's already in without objection. Perhaps you
2 were lucky but it got there. And just looking at it, it does clarify the
3 main statement and doesn't appear to do anything else.
4 MS. MOELLER: Indeed, Your Honour.
5 JUDGE BONOMY: So that's why not only is it evidence because it's
6 already in, but in addition, we have made it clear that if you had sought
7 against objection to have it allowed in, then we would have allowed it.
8 MS. MOELLER: Thank you.
9 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, I can't leave the record saying that
10 it's just a clarification. There is one point in it where she makes a
11 complete change in what she said in a prior statement on an issue of
12 significance, which I will probably raise during cross-examination. But
13 there is -- it's more than clarification in that, at least one instance
14 and maybe more.
15 JUDGE BONOMY: But when a witness, Mr. Ackerman, says something
16 different from what was said before, that is clarification. In fact it's
17 essential that that should be brought to the attention of everyone.
18 MR. ACKERMAN: I just think it's more than clarification, it's
19 substantive change in the statement. That's the way I see it.
20 JUDGE BONOMY: What are you referring to? I mean, it's a matter
21 for you whether you want to tell me at this stage because it's -- it's not
22 going to change our mind but it may help us to know.
23 MR. ACKERMAN: I'd be happy to tell you when the witness is not
25 JUDGE BONOMY: That's what I mean. So you can deal with it in
2 MR. ACKERMAN: Thank you.
3 JUDGE BONOMY: All right.
4 Ms. Moeller?
5 MS. MOELLER:
6 Q. In clarification to your statement, Ms. Bala, let me take you to
7 26 March 1999. You say in your statement that you took some observations
8 on this day and that you kept a lookout and observed things in the
9 neighbourhoods of Dragodan, Kodra e Trimave, Vranjevc, Taslixhe, and
10 Kolovica. Could you explain to the Chamber how you were able to make your
11 observations and from where?
12 A. In my statement of 26th of June 1999, I observed from three angles
13 and I could observe Dragodan, Kodra e Trimave, otherwise called Vranjevc,
14 and Taslixhe and Kolavic. My house is in the old part of town, Pristina.
15 It's five-storey house. There is no roof, but the building has a big
16 terrace, and from the terrace I could see these four places. And I could
17 see them very well. I could see the movements of the people, what was
18 happening. Whenever it was difficult for me to see, I used binoculars in
19 order to be able to observe what was happening in various parts of
20 Pristina. I couldn't observe other parts of Pristina that were far away
21 from where I lived.
22 MS. MOELLER: Could we please put up Exhibit P0013 on the screen.
23 It's a map of Pristina.
24 JUDGE BONOMY: And that's P13.
25 MS. MOELLER: Exactly.
1 MR. LUKIC: Your Honour, I apologise.
2 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Lukic?
3 MR. LUKIC: I think we have to clarify something. Maybe it's just
4 a mistake but I just learned, or it appears that way, the witness said,
5 page 69, line 4, "in my statement on 26th of June 1999." We have never
6 seen this one.
7 MS. MOELLER: Can I clarify this with the witness?
8 JUDGE BONOMY: If you can, yes.
9 MS. MOELLER:
10 Q. Ms. Bala, did you understand what the Defence counsel just said?
11 You referred to a date of 26th of June or at least the transcript reads of
12 that. Have you given a statement at that day or are you referring to your
13 statement of 30 June 2001 and 16 August 2006?
14 A. The 26th, I was speaking about the observations of the event of --
15 that happened on the 16th -- sorry, on the 26th of June 1999 [as
16 interpreted], and those are reflected in my statement, and I gave this
17 statement also in July and June of 2001.
18 Q. Now I have to ask you again because the transcript now reads that
19 you speak about the events on 26 of June 1999.
20 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction: That was 26th of
22 MS. MOELLER: Okay so the interpreter corrected. It was an
23 interpreter's correction. I think that clarifies this question, I hope,
25 JUDGE BONOMY: Yes.
1 MS. MOELLER:
2 Q. You said you had a good view from the roof of your house. Which
3 area was your house located at? How was it called?
4 A. The building where I lived is Ruga e Llapi, number 30. It is in
5 the old part of town, close to the old market of Pristina.
6 Q. Would that be in the centre of Pristina?
7 A. No. It is not in the centre of Pristina. It's in the
8 northwestern part of Pristina.
9 Q. Could we maybe zoom in a little bit on this map so that the
10 witness can have a look?
11 A. If you could take the -- could you take it a little bit higher?
12 Even more. If you could stop there. My house is approximately here.
13 Q. Could you mark it with the pen that the usher is giving to you?
14 A. It's not very clear. These are various parts of Pristina. My
15 house is here. From my house I could see Dragodan, Vranjevc, Kolovica,
16 which is behind my house, and Taslixhe.
17 Q. Thank you.
18 MS. MOELLER: Could we please take a snapshot of it and assign it
19 an IC number?
20 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit IC 15.
21 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.
22 MS. MOELLER:
23 Q. Now, in your statement you state --
24 JUDGE BONOMY: Now, Ms. Moeller, we will have to have another
25 break here. Do you think your examination will be long?
1 MS. MOELLER: No, Your Honours, I think I will be done in 10 or 15
3 JUDGE BONOMY: We'll resume at 6.00.
4 --- Recess taken at 5.29 p.m.
5 --- On resuming at 6.00 p.m.
6 JUDGE BONOMY: Ms. Moeller?
7 MS. MOELLER: Your Honour, before I continue with Ms. Bala could I
8 ask for an indication that any possibility that the next witness could
9 actually start today? Because if not we would release him for today.
10 He's waiting here.
11 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, Mr. O'Sullivan is usually the man to tell us
12 if there is significant cross-examination to be anticipated.
13 MR. O'SULLIVAN: At this point, it's not significance. We don't
14 anticipate it would be significant at this point.
15 JUDGE BONOMY: So if cross begins about 6.15 or 6.20, should we
16 keep the next witness?
17 No is the answer.
18 MS. MOELLER: Thank you very much.
19 JUDGE BONOMY: So the witness may be excused and if would actually
20 help greatly if we finished this witness tonight because further
21 arrangements have to be made for the evidence of the next witness and they
22 can be dealt with so that we start and don't lose time in the morning. So
23 please carry on, Ms. Moeller.
24 MS. MOELLER:
25 Q. Ms. Bala, before the break we talked about 26th of March 1999.
1 And you mentioned that you could see VJ, MUP and Serb civilians
2 destroying Albanian houses and Albanian shops in your statement. Could
3 you please explain, how could you distinguish that it was VJ, MUP and Serb
5 A. I live in Kosova, I was brought up there, and so I know quite well
6 how to distinguish between policemen and soldiers and civilians. The army
7 had dark green uniforms, the police had blue, dark blue camouflage
8 uniforms, and the civilians from time to time wore police jackets, vests,
9 and they sometimes had various arms.
10 Q. Let me take you now to the 29th of March. That was the day when
11 you were expelled from your house; is that correct?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. You mention in your statement that a VJ officer and a gypsy came
14 to your house. Do you know who that gypsy was?
15 A. Yes, I do. He was Ivica was his name. I don't remember his last
16 name. He lived in town. His house was in my neighbourhood. He worked as
17 a traffic policeman and was responsible for that area where we lived, for
18 the neighbourhood we were living in.
19 Q. Now, you explain in your statement that you were taken to the
20 train station, boarded a train and that this train at some point arrived
21 at the border crossing of Hani i Elezit and in your statement you say that
22 Serb forces were standing guard over you and the others there. Could you
23 explain what you mean by "Serb forces"?
24 A. It was an afternoon and it's hard to remember things, the exact
25 time of things, but I think it was about five in the afternoon when we
1 arrived at the train station in Pristina, and from the morning until that
2 time we had been walking through the streets of Pristina, all the time,
3 everywhere the train stopped in Fushe Kosova and Lipijan [phoen], Ferizaj,
4 Hani i Elezit, we could identify on all the stations that there were
5 policemen or paramilitaries or soldiers. All the time the barrels of the
6 rifles were pointed towards us, towards the train, that is, for the whole
7 period, during all the stops of the train, we were not allowed to look at
8 them directly.
9 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, this isn't even remotely responsive to
10 the question. The question was, "What do you mean by Serb forces." She's
11 telling a story. It has nothing to do with the question at all.
12 JUDGE BONOMY: I disagree with that.
13 Please carry on.
14 MR. ACKERMAN: Well, just a minute. Look at it, Your Honour.
15 JUDGE BONOMY: I have done.
16 MR. ACKERMAN: She just said -- the question was, "Could you
17 explain what you mean by Serb forces?" And then she tells the whole story
18 about her today and never says anything about what she meant by Serb
20 JUDGE BONOMY: Yes.
21 MR. ACKERMAN: It's not responsive. It's simply not responsive.
22 JUDGE BONOMY: I hear you Mr. Ackerman.
23 Please carry on now and deal with the question, Ms. Bala.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As I said, during the whole time and
25 the stops that we made in Fushe Kosova, Lipijan, Ferizaj, Hani i Elezit,
1 the train was surrounded by Serb forces. Police, army and forces who I
2 had never seen in my whole life before, in Pristina at least. These
3 forces were -- had black uniforms with the flags, with white, red, blue
4 flags, and they had insignia on various parts of their uniforms. They
5 were Serb uniforms. They were police, army, and these other forces, who
6 were not part of the logo -- of the legal forces of Serbia.
7 MS. MOELLER:
8 Q. And did the forces that you just described work together? Did you
9 see them together?
10 A. Yes. In all the places we stopped, everywhere where the train
11 stopped, all these forces were together.
12 Q. Thank you. Ms. Bala, one last question from my side. Did you
13 leave Pristina and Kosovo because you were afraid of NATO bombing?
14 A. Both I and my family, none of us left Pristina because of NATO
15 bombing. We left -- we were forced to leave by the army, the police, and
16 these other forces who were present in Pristina at the time.
17 Q. Thank you very much.
18 MS. MOELLER: No further question, Your Honour.
19 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you, Ms. Moeller.
20 Mr. O'Sullivan?
21 MR. O'SULLIVAN: Your Honour, I have no questions. We'll proceed
22 in this order: General Pavkovic, General Lazarevic, General Lukic,
23 Mr. Sainovic, and General Ojdanic.
24 [Trial Chamber confers]
25 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Ackerman?
1 MR. ACKERMAN: It's a day of surprises, Your Honour. I'm
2 surprised at the order in which we are doing cross-examination. It's
3 different from what I had requested?
4 JUDGE BONOMY: Well --
5 MR. ACKERMAN: So I was nominated, I guess, to go first, and I
6 guess I'm prepared to do that.
7 JUDGE BONOMY: Let's go then.
8 MR. ACKERMAN: It's just one of those days where nothing seems to
9 work the way it is supposed to.
10 JUDGE CHOWHAN: I'm sorry that I intervene. I want to share with
11 you something that's regarding the meaning of the name. "Bala" means
12 somebody above everybody else in Persian.
13 MR. ACKERMAN: Thank you, Your Honour. I appreciate that.
14 Cross-examination by Mr. Ackerman:
15 Q. All right, Ms. Bala, my name is John Ackerman, I represent
16 General Pavkovic. I have a few questions to ask you and if you try to
17 listen to the question and answer it as precisely as possible, we'll
18 finish quicker.
19 One thing I've noticed about you today, just watching you, is you
20 are a person who is I think quite intelligent and also a person who is
21 extremely careful with regard to the things you say and the things you do,
22 and one of those observations was when you were handed your statement and
23 asked to tell us whether or not it was your statement you very carefully
24 went through it to check it to just absolutely be certain that when you
25 said it was your statement, it was your statement, didn't you?
1 A. Yes, I did.
2 Q. And it's that same kind of care with which you've gone through the
3 process of making your statements in this case, in giving your testimony
4 here today, I take it?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. You talk about working for OSCE there in Pristina until OSCE
7 departed Kosovo. You obviously didn't go with them and stay with them
8 when they left. Were you asked to accompany OSCE or did that end your job
9 with them at that point?
10 A. When the OSCE mission was evacuated, all the local staff was
11 offered a possibility to be evacuated with the mission to Macedonia,
12 because they were afraid that their local staff would be a target for
13 arrest, for killings, for kidnappings, and such things, and I was given
14 the opportunity to leave but I was with my family, I had my family there
15 and wanted to be with my people.
16 Q. So the OSCE evacuated out of concern for the danger that might be
17 coming up and offered the opportunity for anybody else that worked for
18 them to leave with them? Fair statement?
19 A. As I said, local staff were given the opportunity to leave, and I
20 was given that offer too but I did not accept it. But I say once again
21 that the OSCE did offer this possibility to all its local staff.
22 Q. That's how we waste time, because you simply gave me the same
23 answer twice. You could have just said yes, I think.
24 Along that line, you gave a statement to the OTP on 30 June 2001,
25 and that statement was reduced to writing in English. It was read to you
1 and translated into your language, and after you had carefully considered
2 its accuracy, you signed it, said it was true to the best of your
3 knowledge and recollection, and you signed your name to each page of it,
4 didn't you?
5 A. Yes, I did.
6 Q. And in the process of being extraordinarily careful about it being
7 accurate and saying what you -- really is the truth, you certainly heard
8 that in that statement you had said, "I spoke with a number of the
9 Albanian civilians who told me that they were preparing themselves for a
10 Serb invasion and because of this fear they were sending their families
11 out of Pristina." That was there, wasn't it?
12 A. During my preparations for my arrival here in The Hague, I think I
13 discovered a misunderstanding. I didn't want to say that the people were
14 preparing themselves for an invasion. What I meant was that they didn't
15 know what to do. I think that was a misunderstanding between me and the
16 person I gave the interview to.
17 Q. Well, you were given an opportunity to clarify that
18 misunderstanding when it was read over to you and you were asked if it was
19 true to the best of your knowledge and belief, and you said yes and signed
20 it, didn't you? You can say yes or no to that.
21 A. Could you repeat the question, please?
22 Q. You were given an opportunity to clarify the misunderstanding that
23 you say existed there when that statement was read over to you and you
24 were given an opportunity to clarify it and you did not do so. You said
25 it was true to the best of your recollection and belief and you signed it,
1 didn't you?
2 A. Yes, I did.
3 Q. And you signed the very page upon which this language appears,
4 didn't you? The bottom right-hand signature, that's yours, isn't it?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Now, when you came here and gave this addendum to the Prosecutor
7 on August whatever you did that, August 16th, I guess it was, that you
8 gave this addendum to the Prosecutor, you then said that what appeared in
9 that paragraph 4 wasn't really the case, that when on 20th March you spoke
10 to these people in the Albanian community, these civilians, they didn't
11 tell you that they were preparing to send their families from Pristina.
12 So you changed it, didn't you?
13 A. I said that there was a misunderstanding here or misunderstanding
14 as to how they interpreted my English because I gave the statement in
15 English. It was simply a misunderstanding. I said they were afraid for
16 their families, of what would happen to them, but I didn't mean that the
17 families were preparing to send their members away. It was simply a
18 misunderstanding during the interpretation of my English.
19 Q. Well, you gave this statement in English, then I suspect you had
20 an opportunity to read it in English before you said it was true and
21 correct and signed it. Is that true?
22 A. Yes, I did have an opportunity to read it and see it. I can only
23 say once again that there was a misunderstanding here. It was my mistake
24 for not having seen that. I did not mean that families were preparing to
25 send their family members away.
1 Q. Probably was. So was it read to you -- was it read to you in
3 A. The statement in Pristina was read over to me in English as I gave
4 it, whereas the statement here in The Hague was given in Albanian, and
5 that's probably the origin of this misunderstanding between the two
6 languages on the one word here.
7 Q. So at the end of that statement that you gave in Pristina, which
8 bears your signature and a date, I think probably written in there by you,
9 where the acknowledgement says "the six-page statement has been read over
10 to me in the Albanian language," that's also not true? Another mistake,
12 A. Could you repeat the question, please?
13 Q. Have you got your statement there in front of you?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Look at the last page called witness acknowledgement. It
16 says, "This six-page statement has been read over to me in the Albanian
17 language." And then you signed that. And now what you're saying is
18 that's also not true, that it was read to you in English, correct?
19 A. The statement in Albanian was the one I read here in The Hague,
20 whereas the one in English was the one I read in Pristina at the time I
21 gave it.
22 Q. That's not what I asked you.
23 JUDGE BONOMY: Please listen carefully to the question you're
24 being asked and try to answer that particular question.
25 MR. ACKERMAN:
1 Q. The question I asked you was the statement in Pristina -- I don't
2 care about the one here, the statement in Pristina that you're looking at
3 right now, says, "This six page statement has been read over to me in the
4 Albanian language." And right below that is your signature and the date
5 written in, I think by you, and now you're saying that's also not true,
6 that it wasn't read to you in the Albanian language in Pristina and so
7 you've signed another untruth. Is that what you're saying to us?
8 A. No. I never said anything untruthful in the statement. I think
9 there is simply confusion here. The statement in Albanian is the one I
10 gave here in The Hague, and that was where I read it here in Albanian. I
11 don't know which of the declarations you're talking about. I read it over
12 and it's the same and nothing was added to it.
13 JUDGE BONOMY: That can't be right. You're being asked to look at
14 a specific page of the statement, the statement you gave on the 30th of
15 June 2001. And at the end of that there is a witness acknowledgement.
16 Now, it says, "This six page statement has been read over to me in the
17 Albanian language." And the point that's being made to you is that that's
18 not correct.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Six years is enough time to recall
20 all these events. If that's what I declared, on this last page, that must
21 mean that I read it over in Albanian. It must be true. There must have
22 been a confusion here because I didn't see the last page here. I did give
23 my statement directly in English but it's been so many years, so much time
24 has gone by that I'm not sure whether they read it back to me in English
25 or in Albanian but I do know that I went through the statement and
1 verified the whole statement. I'm sorry if there is confusion here. I
2 can't remember exactly how it was. I'm sorry.
3 MR. ACKERMAN:
4 Q. I agree with that completely. Six years ago you went through it
5 very carefully and what you said then was true. Obviously it was true.
6 You may have forgotten since then. So when you said then, "I spoke with a
7 number of the Albanian civilians who told me they were preparing
8 themselves for a Serb invasion and because of this fear they were sending
9 their families out of Pristina," that was true and you've just forgotten
10 since then. And you gave a statement here the other day that was wrong,
12 A. What I discussed with the people that I met is true, and I will
13 never forget what they told me. I will never forget their fear, their
14 horror, the expression on their faces. Please let me finish.
15 Q. No, you have to answer the question. I asked you a question.
16 Please answer the question I asked you. Don't give a speech.
17 A. I'm not giving a speech. I'm simply explaining what happened.
18 The Albanians I talked to --
19 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Ackerman, I -- again I disagree with your
20 approach to this. I do not think that the witness is straying beyond the
21 bounds of what's a reasonable way to answer the question you're putting to
23 Now, carry on, please, and answer as best you can.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In the conversations I had on the
25 20th of March 1999, when I went into town to various parts of Pristina, I
1 talked to a lot of people, and on their faces I could see the horror, the
2 fear, everything. Their fear and horror was for what might happen to
3 their families because they were left to the mercy of fate. They were not
4 prepared for the situation. They were not prepared to send their families
5 away. They didn't know what to do with them. This -- these conversations
6 I can remember vividly even today because I was just as horrified for them
7 at the time.
8 MR. ACKERMAN:
9 Q. And these conversations were on the 20th of March, weren't they?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And you remember them vividly today, as you've just told us.
12 A. Those events, the horror, the fear, is alive in the minds of all
13 Albanians, not only in my mind, and even if you call me here 700 years
14 from now, I will be here to testify, if I am alive.
15 Q. My question was: You remember them vividly today just as you
16 remembered them vividly when you gave your statement in Pristina in 2001.
17 You couldn't have gotten that wrong because you remembered it so vividly.
18 Isn't that true?
19 A. I remember the events very well, and I have the whole thing before
20 me eyes. These were events that had to do with life or death so these are
21 events that cannot be forgotten. I told you earlier that this might have
22 been a mistake on my part, an oversight on my part, but I stand by my
23 statement, the things that I've said there, and I will say these same
24 things in the future.
25 Q. Well, you want to tell us how horrible everything was and how
1 terrible everything was and what a horrible time this was and I agree with
2 all that. So I don't need you to tell me that over and over and over, and
3 I think the Chamber understands that. What I do need you to do is try to
4 answer just a question. And when we asked you about your witness
5 acknowledgement that says it was read over to you in the Albanian
6 language, you said, well, I guess I'm wrong, at the time it probably was
7 read over to me in Albanian. I'm sure I wouldn't have made a mistake
8 then. So when I then go to paragraph 4 and say, well, based upon that you
9 certainly didn't make a mistake in that paragraph either, especially when
10 this is -- these events are so vivid to you.
11 Now, I don't know why you can't just answer me whether that was
12 true or not at the time you made it. Did you look at it and consider it
13 when you signed that paper and say it was true? That's what I'm trying to
14 get you to tell me.
15 MS. MOELLER: Your Honour --
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If I signed this statement on the
17 16th of August 2006, and in June 2001, then everything is correct. I mean
18 the statement in English and the other one in Albanian.
19 MR. ACKERMAN:
20 Q. So everything is correct in both of them? Yes?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Well, let me suggest to you, and you'll have a chance to answer
23 me, let me suggest to you that you changed your statement here in
24 paragraph 7 of your addendum because what you had said in your Pristina
25 statement, that you spoke to a number of civilians on March 20th who were
1 preparing themselves for a Serb invasion and because of their fear they
2 were sending their families out of Pristina, you realised that that was
3 not politically correct, that the political line must be that nobody left
4 voluntarily. And so you changed it when you came here, didn't you? Isn't
5 that what you did? And what you said here in this statement is not true.
6 A. Sir, what I discussed with these people -- maybe it is necessary
7 for me to repeat this again, the conversation with them was about their
8 fear, they feared what would happen with their families. They were not
9 preparing to send their families outside Kosovo. Maybe it was a mistake
10 on my part. I did not explain -- I did not read this in detail. Maybe it
11 was an oversight, but the meaning is there. They feared for the future of
12 their families, for the life of their families.
13 Q. Okay. I'm finished with that area and I want to talk to you about
14 something else. A major part of what you've told us in your statement has
15 to do with observations you made of what was going on in Pristina over the
16 next few days from your home, correct?
17 A. Yes.
18 MR. ACKERMAN: And Your Honour, I just want to sigh for the record
19 that this is an area that is very difficult for cross-examination since
20 we -- I have not been able to visit Pristina and so it's very difficult
21 for me to question her about that because I don't know whether she could
22 have seen the things she claims to have seen or not. Had I been there I
23 would know. But I'm told and all I can do is deal with the things I've
24 been told and so my cross-examination will be based on what I think might
25 be the case there.
1 Q. Now, this place that you marked on the map, that you -- where your
2 house was, where you claim to have made all these observations across the
3 city, isn't it the case that there are all kinds of very tall buildings
4 which would have obstructed your view, the opstina, there is a warehouse,
5 there is a bank, there is the Hotel Grand, there is the Kumunda Korpusa
6 [phoen], there is Radio Pristina, there is all kinds of large buildings
7 standing between you and some of the things you claim to have seen, aren't
9 A. The house where I live is in the old part of town, close to the
10 market. At this location, there are no such buildings, no banks, no 15 or
11 20 storey buildings. It's a part that is in a valley and you can see
12 Vranjevc, Dragodan, Kolovic, and Taslixhe. So all these areas, Dragodan,
13 Kolovic, Taslixhe, are -- the houses in these areas are on the hills so
14 you can see very clearly. And it was not only me that could see the
15 movement of the police forces in Pristina. There were other people who
16 saw the events. My house is not in the centre of Pristina. It is in the
17 centre of Pristina that you find those buildings that you mention, the
18 warehouse, the bank, Radio Pristina and so on. My statement does not say
19 that I saw these things in Dardanija, Lakrish, and other areas where it is
20 impossible to make observations from my house. So I could see Dragodan, I
21 could see the whole of Vranjevc because it's on the side of the hill. I
22 could see Kolovica, which is in the eastern part, to the east of the house
23 where I lived. And Taslixhe which is opposite the house where I live. So
24 these are all hills around the place where I live.
25 Q. And you were making observations both during the day and at night,
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. And --
4 A. Both during the day and the night.
5 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... observations you were making
6 at night, you say you were making with night vision binoculars?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Where did you come by night vision binoculars? That's kind of a
9 rare thing for somebody to have.
10 A. Of course it is not an instrument that you can find easily. When
11 the OSCE staff left Kosova, they only were allowed 20 kilograms of
12 personal belongings. These binoculars remained in my car. When I drove
13 some of the OSCE mission members to the regional centre in Pristina, which
14 was in the building of Kosova Film.
15 Q. Do you know what make these night vision binoculars were, who made
17 A. No, no. That was the first time I used binoculars with that night
18 vision equipment.
19 Q. Tell us what you could see through them. What did it look like
20 when you looked through them?
21 A. With those binoculars, at night-time, when there was no
22 electricity and we could hear detonations, blasts, various gunshots in the
23 areas that I mentioned, Dragodan, Vranjevc, Kolovica, Taslixhe, so with
24 these binoculars I saw the movements of the police forces, the army,
25 various cars at the time.
1 Q. What did they look like? Did you see them in full colour? Like
2 it was the light -- did those binoculars like light it up like it's
3 colour? Or what did it look like to you when you looked through those?
4 A. The colours, when I saw with these binoculars, it was some kind of
5 a light which looked more like a green light. But I could see very
6 clearly the tank, the movement of armed persons, the APCs, the jeeps.
7 Q. How far away were these tanks and APCs and jeeps and persons when
8 you were observing them through these night vision binoculars? How far
9 away were they?
10 A. I don't know the aerial distance because I didn't measure it. I
11 only can say that these areas that I mentioned earlier are not far from
12 where I live. They are close to where I live.
13 Q. Is the map still on the screen there in front of you?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Is the map still on the screen in front of you of Pristina?
16 A. Yes, yes, it is.
17 Q. Can you -- can you show me on that map --
18 MR. ACKERMAN: I don't know all the rules, Your Honour. I don't
19 know if she can draw on this map because it's the Prosecutor's exhibit, I
20 don't know if I can have her draw on it or not. I can, okay.
21 Q. Show me on the map where you were observing these tanks and
22 armoured personnel vehicles and troops and so forth, the movement of them.
23 Show me.
24 JUDGE BONOMY: I think what we need, Mr. Ackerman, is another copy
25 of this map now because this one has already been marked and assigned a
2 MR. ACKERMAN: That's what I was wondering.
3 JUDGE BONOMY: So we need to go back to P13 unmarked. Can we have
4 that on the screen?
5 MS. MOELLER: Also, Your Honours I would maybe ask that it's
6 been -- zoomed out a little bit so the witness has a better overview of
7 the map.
8 JUDGE BONOMY: No, but -- is that how you want it?
9 MR. ACKERMAN: I want her to first mark on the map her home. Do
10 that again.
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Earlier I could see this part here.
12 This is the part.
13 MR. ACKERMAN:
14 Q. I'm not asking you a question now. I just asked you to mark where
15 your house is and you've done that. The next thing I want you to show me
16 is the areas that you were able to observe, things that you thought were
17 important, only by looking through these night vision binoculars. Just
18 make some Xs of the places that you observed, and when you make the X,
19 tell us what you observed there.
20 A. Could you put it a little higher, please?
21 MS. MOELLER: Your Honours, I wonder whether a snapshot should be
22 taken at this point before it's moved.
23 MR. ACKERMAN: No, I don't think so. I think the map can be moved
24 up a little bit without disturbing what's already happened, can't it?
25 JUDGE BONOMY: When it's moved, Mr. Ackerman, the mark will
1 disappear and you'll need to start again.
2 MR. ACKERMAN: Let's do a snapshot then and make it an exhibit.
3 JUDGE BONOMY: Are you sure? Well, it's a pretty pointless one,
4 is it not?
5 MR. ACKERMAN: It is a pointless one. Okay, let's move it up so
6 that she says that she can see all the areas she wants to mark and then
7 we'll do it all over again. I'm sorry, Your Honour, there is no way we
8 are going to finish today now. Not even close.
9 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, I don't know, Ms. Bala is that good enough
10 now or should it be moved?
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, it's okay now. I will try to
12 mark --
13 JUDGE BONOMY: [Previous translation continues] ... With a circle
14 and the places that you could see with the binoculars with crosses.
15 Wait, but it's changing again. What's happening here? It's
16 changed twice since you moved. All right. Just wait there.
17 THE WITNESS: [No interpretation]
18 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter cannot hear the witness.
19 JUDGE BONOMY: Can you speak more directly into the microphone,
20 please, so that the interpreters can hear you?
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] My house is here where I made the
22 circle. The places where I could see with my binoculars is Dragodan, the
23 part of the cemetery where there is a main road. I can't see Vranjevc
24 here, if you could move the map a little higher?
25 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, we can't apparently do that so it's not an
1 adequate picture for this purpose, right. Can we have a hard copy of this
2 we can use? Can we print it off or something? This is pathetic.
3 MR. ACKERMAN: Well, Your Honour, I do want a screen shot of this
4 one and have it marked as an exhibit. We can go on and do some more but
5 this one I want because it's important.
6 JUDGE BONOMY: It's certainly not an efficient use of time to do
7 this one bit at a time. We are going to have some discipline and we are
8 going to finish this witness so let's get on with it. Take a shot of that
9 and let's move on.
10 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit IC 16.
11 JUDGE BONOMY: Right. Then we need the picture back blank again.
12 Can you pick out any other part, you better mark your house first of all
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] My house is here in the circle. The
15 place where I could see with my binoculars is the Dragodan area here that
16 I marked. The Vranjevc area, it's opposite to Dragodan, must be right
17 here, Kolovica is here on the side and Vranjevc on the top, and Taslixhe
18 is the other cross down there.
19 JUDGE BONOMY: Now, will the photograph show these up? Well,
20 okay. Take them.
21 MR. ACKERMAN: Will a screen shot show those marks that are off
22 the map?
23 JUDGE BONOMY: We are going to see if it happens or not. They do
24 show, Mr. Ackerman, so we can carry on.
25 And that number now?
1 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit IC 17.
2 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.
3 MR. ACKERMAN:
4 Q. Now, what you have marked on IC 17 are the areas that you were
5 able to observe only by use of your night vision binoculars?
6 JUDGE BONOMY: That's not the answer she's given. She said what
7 she can see with the night vision binoculars, not the areas she can only
8 see with the night vision binoculars. That wasn't the way the question
9 was phrased.
10 MR. ACKERMAN: If you go back and look at my question I think it
11 was exactly phrased that way, and I wanted her to mark the places she
12 could see only with her night vision binoculars. That's what I asked and
13 thought that's what she did. If she could see them without the
14 binoculars, then I have no interest in all those marks.
15 JUDGE BONOMY: Show me on the map where you were observing the
16 tanks and armoured personnel vehicles and troops and so forth, the
17 movement of them.
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I said earlier that --
19 JUDGE BONOMY: I don't want an answer from you at the moment.
20 I don't see a reference to it being all that -- the areas that you
21 were able to observe, things that you thought were important only by
22 looking through these night vision binoculars. All right. And that was,
23 yeah, all right. Carry on, Mr. Ackerman. Clarify it with the witness,
25 MR. ACKERMAN:
1 Q. Now, would you agree with me that all of these locations that
2 you've marked are certainly more than a hundred or 150 metres away from
3 your home?
4 A. They are more than 150 metres from my home, but those are hilly
5 areas, and you can see very clearly from my house the hills during the day
6 and during the night when it was difficult to see I used the binoculars.
7 But during the day I could see them very clearly with my naked eye. I saw
8 houses burning in Dragodan, I saw cars, but as I said, it is of course
9 more than 150 metres away from my home, but because those are on the side
10 of the hill, all the houses, it is very -- it is very clear from my place.
11 Q. You told us that you really weren't familiar with the use of night
12 vision binoculars. They were simply left in your car, correct?
13 A. Not only the binoculars but even clothes and shoes and notes, many
14 other things were left in my car, and the binoculars were in the car. I
15 had never used binoculars before. That was the first time I used them,
16 and if -- when I left home, I left the binoculars behind and didn't find
17 them when I came back.
18 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, as long as she's not going to answer a
19 simple question without giving some kind of a speech we are going to be
20 here a long time?
21 JUDGE BONOMY: I personally couldn't identify the question.
22 MR. ACKERMAN: The question was, you left the binoculars -- the
23 question was, you weren't familiar with the use of night vision
24 binoculars, they were simply left in your car. The answer is yes. She is
25 not familiar with the use of them. She found them in her car.
1 JUDGE BONOMY: I thought we knew it already. But in any event,
2 yes, let's carry on, what's the next question.
3 MR. ACKERMAN:
4 Q. I takes it then that you are not aware that the maximum range of
5 night vision binoculars is about 50 metres and you couldn't possibly have
6 seen things 150 metres away with them. You're not aware of that, are you?
7 A. Could you ask the question again, please?
8 Q. I take it that because of this lack of familiarity that you
9 weren't aware that the maximum vision -- maximum range of night vision
10 binoculars is somewhere around 50 metres? You couldn't possibly have seen
11 things through them at 150 or 100 metres like you said you did. That's my
13 JUDGE BONOMY: Ms. Moeller.
14 Don't answer that there is an objection.
15 MS. MOELLER: Your Honour, I'm wondering on which basis he --
16 Mr. Ackerman is making this claim of 50 metres. Is that in evidence
18 JUDGE BONOMY: It's not, but I for one am happy to accept that
19 he's got a proper foundation for the question, bearing in mind who his
20 client is. So I repel the objection.
21 You may answer the question now.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I said earlier that I had never used
23 binoculars before because I didn't need to. The aerial distance, and I'm
24 emphasising this, the aerial distance from my home to these hills, I don't
25 exactly know what that distance is. It could be more than 150 metres. I
1 don't know what kinds of binoculars that exist or whether they can enable
2 you to see at different distances. I only know that I saw with those
3 binoculars various objects and various buildings, movements, and tanks.
4 MR. ACKERMAN:
5 Q. I'm going to leave that issue now and go into another matter.
6 I've done a count and in the -- you used the phrase, I think five times
7 plus maybe half in your statement, "VJ, MUP, and Serb civilians." So in
8 the first paragraph on the third page, you say, "all roads in and out of
9 Pristina were blocked with VJ, MUP, and Serb civilians." And then further
10 down in that paragraph you say, "I could see VJ, MUP, and Serb civilians."
11 And in the next paragraph you say, "they also told me that the VJ, MUP,
12 and Serb civilians." And on the next page, "on the 29th March, the VJ,
13 MUP, and Serb civilians," and you add gypsies to that one. And then
14 finally at the last paragraph on that page, "the first and last cars had
15 armed MUP, VJ, and civilians."
16 You use that phrase over and over, and my assumption is that it's
17 kind of a generic phrase. Every time you saw troops you just said VJ, MUP
18 and Serb civilians without really distinguishing where one time it may
19 have been Serb civilians, one time it may have been MUP, one time it may
20 have been people you thought were VJ soldiers, correct?
21 A. All these identifications I made, VJ, MUP and civil -- civilians,
22 the Roma, these are people that I saw myself. I didn't see them in
23 various places, separate from each other. They were together in group --
24 in a group in the check-points, at the check-points, and in main points on
25 the roads. So the army, the police and the civilians, the Serb civilians.
1 I can distinguish, I recognise them, soldiers, the police, the Serb
2 civilians, the Roma. So I know what the policemen are, what the VJ are,
3 and the Serb civilians. I saw them together in various parts of Pristina
4 and on the day when we left they were together. The army, the police and
5 the Serbs. When we were stopped at Fushe Kosova as well.
6 Q. You tell us in paragraph 9 of your August statement, your
7 addendum, that the reason you were able to identify the people that you
8 say were VJ was because they were wearing badges or patches on their
9 uniforms that said, "Yugoslav army" or "Vojska Jugoslavija" in Serbian,
11 A. During the whole time that I lived and worked in Pristina, I knew
12 where the police stations were, where the military barracks were.
13 JUDGE BONOMY: Ms. Bala, you've been asked a particular question
14 which relates to the army, nothing to do with the police.
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's very simple. I was trying to
16 say that I had seen soldiers before and I saw soldiers during those days.
17 So I could tell that they were --
18 JUDGE BONOMY: I understand that point that you know a local
19 soldier when you see one, you know a local policeman, and it might be
20 difficult to describe them if you're asked in detail years later to go
21 through exactly where on his body there was a particular emblem or
22 whatever but in this case you were asked a particular question which was
23 you were able to identify people who were VJ because they were wearing
24 badges or patches on their uniforms; is that correct.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
1 JUDGE BONOMY: And that these badges said Vojska Jugoslavija in
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
4 MR. ACKERMAN:
5 Q. I take it then it would surprise you to know that there are no
6 such patches in the Yugoslavia army and have never been. So if you saw
7 people wearing patches that said Vojska Jugoslavija, what you proved is
8 that they were not that, would you agree?
9 A. Sir, their patches that were either on the left or right upper
10 arm, they had the initials VJ, and for me that meant that it was Vojska
11 Jugoslavija, the Yugoslav army.
12 Q. And I'm going to tell you, and I suggest to you again, that there
13 is no such patch in the Yugoslav army that says VJ on it. So would you
14 say that if you saw VJ and there are no such patches in the Yugoslav army,
15 that they must have been someone else?
16 A. As far as I know, they were soldiers. What other thing they could
17 have been, I don't know. This is the first time I hear about this. But I
18 could see they were regular army soldiers. They were close to the tanks,
19 close to their cars, they had the Yugoslav flags. It was clear that they
20 were an army.
21 Q. I want to go now to the final paragraph on page 3 of your
23 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, Mr. Ackerman, have you much more to go?
24 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, I would say I have 10 to 15 minutes
25 maybe, and I think there are other counsel who would have questions.
1 JUDGE BONOMY: All right. If that's the case, then I think we are
2 going to have to adjourn until tomorrow.
3 Now, Ms. Bala we'll need to interrupt here until tomorrow
4 afternoon at 2.15. So you need to be back here ready to start your
5 evidence here at 2.15. Meanwhile it's vital that you have no conversation
6 with anyone, that's with anyone at all, about your evidence. That is
7 either the evidence you've given so far or the evidence that you are yet
8 likely to give. So talk about anything else but not the evidence and
9 we'll see you again tomorrow at 2.15.
10 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.05 p.m.,
11 to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 23rd day of
12 August, 2006, at 2.15 p.m.