1 Tuesday, 20 May 2008.
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.02 a.m.
5 JUDGE BONOMY: Good morning, everyone. We shall now continue
6 with the cross-examination of Mr. Djakovic.
7 Mr. Hannis?
8 MR. HANNIS: Your Honour, may I inquire, did the Court reach any
9 consensus on what you might want to do with my proposal about the
10 illegibles in P1468?
11 JUDGE BONOMY: Just give me a moment. Did you not receive an
12 e-mail, Mr. Hannis, asking you to identify the ones you really wanted
13 dealt with?
14 MR. HANNIS: I did, Your Honour, and I have a hard copy of the
15 B/C/S where we've highlighted the portions.
16 JUDGE BONOMY: We haven't seen that yet, I don't think.
17 MR. HANNIS: I brought it to court, Your Honour, and I can --
18 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, if that can be handed over, we will need
19 to -- and you'll need to intimate it to the other parties. You can pass
20 it round if you like or whatever, but -- and we can get it at the break,
21 but that will have to happen so that if any want to address us on this
22 issue, they can do so, and then we shall decide it.
23 MR. HANNIS: Thank you.
24 [The witness entered court]
25 WITNESS: MILAN DJAKOVIC [Resumed]
1 [Witness answered through interpreter]
2 JUDGE BONOMY: Good morning, Mr. Djakovic.
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning.
4 JUDGE BONOMY: I have to remind you that the solemn declaration
5 which you made at the beginning of your evidence that you would tell the
6 truth will continue to apply to your evidence until it's completed. The
7 cross-examination will now continue by Mr. Hannis.
8 Mr. Hannis.
9 MR. HANNIS: Thank you, Your Honour.
10 Cross-examination by Mr. Hannis: [Continued]
11 Q. Good morning, General. I wanted to ask you if you had occasion
12 to look at Exhibit P2943, the unsigned statement that was prepared by
13 Philip Coo and others from the OTP.
14 A. Yes. Yes, I've had a look.
15 Q. The first question I want to ask you this morning relates to
16 that, and yesterday at page 21, line 19, Judge Bonomy asked you a
17 question about the Joint Command and the use of that term, and you said,
18 '"Command' pertained to the MUP staff and the Pristina Corps. That is to
19 say that when we talked about the variant as to what we should put in the
20 text, I suggested to him" -- and I think you're talking about
21 General Pavkovic there -- "I suggested to him another variant: Staff of
22 the MUP and the command of the Pristina Corps, and the general said,
23 that's long; how can we put all that down? So then through an exchange
24 of comments, we came to the conclusion, the two of us, that it would be
25 best to put 'Joint Command.'"
1 Do you recall giving that answer yesterday?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Now, in 2004 you were asked a similar question, I guess, by
4 Mr. Coo about that, and at paragraph 33 of that statement, you said in
5 2004, "I remember that at one point I asked General Pavkovic what I
6 should call the document I was keeping notes in. He said, I don't know,
7 but for the time being called it the Joint Command. I remember that in
8 the left corner I wrote 'Joint Command,' the time the meeting started,
9 and the time the meeting ended, and at the outset I listed the people
11 You didn't mention anything about this two-way discussion between
12 the two of you and reaching that consensus. Was your memory better in
13 2004 about what happened than -- than it is today?
14 A. Both are correct. The first statement that I made pertained to
15 the first documents that were written, that is to say before the 22nd of
17 As for this here, it's just my interest in respect to the 22nd of
18 July in connection with the notes that I kept. Then I asked again what I
19 should put there in the corner. The General said, put what you've been
20 putting so far, and this so far was on the 6th of July and a few other
21 times when we placed "Joint Command" on a few other documents. So for
22 the most part, this had to do with instructions and general documents of
23 coordination that were there by way of information to the MUP that the
24 army was involved in a certain activity and that they should coordinate
25 their activities with the army. So both are correct.
1 I believe that you have understood what it was that I've been
2 trying to say. These are two different events. Of course, now I'm
3 interpreting them in a different way because the conversations took place
4 in a different way too.
5 Q. Okay. I understand what you're saying, but I have a question
6 because I think you maybe -- maybe I interpreted this wrong, but I think
7 you agreed with me that "command" is a word that has a special
8 significance for military men more so than probably for us civilians.
9 Would you agree with that?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And -- and we discussed a little bit yesterday that when you used
12 the term "Joint Command" for the first time and sent that out to
13 subordinate units, you got some calls back or some contacts from, I
14 think, the 125th and the 549th about what is this Joint Command, right?
15 You have to answer out loud.
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. And in this discussion, it seems like one reason that you and
18 Pavkovic agreed to use the term "Joint Command" was because it was short
19 rather than writing out Pristina Corps command and command of the staff
20 of the MUP, correct?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. But you've made the point, and other witnesses have made the
23 point that this Joint Command that included Mr. Sainovic and some of the
24 other civilians who we've mentioned before made a strong point that there
25 was no command authority in that body, right? That it was a coordinating
1 body, if anything.
2 I see Mr. Fila on his feet.
3 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Fila.
4 MR. FILA: [Interpretation] Two things are a problem. First of
5 all, the witness never said that the Joint Command included Sainovic.
6 Please show me where it is that Djakovic, this witness, said that. Other
7 witnesses, too, who said that Sainovic was a member of the Joint Command.
8 Where is that? Tell me. And also, thirdly, where did the witness say
9 that it was a coordinating body? So it's these three things. He didn't
10 say that, either. Then we'll move on. Thank you.
11 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, there's a basis for inferring the first two,
12 and he definitely said the third one, Mr. Fila.
13 So let's continue, Mr. Hannis.
14 MR. HANNIS:
15 Q. General, do I need to repeat my question, or do you recall it
16 before the intervention?
17 A. I recall the question. It is clear to me. I'll answer. There's
18 no need for you to repeat it for me. First of all, it is correct that I
19 did not say that Mr. Sainovic belonged to the command. I certainly did
20 not say that. And secondly, I said that for me the command was the MUP
21 staff and the command of the Pristina Corps throughout.
22 As for Mr. Sainovic and the other gentleman, I saw them there as
23 political organs in charge of certain functions within the republic and
24 the federation. That is how I saw them, and that is how they behaved. I
25 can say with certainty that Mr. Sainovic or Mr. Minic or any one of them
1 never asked me to write something up, to prepare a document, to bring in
2 something to sign. So I do not know of the corps command ever having
3 prepared a single document for Mr. Sainovic, Minic, Matkovic, or any one
4 of them for them to sign and to send to any level of command. That is
5 what I know for sure.
6 As for that part of the corps command, I can be certain about
8 Q. I don't think you -- you understood me correctly or answered my
9 question, and as far as Mr. Sainovic being a member of the Joint Command,
10 I say that because that exhibit, P1468, the notes of the meetings you
11 took on -- on the first page, the first meeting, he's listed as one of
12 those present, and in later meetings where you list the people present,
13 sometimes you say "All members present," and among those present is
14 Mr. Sainovic. Are you saying he was not a member of that body that met
15 from July to October 1998 in Pristina at those meetings referred to as
16 Joint Command meetings in your notebook?
17 A. No, that's not what I'm saying, but what I do claim is that on
18 the occasion of the first meeting no one mentioned the Joint Command,
19 none of the persons present. General Pavkovic, I, no one from the
20 military, no one from the MUP mentioned the Joint Command. None of the
21 civilians mentioned the Joint Command. Even in the text as far as I
22 could see in all the texts, on 150 pages you do not have a single
23 reference to a Joint Command in my notes. That is to say that no one
24 ever at that meeting mentioned the term "Joint Command." Joint Command
25 was an internal fictitious name when there were discussions for the most
1 part between General Pavkovic and myself so that we could separate this
2 and create coordination documents with the MUP because the MUP could not
3 and would not accept a single document where it said "Command of the
4 Pristina Corps." When it said "Joint Command," then the MUP accepted
5 that variant, and that is the only reason. That was the only reason why
6 it said "Joint Command," not because of Mr. Minic or Mr. Sainovic or
7 anyone else.
8 Q. Well, are you certain that there's no mention in your notes of
9 the term "Joint Command" by people attending those meetings?
10 A. Yes, except for the title that I wrote myself, this upper part
11 where it said "Joint Command." And I've explained that already, how I
12 put it there and why.
13 Q. Okay. We'll have a look at that in a little bit. But isn't it
14 true that all of those members attending -- at least Mr. Sainovic,
15 Mr. Minic, I'm not sure about Mr. Matkovic, but Mr. Minic and
16 Mr. Sainovic, General Lukic, General Pavkovic eventually all came to
17 refer to that group as the Joint Command, didn't they?
18 A. No.
19 Q. Okay. Let me ask you another question.
20 MR. FILA: [Interpretation] Where was this that Sainovic and Minic
21 called this the Joint Command at these meetings, please? Members --
22 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Fila, there's no --
23 MR. FILA: [Interpretation] Look at the text.
24 JUDGE BONOMY: There is no reason why the question that's been
25 asked cannot be asked. Please confine your -- you know that we fully
1 understand your point on this, but there's no reason why Mr. Hannis
2 cannot try to discover the terms in which these meetings were referred to
3 by the various people who attended them, and there is no doubt
4 Mr. Sainovic was a regular attender.
5 Mr. Hannis.
6 MR. HANNIS: Thank you.
7 Q. General, let me show you an exhibit that you may or may not have
8 seen before. It's Exhibit P2166, and I can give you a hard copy that may
9 make it easier and quicker.
10 These are -- this is dated the 2nd of November, 1998, described
11 as the "Minutes of the meeting of the operations interdepartmental staff
12 for the suppression of terrorism in Kosovo at the Beli Dvor palace in
13 Belgrade on 29 October 1998." Have you ever seen this document before
15 A. As for the content, I'm aware of quite a few of the elements from
16 here, but I haven't seen it in this form. Well, actually, I'm not sure.
17 I know this information, for instance, because I prepared some of this
18 information with the operative organ, what had to do with the combat
19 operations and so on. So I'm aware of some of the data, but whether I
20 actually saw this, well, I know that the meeting was in Belgrade at
21 President Milosevic's. That I know. Now, whether it was on the 2nd of
22 November or -- rather, the 29th of October, right? I'm not sure about
24 Q. 29th of October according to the minutes. The point I'm trying
25 to get at in connection with this is the use of the term "Joint Command"
1 by Mr. Sainovic, Mr. Minic, and others. On the first page you'll see the
2 list of all the people attending, and the meeting is chaired by
3 President Milosevic. In the second paragraph, you'll see that
4 Mr. Milosevic opens the sessions and tells who will speak, and he says
5 that General Pavkovic is going to present the proposals of the Joint
6 Command. So apparently, President Milosevic is using the term "Joint
7 Command" in this meeting.
8 Now, if you will go over to page -- let me find it here. Page 9
9 of the English, and I guess it's page 10 of the B/C/S -- of the B/C/S. I
10 will tell you that this is Mr. Minic speaking. He's been speaking for a
11 couple of pages here. And this has: "In conclusion, Milomir Minic
12 proposed the following." Do you see that? It should be at the very top
13 of your page 10.
14 A. Page 10, you say? Oh, yes, yes.
15 Q. The very top. "In conclusion, Milomir Minic proposed the
16 following: "The operations staff" -- which is this group meeting on this
17 date -- "should provide an assessment of how successfully the Joint
18 Command for Kosovo and Metohija has fulfilled the authorisations
19 conferred upon it."
20 So in this meeting with President Milosevic, we see Mr. Minic
21 using the term "Joint Command." Do you agree?
22 A. He's not the one using it. This is a text, a text of the notes
23 taken by -- I mean, General Susic. Now, out of the context of this
24 conversation, how he attributed this to Mr. Minic, well, in some
25 communication he probably had some knowledge that in some discussions the
1 term "Joint Command" was being used, but I'm telling you what I know, and
2 that is that down there in Pristina, it wasn't. I mean, I cannot give
3 you my comments with regard to this here.
4 Q. I -- you were not at this meeting, right?
5 A. No, no.
6 Q. Okay. And are you saying that Colonel Susic or General Susic
7 made up the term and attributed the use of the words "Joint Command" to
8 Mr. Minic falsely?
9 A. No, no, no. That's not what I'm saying. Probably like me, the
10 same way.
11 Q. Well, if somebody in your meeting of the Joint Command in
12 Pristina didn't use the words "Joint Command," you wouldn't put that in
13 your notes, right? You wouldn't make up something to put in the notes?
14 A. I wouldn't.
15 Q. If you'll go to page -- I guess it's the bottom of page 13 in the
16 B/C/S and -- the very bottom, and then going on to page 14. It's
17 Mr. Sainovic, Deputy Prime Minister, speaking, and he's described or
18 reported as saying: "Deputy Prime Minister Sainovic agreed with the
19 opinion that the viability of the continued activity of the Joint Command
20 for Kosovo and Metohija in its present composition should be
22 So it appears, according to the notes taken by General Susic,
23 that Mr. Sainovic was using the term "Joint Command" as well. Do you
25 A. No, I don't know about that. I don't know about these meetings,
1 nor could I have known about them.
2 Q. Let me ask you -- let me move to another topic related to Joint
3 Command. Yesterday, Judge Bonomy was asking you about certain orders
4 issued in 1999 under the title "Joint Command."
5 MR. HANNIS: Could we have on the screen P1966, first of all.
6 Q. Now, I understand correctly that you were no longer with the
7 Pristina Corps in April or March of 1999; is that right?
8 A. I was in the territory of Kosovo, though I wasn't there.
9 Q. You see, this is a document that has the heading "Joint Command
10 for Kosovo and Metohija," dated the 22nd of March, 1999, and it's an
11 order to route and destroy the Siptar terrorists in the Malo Kosovo area,
12 and I will tell you this one on the last page has that typewritten word
13 "Joint Command," but there's no handwritten signature by anybody. Is
14 that a practice that you were familiar with, with Joint Command appearing
15 at the top and the bottom of the page with no signature for these orders
16 relating to joint MUP and VJ activity?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Now, I want to show you next P1967, and I would tell you this one
19 is dated the same day. It also has the words "Joint Command" at the top,
20 and it's described as an amendment to the one that we just looked at, and
21 the numbering system makes it clear that they are related.
22 Now, if we go to that last page of this one, you'll see that this
23 one is actually signed by General Lazarevic. Were you ever aware of that
24 practice where a document was entitled Joint Command and then it was
25 signed by some VJ commander?
1 A. I saw this document. I think that Mr. Coo showed it to me in
2 2004 as well. I know of this one case when General Lazarevic signed a
3 decision after the order of the Joint Command. I haven't come across any
4 other instances, but I have an explanation for that too.
5 Q. Okay. Tell us that explanation.
6 A. You see, this order, the first order without an annex was a basis
7 for coordination with the staff of the Ministry of the Interior, and in
8 principle this was done in 1998 and in 1999 as a basis for coordination
9 without any signature because as I've already said, the MUP did not
10 accept the joint decisions in a different way without a signature.
11 I studied this document very well, and this is what happened: In
12 the first order, the basic idea of the commander was left out as the key
13 basis for coordination because the decision of the commander is the basis
14 for coordination. The plan is just form. This part is form. If you
15 look at the first document, you do not have the commander's decision.
16 Had I received this first document as a subordinate of
17 General Lazarevic's, I wouldn't know what to do. So General Lazarevic
18 probably noticed or one of his organs did that the basic idea was left
19 out and then an additional paper was made along with the basic idea, and
20 the basic idea has to be provided by the commander personally.
21 Otherwise, it cannot constitute a basis for coordination either of the
22 Ministry of the Interior or other structures. That is the only
23 explanation, and I think that this is the right explanation because there
24 are no other such documents.
25 Q. Okay. Can we go back to P1966 for a minute, and if you can show
1 me what you're talking about in terms of there's no decision made as to
2 how or which forces are to be engaged? Do we need to look at what,
3 paragraph 4?
4 A. Four, that's the idea part of the decision. Without item 4, no
5 order is valid. This is a rule in the army, and this basic idea is
6 something that is adopted by the commander. There's always an item 4.
7 No order, no matter what you're supposed to do, would not be valid
8 without that because you have what he has decided the objective of the
9 action, the combat disposition and readiness to execute the assignment,
10 meaning movements of the units, and this was not issued by any one from
11 the Joint Commander. It was issued by the commander of the Pristina
12 Corps, the army commander, or the MUP Staff Commander, no one else. The
13 person that had the command role issued it.
14 Q. Well, on the screen now on the right side, on the right-hand
15 side, we have paragraph 4 from the original document I showed you, the
16 Joint Command one with the unsigned "Joint Command" at the end. There is
17 an item 4, and it appears to be nearly identical to the one that's in
18 General Lazarevic's amendment, correct?
19 I think the only difference I can see, and I'm just looking at
20 the B/C/S, is that in General Lazarevic's amendment --
21 A. There is a difference. There is a difference. There are
22 differences. That's where the problem lies. Look, there are
23 differences. Because even if the sector is changed, the decision has to
24 be changed as well. If the names of the sectors where the units are to
25 go into action are changed, the decision has to be changed entirely. You
1 cannot place just one sentence saying only that part of the decision is
2 changed. You need to replace the whole decision.
3 Q. Now --
4 A. I can see right from the beginning that there are changes. First
5 you have Krpimej, Bradas, and in the other document you have Palahtna.
6 This is the access, and that's the sector. There's major difference
8 When we're talking about the axis, then it's indicated with three
9 points, then --
10 Q. Let me stop you there. General Lazarevic testified about these
11 two documents here in this trial, and he indicated that in his amendment
12 the only thing he put in were the things that were different, and
13 everything else from the original order remained in effect. Isn't that
14 typically how an amendment would work? Rather than repeating the whole
15 document, you only need to list the things that are changed.
16 A. I don't see major changes here in comparison to the other items
17 of the order. Only from what I can see, the decision is valid if there
18 are corrections. If there are changes, it has to be redone. The
19 measures are not so important for the subordinate units. They know which
20 measures they're supposed to take.
21 Q. Let me ask you about something that General Stefanovic told us
22 when he testified here, and it was at transcript pages 21661 through 662.
23 Here's what he said. He said: "During the hand-over of my duty at the
24 corps command, I was then told by General Djakovic... that the combat
25 document entitled 'zapoveset' order is formulated for actions that are
1 carried out by the army and the MUP, and the heading says 'Joint
2 Command.' And instead of the commander's signature, where the signature
3 should be, it says 'Joint Command,' as well, and also, there is this
4 clause that all forces would be commanded by the Joint Command.
5 "There are two forms there, two forms of these documents, one
6 where in the heading and the signature it is the command of the Pristina
7 Corps, rather, the commander with this clause of commanding the forces;
8 that was more seldom, and then this other one that was more frequently
9 present. In the heading it would say 'Joint Command,' and at the place
10 where the signature of the commander is supposed to be, it also says
11 'Joint Command.' And when it says command, all forces will be commanded
12 by the Joint Command. This was taken over from 1998, and it was only for
13 situations where forces of the army and forces of the MUP were engaged,"
14 and the former order was in the computer.
15 So if there are actions where there's joint activity by the MUP
16 and VJ, this form was used with the Joint Command in the heading and in
17 the signature block exclusively?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. And was that the practice in 1998 as well?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. And if it was something that did not involve a joint action or
22 support of the MUP by the VJ, then it would just be a Pristina Corps
23 order, Pristina Corps command in the heading and a signature block signed
24 by Pavkovic, for example?
25 A. Yes, if --
1 Q. [Overlapping speakers] ...help. If we could look at Exhibit
2 P1428. And this relates to an action in the area of a couple of villages
3 called Slup and Voksa, and I will tell you, in Exhibit P1468 there are
4 some references to this action in these villages, but you see this is
5 dated the 14th of August. It's decision on breaking up terrorist forces
6 in the Slup and Voksa villages sector. The heading is "Pristina Corps
7 command." Have you seen this one before?
8 A. From what I can remember, I worked on that document personally.
9 I'm quite positive about that. And I do have some information if you
10 wish to find out more about the document. The information is quite
12 Q. Let me ask you a couple of specific questions first, and then
13 I'll give you the opportunity to tell me that additional information. If
14 we can go to the last page in both the B/C/S and the English. You will
15 see that there is a signature block signed by -- and it's signed by
16 General Lazarevic. And I will tell you from the Joint Command meetings
17 notes that you took, there is a reference around this date. I don't have
18 the precise page number with me right now, but where General Pavkovic
19 advises the people attending that this action is going to be commanded by
20 his -- his deputy, General Lazarevic.
21 Now, if we could --
22 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I remember these
23 records exactly. Not that General Lazarevic would command, but that he
24 should command. So we need to put these questions very precisely. I
25 would like to ask my colleague Mr. Hannis to be very precise when putting
1 questions of this nature.
2 MR. HANNIS: Well, Your Honour, to the extent that that's what it
3 says in P1468, I stand corrected, but we see his signature on this
5 And if we could go to the next to the last page in English. Keep
6 the B/C/S where it is.
7 Q. And you'll see, General, in item number 6, it says -- there's a
8 reference to the Joint Command there. It says: "Combat operations will
9 be commanded by the Joint Command for Kosovo and Metohija."
10 Now, I'm confused. Do you know why that reference is in this
11 Pristina Corps command order signed by General Pavkovic? I --
12 A. Lazarevic.
13 Q. General Lazarevic, yes. Thank you.
14 A. There are two instructions or two books for the works -- work of
15 commands and staffs. These are instructions or rules and attachment to
16 the rules, and these are two basic documents based on which all combat
17 and other documents are drafter from the general staff to the battalion.
18 It is unified and defined specifically by levels who would be doing what.
19 At one point after command and liaison or in one of sentences, you would
20 put the sentence how to organise cooperation, coordination and joint
21 action. I think in these instructions, this is defined with one to two
22 sentences that -- so that these questions are defined in the order.
23 Here, it's an unfortunate matter that the term is "Joint
24 Command." I said that the Joint Command would be the MUP staff and the
25 army command. I don't see Mr. Sainovic, Minic anywhere here because they
1 were not at the Djakovica forward command post. I know that
2 General Lazarevic was there. General Pavkovic was at the command post in
3 Pristina, and General Lukic was at his command post at the MUP staff.
4 This was definitely so because I attended conversations between
5 General Lukic and General Pavkovic that they had occasionally. They
6 would speak once or twice, sometimes even more often. I did attend some
7 of these conversations between the two of them when these actions were
8 being carried out.
9 Q. Maybe you need to help me with something in the translation,
10 then, because my English says: "Combat operations will be commanded by
11 the Joint Command for Kosovo and Metohija with the Pristina Corps forward
12 command post in Djakovica."
13 Is that what it says in the B/C/S, with?
14 A. Yes.
15 JUDGE BONOMY: Ask the witness to read that, please, Mr. Hannis.
16 MR. HANNIS:
17 Q. Yes. Could you read that first sentence under item number 6,
18 "Command and communications."
19 A. "Combat operations will be commanded by the Joint Command for
20 KiM, Kosovo and Metohija, with [as interpreted] the Pristina Corps
21 forward command post in Djakovica."
22 Q. Thank you. And I noticed that in the original it appears --
23 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours.
24 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours. Your Honours, in the
25 transcript there is a mistake. The witness correctly read it, but it was
1 translated "with the Pristina Corps forward command post." It should not
2 be "with," but it should be "from."
3 JUDGE BONOMY: It's been translated in the document as "from."
4 The whole point of it was to clarify it, and this interpreter also says
5 "from." So can the interpreter assist us further?
6 THE INTERPRETER: It is "from." "Sa" in this case is "from."
7 JUDGE BONOMY: I put that the wrong way around. "With" would be
8 used twice, but it's now been clarified as "from," Mr. Hannis.
9 MR. HANNIS: Okay.
10 Q. I notice that the term for "Joint Command for Kosovo and
11 Metohija" in the original B/C/S is in bold print. Do you know why that
12 would be?
13 A. That was not any special practice. I don't know why. Probably
14 in the typing at the automatic database-processing, the people who
15 technically processed that perhaps wanted to emphasise that in particular
16 in order to see that the decision to carry out combat actions was
17 approved from both sides, from the MUP and from the command, but it's not
18 anything special.
19 Q. If we could go up to item number 2. I think it's on the second
20 page of this document.
21 MR. HANNIS: Yeah, I think we need to go back one more page on
22 each to get to the beginning, please.
23 Q. And you'll see the "Task for Units" involves VJ units supporting
24 -- in some cases supporting a MUP unit, for example, in item 2.1. So
25 part of this is a joint VJ/MUP action, right?
1 A. Yes, yes.
2 Q. Why, then, from what you explained me before does this document
3 not have the header "Joint Command" and the signature block "Joint
4 Command"? Do you know?
5 A. I don't know. All I know is that when this action was executed,
6 I think that that day -- well, if you allow me to explain, to say what I
7 wish to say.
8 General Pavkovic asked General Samardzic to go to Djakovica, and
9 the general asked him about this part, to break up the enemy in the area
10 of Slup and Voksa, and he explained that the plan was drafted and that it
11 will be brought up for approval, and General Samardzic asked him, who can
12 explain that, and he said, Djakovic can. And he said, all right, let him
13 bring it, and that evening, well, the general left, and he wasn't sure if
14 he was going to come back. So pursuant to an approval by General
15 Samardzic, I went to Djakovica. I don't know exactly why, perhaps
16 because of these preparations. I personally took the decision to General
17 Samardzic on the map for approval. He wanted me to explain about Slup,
18 Voksa, and another preparatory action near Pec. So I spent an hour and a
19 half explaining to him each element from the first paragraph to the last.
20 He was satisfied, and then after that I called General Pavkovic because
21 he couldn't come back that evening. I told him that the decision was
22 approved. I assume that this is probably, then, the reason why the
23 general signed it. The army general approved that the decision for
24 support of the forces was approved, so I know there is a decision or,
25 rather, a map in existence. I saw it, and I think Philip Coo in 2004
1 showed me that to see if that was actually General Samardzic's signature.
2 I was present when he signed it. He said to me, Djakovic, give me that
3 so I can sign it for you. That was his last sentence because that was
4 the first time that I personally explained to General Samardzic the
5 decision, him in the capacity of army General, and this I had to do
6 because General Pavkovic was absent.
7 Q. I need to stop you there and move on because I have limited time.
8 I'd like to show you Exhibit 6D716, which I think you were shown
10 This is a document dated the 19th of February, 1999. Do you
11 remember this one?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Now, you told us that you wrote this one. Where were you at and
14 what job did you have on the 19th of February 1999 that you would still
15 be engaged in this activity?
16 A. After handing over duties in late January, I remained in Pristina
17 because General Mladenovic could not fit in. A lot of senior officers
18 were being moved around, so all of these hand-over procedures had to be
19 scheduled. So the official hand-over of duty between myself and General
20 Mladenovic took place on the 20th or the 22nd of February. It began
21 then, and it lasted until the 15th or the 16th of March. So from the
22 20th of January until the 20th of February, I was at the Pristina Corps
23 command post and the forward command post of the 3rd Army in Gracanica.
24 Occasionally, I went to the command post. I would assist in the drafting
25 of documents. I took part in the drafting of plans relating to
1 Thunder 3, Grom 3, which had to do with the duties of the army command in
2 relation to the Pristina Corps command, and I was also preparing for the
3 new duties that I was going to assume.
4 Q. And I want to compare this to an Exhibit P2808. Can we have a
5 look at that on the screen for a moment. This is a document dated the
6 16th of February, 1999, from General Lazarevic.
7 Have you seen this one before, General?
8 A. No, no, not this document.
9 Q. Okay. Well, you see this one has the number 455-1, and that 455
10 series is -- is the number which all those Joint Command orders in March
11 and April we see start with, that number 455. And -- and I will tell you
12 that the 6D716 that you wrote appears to follow to a great extent what's
13 set forth in this document, but you say you never saw it before?
14 A. No. Well, the format of the document. That was not a combat
15 document. It's, as we say, the template for an order that we had in our
16 computer. All the information I could type in at any point in time, I
17 could have it from the data-processing sector. I could have the template
18 for that. But when you're executing combat actions, you need to put in
19 axis and sectors, objectives. That was just a template that could even
20 be in a textbook.
21 Another thing is when it's defined by signature, by orders, it
22 can be identical, of course, because that's how it was in the computer.
23 I didn't need too much time to do that. I needed just enough time for
24 the computer to process it and to bring it up as a general order that
25 applied to all commands at specific levels.
1 Q. Okay. Let me ask you now about something in your unsigned
2 statement taken by Mr. Coo in 2004 regarding Mr. Sainovic at paragraph
3 39. You were recorded as saying: "Mr. Sainovic was Deputy Federal Prime
4 Minister, and as a part of his job he was in charge of some points of
5 defence. I don't know exactly which, but this is a part of his job."
6 Now, do you recall saying that in 2004 to Mr. Coo?
7 A. Before I answer, I need to say something. Leafing through
8 yesterday, I found quickly somewhere, as much as I was able to leaf
9 through the material, 21 incorrect assertions which I cannot stand
10 behind. This was just at first glance, 21 incorrect assertions.
11 I need to say something else. When I was speaking to Mr. Coo, I
12 openly told him -- yes?
13 Q. Can you just answer my question? I understand you may have found
14 some -- and I'm not --
15 MR. FILA: [Interpretation] I would like to ask you, Your Honours.
16 It's very important to let the witness to explain the circumstances in
17 which he did not sign the statement to Philip Coo. Had the statement
18 been signed, I would not be on my feet now, but he had refused to sign
19 the statement. In order to evaluate the testimony, we need to hear what
20 the witness has to say. Let's hear what the witness has to say about
21 these 21 incorrect assertions. Thank you.
22 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Fila, this is not a statement that's before us
23 as an exhibit in its entirety. There's no need for this to be explored.
24 If you want to do it, Mr. Fila, you can do so. Mr. Hannis had a specific
25 question, and the witness can answer that question.
1 Mr. Hannis.
2 MR. HANNIS:
3 Q. First, General, could you just answer my question. Do you recall
4 saying that to Mr. Coo?
5 A. Not in this form.
6 Q. Well, in what form, then?
7 A. I said that Mr. Sainovic was deputy prime minister of the federal
8 government, that from what I know he mainly carried out duties relating
9 to the foreign political factor and duties arising from those
10 conversations relating to internal questions of defence and relations
11 with the Albanian people. That was related. That's what I said, which
12 mainly had to do with conversations with Mr. Hill, Miles in Macedonia, in
13 Belgrade, because I heard several times when Mr. Sainovic was saying how
14 he was going for talks in Macedonia.
15 Also, these conversations had to do with arming of the Siptar
16 police forces in ethnically homogenous villages. This is something that
17 I was talking to Mr. Coo about, not that he was responsible for questions
18 of defence. The Defence questions, Mr. Minic spoke about from the aspect
19 of functioning municipalities and regions together with Mr. Andjelkovic
20 who dealt with the problems of civilian defence and civilian protection.
21 This is what I spoke to him about. Now, perhaps he made a
22 mistake or the interpreter made a mistake, I'm not sure which, but there
23 are many such incorrect matters.
24 Q. Well, it's possible that you may have said that and don't
25 remember, correct?
1 A. No, no. No. I asked the gentleman to allow me to look at the
2 statement and that I sign it then, and he said no need. That's what he
3 said the next day, and that's the way it remained.
4 Q. I -- are you saying that Mr. Coo said there was no need for you
5 to look at the statement?
6 A. Well, that's what he said, there was no need for me to sign it.
7 I mean, I know, because everybody who made a statement from down there
8 signed the statement except for me. I seem to be the only one. But
9 you're not allowing me to say something which I believe is very important
10 for the Honourable Trial Chamber.
11 Q. You will probably get a chance from Mr. Fila later on, but isn't
12 it correct that Mr. Coo tried to make arrangements with you to have this
13 statement in English read back to you so you could make any changes or
14 corrections as needed, but you declined to participate in that process?
16 A. No, sir. No, no, no. No. That is certainly not true. That is
17 certainly not true.
18 Twice I cautioned Mr. Coo. I'm telling you exactly the way it
19 was. I'm not a man who says something that is not true. I cautioned
20 Mr. Coo twice to the effect that the young lady was not writing things
21 down when I was speaking. He was dictating the content of my statement,
22 and I said since you're dictating, I cannot sign the statement without
23 having looked at it. I said that quite openly because I'm not a person
24 who signs something one day and on the next day says that that is not
1 There are quite a few, many, correct things that Mr. Coo
2 recorded. I'm not saying he changed everything. I'm not saying that.
3 There are many things that are fair and correct that he wrote down.
4 Q. But I just want to be clear on this. Are you saying Mr. Coo did
5 not provide you an opportunity or offer you the opportunity to hear what
6 he had written in this statement before asking you to sign it?
7 A. No. Bring him here. Let him face me. I am sure that that was
8 the case.
9 Q. And you, according to -- according to the statement, the
10 interviews occurred on three different dates, 26th and 27th of March,
11 2004, and the 22nd of October, 2004. Would you agree with that?
12 A. I would agree with that, but on the 22nd of October that was an
13 interview that took an hour, an hour and a half, and it only had to do
14 with some of my functional duties because I wasn't sure when it was that
15 I took over duty when I handed over to someone else. Quite simply, I
16 hadn't been prepared for that interview, and I wasn't aware of the
17 content of the interview. He asked me very specifically about the times
18 involved, the times of hand-over, and I simply wasn't sure after several
19 years when it happened. So even now I had to go to the personnel
20 department to look at documentation and see when it was that I handed
21 over duty and when it was that I took over.
22 Q. Okay. Let me move to another topic, then, and ask you about
23 Exhibit P2068. You were shown this document yesterday. This is a
24 document that's entitled "Instructions for the Defence --" well, that
25 doesn't appear to be the right document.
1 I'm sorry. I may have transposed my digits. I need 2086. I may
2 have said 68. My apologies. 2086 is a document that's entitled
3 "Instructions for the defence of populated areas. Joint Command for
4 Kosovo and Metohija," and it's dated July 1998.
5 You told us yesterday in describing this that -- you said at page
6 55, line 17: "This looks to me like a training exercise for how to do
7 the defence of inhabited areas," and you went on to say this isn't
8 binding on anyone, it doesn't oblige anyone, correct?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. I want to show you a related Exhibit, P1064. This is dated the
11 28th of July, 1998. It's from Petar Ilic, the chief of defence
12 administration in the administrative defence, and you'll see it makes
13 reference to these instructions for the defence of residential areas. It
14 says they're attached to this cover letter, and you will see the first
15 paragraph says: "The joint demand for Kosovo and Metohija has issued
16 instructions for the defence of inhabited areas ..."
17 And in paragraph 2, he makes reference to the resubordination of
18 conscripts from the Federal Ministry of Defence units formed and
19 mobilised by the defence departments and sections to the MUP.
20 And in the third paragraph, he says: "We would point out that
21 the Joint Command for Kosovo and Metohija has determined a new
22 composition of municipal defence staffs, and in addition to
23 representatives of local self-governed units, the MUP, the Municipal
24 Assembly, Executive Committee, and the VJ, chiefs of defence departments
25 and heads of defence sections have also become members of these staffs."
1 Now, from your position and in your participation in taking notes
2 for the meetings of the Joint Command from the 22nd of July, 1998, you
3 weren't aware that this was going on?
4 A. Specifically as far as this document is concerned, I didn't know
5 about it, but I did have contacts with Mr. Ilic otherwise, who was on the
6 fourth or the fifth floor of our command. That is to say that is where
7 his headquarters were. I had contacts with him up to January, February
9 Yesterday, I said in relation to these instructions that I assume
10 that most probably the administration in the defence ministry had this
11 instruction by way of a general instruction for the defence of inhabited
12 areas, so I assume that Mr. Ilic, knowing in our conversations that we
13 had meetings with representatives of the MUP and the political
14 representatives of the Republic of Serbia and the Federal Republic of
15 Yugoslavia, that he also wrote this up in this text with the intention of
16 raising --
17 Q. You're going well beyond my question now, I think, and I need to
18 try and move on.
19 Isn't it a fact that this issue of defence plans for the towns,
20 for populated areas, was a topic that was discussed in those Joint
21 Command meetings that you were taking notes of in late July 1998?
22 A. That was stated, yes, but plans were not made. So no plans were
23 made at meetings. Mr. Minic only stated that there was information from
24 municipalities and districts. That is certainly the way it was, sir,
1 Q. I didn't ask you if plans were made at the meetings. Would you
2 look at P1468. Do you have your hard copy with you, the minutes or the
3 meeting notes for the Joint Command?
4 I'm looking at page 2 of both the English and the B/C/S, the
5 first meeting on the 22nd of July, 1988. There are five items listed at
6 the beginning, which I take it are the agenda items.
7 Number 2 is: "Measures for the defence of the towns and measures
8 for Pec." Do you see that?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. And if you will go over to page 3 in the B/C/S?
11 MR. HANNIS: And it's page 469 English, Your Honours.
12 Q. You see Mr. Minic speaking, and then there's item number 2:
13 "There's a danger of attacks on the towns." General -- "No town can fall
14 into Siptar hands. General Pavkovic is to give instructions. Priority
15 is to be given to the crisis towns ..."
16 Then that next sentence, can you help me? I have an illegible
17 word here in English that I don't understand. It says: "We have to have
18 measures, forces and control." Can you read that sentence, please?
19 A. I am not really following this yet. Where is it that you're
20 reading from? Is it page 2 or page 3?
21 Q. It's page 3. You see item number 2? Page 1 may be the -- it's
22 on the screen. I don't know --
23 A. It's my page 2. "There is a danger of towns being attacked." It
24 is page 2 in my version, B/C/S.
25 Q. After the list of towns there, can you read us the rest of that
2 A. "We have to have an assessment, measures, forces, and control.
3 The staff consists of the president of the municipality, the government,
4 the army, the MUP, and the National Defence Department. At the level of
5 the district, the chief, the MUP, and the army will meet."
6 Q. Okay. And could you go on to page 4 or the next page for you. I
7 think I have to subtract one because I'm using the electronic version,
8 which includes the cover page as page number 1. But the next page for
9 you, you see Mr. Gajo speaks, and below his remarks there's a conclusion,
10 and it says, does it not, that "Pec and Suva Reka have defence plans, but
11 other towns need to be worked on; Djakovica of special interest." Right?
12 Did you find that?
13 A. No. I don't have it on page 3. Oh, the conclusion. Yes, yes.
14 I do apologise. Yes, the conclusion. You're asking me about that, to
15 answer that?
16 Q. Yes. Did I read it correctly, that Pec and Suva Reka have
17 defence plans, but other towns need --
18 A. Yes, yes. Yes.
19 Q. So it seems yesterday you were trying to suggest that these Joint
20 Command instructions for defence of towns were something that were maybe
21 just a staff exercise for somebody. These were instructions that came
22 from the Joint Command. Isn't that correct?
23 A. No. No, not from the Joint Command. That document, the
24 instructions were in the corps command, and every structure has
25 instructions like that by way of a reminder for their work on defending
1 inhabited areas and towns. So there is the ministry that has that and
2 the army that has that. I don't know about the MUP. I never saw that,
3 but as for the structure of the ministry, I'm sure about the federal
4 ministry because I had exceptionally good cooperation were Mr. Ilic, and
5 I had regular contacts with him. I know that for sure because I stayed
6 in Kosovo before that, as well, from '88 until '92, and I know -- I've
7 known since then that these instructions exist.
8 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Djakovic, you've answered the question. Thank
10 MR. HANNIS:
11 Q. Based on that contact and good cooperation with Mr. Ilic, why
12 would he be putting -- or referring to these instructions as being
13 instructions from the Joint Command if, as you say, they came from the
14 corps command?
15 A. For the same reasons that we had for using this, so the members
16 from the other structures -- well, since no one was subordinated to
17 anyone, this was done in order for us to coordinate certain activities.
18 The question is that without this, Ilic would carry out these obligations
19 of coordination because he is not the mainstay of coordination of the
20 territory, but quite simply now, in a way he is referring to that so that
21 people could take this more seriously, their obligations in terms of
22 defending inhabited areas and towns because he had part of his units
23 dealing with that problem.
24 Q. General, I don't think that makes any sense. Why would he need
25 something like that to make the people he was sending these instructions
1 to take it more seriously? Didn't he have authority over those members
2 of the civil defence and civil protection that were part of the Ministry
3 of Defence? He had authority. He didn't need to invoke the words "Joint
4 Command" to make anybody take anything more seriously, did he?
5 A. Yes, he did, but only over his own part of the structure, as it
6 were, along the vertical line. He had two lines below him. Two levels
7 below him.
8 Q. I think you told us yesterday that as far as you know, the Joint
9 Command as -- and I'm using the term as describing the people who met at
10 the meetings in your notebook. You're saying as far as you know, there
11 were not meetings of the Joint Command in 1999, is that right, in
13 A. I don't know about that.
14 Q. I will tell you that General Lukic gave an interview to the OTP,
15 and he told us that the Joint Command met in 1999 at page 112 of his
16 interview, which is Exhibit P948. And he was asked, "During the time of
17 the bombing, where would the Joint Command be more often?" He said the
18 meetings were held at whatever -- at whichever location we could. He
19 said, "Now it's all coming back to me. Speaking of the places where the
20 meetings were held, they were usually held in basements, but most often
21 they were held in the shelter of the Grand Hotel."
22 You didn't know about that, did you?
23 A. No. In 1999, I no longer attended any of these meetings. I even
24 did not attend meetings with the Ministry of the Interior, that is to say
25 with their organs, because I was within the army. I said that I only had
1 two or three contacts with members of the MUP through commissions,
2 through the order on the resubordination of the MUP, a few contacts like
3 that. However, I had no other direct contacts with the representatives
4 of the MUP.
5 Q. And could we look at Exhibit P2016, please. General, this is a
6 document from the 25th of April, 1999.
7 MR. FILA: [Interpretation] Please. I'm not objecting to what
8 Mr. Hannis is asking now, but I waited for the answer to be completed.
9 I'm asking you for instructions. If General Lukic's statement is
10 being used, a statement given to an investigator, and it's been said that
11 it cannot be used to the detriment of others, it seems to me that what
12 Mr. Hannis did a few moments ago could have been detrimental. So now I
13 would be interested in hearing what you as the Trial Chamber think in
14 relation to this question and answer because it could have been
16 Now, I really don't know whether I should complain. If I
17 shouldn't, then I do apologise, but I waited just in case so as not to
18 harm Mr. Hannis in any way, especially if I'm not right.
19 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Fila, all we have is the witnesses's
20 understanding of the situation. He's made it clear he doesn't know
21 anything about what is in General Lukic's statement, and that is it. We
22 can only take the evidence as the witness gives it, no more, no less.
23 There's nothing more to be said.
24 Please continue, Mr. Hannis.
25 MR. HANNIS: Thank you, Your Honour.
1 Q. This is from the 25th of April, 1999. It's a combat report to
2 the 3rd Army command and the Supreme Command Staff from the Pristina
3 Corps command. If we could go to page 2 in both the English and B/C/S, I
4 have a question I want to ask you about a comment here. It's -- I'm
5 sorry. We have to go back to page 1 of the B/C/S, I guess. I need to
6 find item 2.1. Thank you.
7 You see item 2.1.
8 A. I see that.
9 Q. "Operations of combing the terrain and breaking up the Siptar
10 terrorists continue in line with the decision of the Joint Command for
11 Kosovo and Metohija."
12 That suggests to me that in April 1999, the Joint Command for
13 Kosovo and Metohija apparently is still functioning and making decisions.
14 You have no reason to disagree with that, do you?
15 A. Well, I can agree in part but only in the context of that
16 conversation and my explanation of the Joint Command.
17 Q. All right. Let me --
18 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Hannis, are we nearing the end?
19 MR. HANNIS: Are we nearing the end? Is that your question, Your
21 JUDGE BONOMY: Yes.
22 MR. HANNIS: Yes. I know I'm over the time I told Your Honours.
23 I probably need 15 minutes.
24 JUDGE BONOMY: This session, I think, Mr. Hannis, focus on what's
25 most important.
1 MR. HANNIS: I will.
2 Q. I'd like to show you next Exhibit P1281, and if we could go down
3 to the bottom of the page in English. This is from the VJ web site, and
4 it deals with a public discussion that apparently was taking place
5 between General Pavkovic and Dusan Mihajlovic, who was the minister of
6 the interior at the time, related to alleged crimes in connection with
7 the freezer truck with dead bodies in it. Were you familiar with that
8 public event?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. I need to go to page number 2 of the English, and I'll read it to
11 you, General. I'm not sure where it is on the B/C/S, but
12 General Pavkovic is saying: "The police had their own headquarters
13 headed by their own officers, and the cooperation with the army was
14 coordinated through political actors in joint command formed for the
15 purpose. Therefore, the information to what the police force units were
16 doing can best be provided by the police commanders and members of the
17 joint command in charge of them."
18 Would you agree with General Pavkovic that the Joint Command was
19 formed for the purpose of coordinating MUP and VJ activities? Yes or no?
20 A. Well, I don't know. I don't know if this is his statement. I
21 mean, I personally never heard that kind of statement from
22 General Pavkovic. In what context was it given? I don't know that.
23 Q. Set that aside for a minute.
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. I'm assuming since it's on the VJ web site and it says he said
1 that. Assume he said that. Do you agree with that or not?
2 A. Let us assume that.
3 Q. Okay. And do you agree that the Joint Command was formed so that
4 the cooperation between the VJ and the army could be coordinated through
5 the political actors in the Joint Command? Yes or no?
6 A. As for the part that I'm talking about in terms of the Joint
7 Command, the staff of the MUP, and the army, yes. That is to say as far
8 as General Lukic is concerned and General Pavkovic as commanders of
9 certain formations as a joint command that coordinated activities, then
11 Q. So you don't agree with the part where General Pavkovic said that
12 the cooperation between the police and the army was coordinated through
13 political actors in the Joint Command. Is that your answer, you do not
14 agree with that?
15 A. Only in part. Just in part.
16 Q. And do you recall what the radio call-sign was for the Pristina
17 Corps command and the forward command post in July 1998?
18 A. July 1998? Well, these things changed whenever there was an
19 action or a plan. I mean, it wasn't a constant thing, or at least that's
20 not what I recall. I don't recall a call-sign that was a permanent one.
21 MR. HANNIS: Thank you, Your Honour. I'll stop now.
22 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you, Mr. Hannis. Mr. Hannis, have you
23 allowed Defence counsel to see that document with the highlighted
25 MR. HANNIS: Your Honour, I'm told it's too big to e-mail. We
1 are making -- we're trying to make colour copies with the highlighted
2 sections. Mr. Reid told me it might be possible to make a CD.
3 JUDGE BONOMY: Perhaps we can deal with this.
4 Mr. Hannis would like the witness to try to deal with the
5 illegible passages, and I gather there's about 80 of them that he's
7 MR. HANNIS: Yeah 84, I think.
8 JUDGE BONOMY: Now, is there any objection to this? Does anyone
9 feel strongly against it? No.
10 Well, it would be unwise, I think, to use everybody's time.
11 Obviously, anyone who wants to be there when it's done can be there, but
12 there seems little point, and one way of doing it would be to use Rule 71
13 of the Rules, which would be a deposition process that Mr. Haider could
14 supervise, and the OTP could simply ask the witness to read the various
15 passages, and the interpreter would translate them, and that would be
16 recorded and then a compilation document could be framed thereafter.
17 Now, maybe it could be done more informally that. In other words, we
18 could follow Rule 71 but not necessarily comply with all the
20 What we'll do is consider the possibilities and try to set that
21 up for tomorrow, and that would allow Mr. Djakovic to complete his
22 evidence and this exercise tomorrow and get back home, which I'm sure
23 he's anxious to do.
24 If -- can you tell me at the moment whether it's likely the
25 Defence cross-examination will take the rest of today?
1 Mr. Lukic -- Mr. Lukic, can you help?
2 MR. LUKIC: I think that we'll have some of my colleagues
3 crossing this witness before me, but I think that we have pretty lengthy
4 cross-examination for this witness.
5 JUDGE BONOMY: We might going into tomorrow, right.
6 MR. LUKIC: It's likely that we might.
7 JUDGE BONOMY: But hopefully there would be time still tomorrow
8 to conduct this other exercise, as well, and review it the following day.
9 MR. HANNIS: And Your Honour, I certainly invite the Defence if
10 there are any illegible portions that they're interested in that aren't
11 on my list --
12 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, we know that Mr. Fila has an interest in
13 this having identified all the illegible portions in an earlier filing
14 and no doubt assisted you by doing so, so he may wish to identify some.
15 I'm not sure, but I think his principle concern is that we get as much
16 accurate information as possible.
17 MR. HANNIS: Thank you.
18 JUDGE BONOMY: We need our break again at this stage,
19 Mr. Djakovic, for 20 minutes. Could you leave the courtroom with the
20 usher, please.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
22 JUDGE BONOMY: We will resume again at five to 11.00.
23 --- Recess taken at 10.32 a.m.
24 --- On resuming at 10.56 a.m.
25 JUDGE BONOMY: We're working on a way of dealing with these
1 minutes in the course of tomorrow, and we'll inform you later in the day
2 of the exact arrangements.
3 Note -- sorry, Mr. Fila.
4 MR. FILA: [Interpretation] Your Honour, wouldn't it be the
5 easiest thing for the translators to sit with Djakovic this afternoon,
6 for them to do that this afternoon, and we would have that in the
7 morning, either formally or informally? It seems to me that's the
8 simplest thing in the world. This guy's reading, and the interpreter is
9 translating, and that's it. Then we would all be happy. Thank you.
10 JUDGE BONOMY: If that's okay with the witness, yes, it sounds a
11 good idea. We'll deal with that, then, at the end of today's business.
12 Before we move on, Judge Chowhan has a question.
13 Questioned by the Court:
14 JUDGE CHOWHAN: Good morning, General.
15 A. Good morning.
16 JUDGE CHOWHAN: If you go back to page 6, line 1, of your
17 statement, you had said that the politicians were there, and you've given
18 the names, for performance of certain functions. Would you be kind
19 enough in elaborating what those functions were which required their
20 presence there? That's very kind. Thank you.
21 A. I can say what I noticed, and that is that at the meeting they
22 showed interest for certain questions, and the way I saw them during that
23 hour or hour and a half during those briefings, after the briefings I
24 would really not see any more of them because they would have work to do
25 in the field or in the offices of the Executive Council. I don't know
1 where they would go later.
2 The meetings were usually held in the evening and would take an
3 hour to two hours.
4 Exceptionally, sometimes we would have meetings also with the MUP
5 in order to coordinate during the day or in the morning.
6 What I can say about Mr. Minic is this: I noticed that he mainly
7 dealt with tasks relating to the functioning of the municipal organs,
8 organs of the district, and he had a lot in common with Mr. Andjelkovic
9 as far as resolving civilian protection issues. Mr. Sainovic mostly
10 reported back about questions that had to do with the foreign policy
11 factor. I said that he often had talks with Mr. Hill, Miles, and some
12 other representatives, and from what I can remember, I think that he was
13 away some 13 times from these meetings during these 60 or 64 days that I
14 was taking the minutes. This was the number of times that he was absent.
15 He would often go to Belgrade, to Macedonia. He had meetings in Kosovo.
16 I heard a couple of times when he commented. I was following that from
17 the sidelines, when he spoke with Mr. Minic and said that he had
18 preparations for talks with Mr. Hill. In two days he was going to
19 Macedonia. He needed to prepare well to talk about the platform for the
20 talks. This is what I heard.
21 I know that after talks with Mr. Hill, he intensively supported
22 the implementation of decisions that he had said that Mr. Hill agreed to,
23 and this had to do with the forming of ethnic police in ethnic villages.
24 Actually, Albanian policemen in ethnically Albanian villages, for them to
25 carry out security in the village themselves, to be equipped with
1 uniforms, with insignia, with sidearms meaning pistols, and he did say
2 that at least they should resemble a police force so that the people
3 would accept them. This is what he did.
4 Occasionally, he would comment if any of the commanders would
5 report on some questions that had to do with military activities in terms
6 that the army did such-and-such a thing. In the course of the day, he
7 would put some questions that had to do with what the plan was for the
8 following day, if the commander approved a decision, meaning General
9 Samardzic, and things like that. So these questions were put sometimes.
10 Andjelkovic mostly dealt with civilian protection and civilian
11 defence matters, and as far as I know from what I could see of those
12 people, he's the only person that I saw three or four times in 1999, once
13 in Kosovska Mitrovica and maybe twice in Pristina. I saw him in passing.
14 And as for Matkovic, I saw him a couple of times he came. I
15 didn't see him that often. I saw him mostly because he was also an MP, a
16 representative of the Socialist Party in the parliament, and as far as I
17 know he had some companies in Kosovo because he was also the director of
18 Sartid, and so mostly things that had to do with these economic issues,
19 and whenever economic issues were up in these briefings, then he would
20 emphasise these questions. This is what I saw of him.
21 In the notebooks, I actually made an analysis of all of these
22 discussions in a way because I was purely interested to see what I noted
23 down during those 64 or 65 days when I was practically taking these
24 minutes, these notes. This is how I saw those people.
25 General Samardzic was present at the meetings. He would attend.
1 The army commander. There are at least -- there was one discussion of
2 his from the 27th. I remember that, and that was the basis, let me put
3 it that way. And nobody ever questioned the army commander's decisions,
5 I've already mentioned one instance when simply relating to that
6 question, the question of issues and orders, nobody asked questions. If
7 there was some request, it would be the general's request, either a
8 request by General Lukic or some proposal from the other members: Would
9 this be good, would this be possible, something like that.
10 JUDGE CHOWHAN: General, thank you very much for that elaborate
11 answer, but it looks a bit strange to have a composition like that.
12 There must be somebody who must be convening these meetings.
13 Now, whose idea it was to induct the politicians also there, and
14 what was the rationale behind that idea? Because as a matter of fact, if
15 it was merely a question of briefing simpliciter, well, we know what
16 briefing is. It could be done man to man, so this -- and then in these
17 meetings what you were discussing with some plans, also, and so on, could
18 you just throw some light on this, please, with all your background and
19 expertise and your presence there? Thank you very much.
20 A. Your Honour, I cannot say exactly whose idea it was, but based on
21 what I know I believe the idea probably came from Belgrade for them to
22 come down to Kosovo. As for the specific assignments that they were
23 given, that I don't know. This is something that I cannot really comment
24 on. I'm just giving my impressions from these meetings, from these
25 talks, briefings, and so on and so forth.
1 How it was scheduled, well, let's say the first meeting. I said
2 how I came to attend the first meeting. Mr. Minic was the president or
3 the chairman of the council of citizens, and realistically speaking, he
4 had the highest post out of all the civilians. Then he was followed by
5 Mr. Sainovic. I'm talking about my assessment. Followed by
6 Mr. Andjelkovic, and then either Gospodin Matkovic or Mr. Andjelkovic.
7 Probably more likely, it was Mr. Andjelkovic. I'm not sure, but it
8 seemed to me that Mr. Minic, when he was at the meeting, in a way was the
9 one who -- let's say, was the one who put the most questions, spoke
10 whether we needed to see each other again or not, whether it was
11 necessary for them to come and report back about something again or not.
12 When he was there, he was the first one to actually state the
13 agenda, and if army briefings are in question, there is no agenda. The
14 briefing proceeds along the elements of combat readiness, and this is
15 done by commanders -- and this is done pursuant to six elements of combat
17 We never discussed -- or the briefings did not go in the order of
18 the combat readiness items. We were talking about political relations,
19 Albanians, Serbs, the Serbian state, political leadership of Kosovo. We
20 discussed political matters of broader significance, not just of Serbian
21 significance but the Balkans and the European question. There was no
22 briefing based on the elements because if this was the case, the
23 commander who was in charge would then issue assignments and the
24 deadlines when these assignments had to be implemented, but this was not
25 there. Had these tasks been issued, I would surely have written that
2 JUDGE CHOWHAN: With a person as senior as a deputy prime
3 minister present there, well, can it be said that he was also imparting
4 instructions, or was he just sitting and listening without showing any
5 leadership there? What have you to say on that, please?
6 A. He wasn't sitting there without being interested in what was
7 going on. As for the reasons why he was interested, I'm thinking now.
8 If he was carrying out the post of dealing with this foreign policy
9 moment, then of course it was -- he was interested to know what the
10 situation in the field was, and the only opportunity was to get the
11 information from General Lukic and from General Pavkovic, from the army
12 commander, from General Djordjevic, from Obrad and from the others who
13 participated in all of that. And also from Mr. Minic for them to
14 mutually exchange information through the municipal organs, the district
15 organs, through the civilian structures, from the ministry, and so on and
16 so forth. The only opportunity was for him there to get good information
17 so that he had a good basis to speak with someone because if we're going
18 for talks with someone, you have to prepare. You have to think about
19 what the situation is. You cannot just go. At least this is how I
20 viewed it. You cannot go for talks with someone without knowing what the
21 situation is in the territory and then make assertions.
22 A witness who comes to testify has to look at something. He has
23 to see documents because he cannot remember everything. And I -- I am
24 sure that and I'm saying that only at those meetings and briefings they
25 lasted for an hour and a half, and then for the rest of their work hours
1 and for the whole rest of the afternoon, they were carrying out duties
2 that I don't know what they were. Probably in the Executive Council. I
3 know that Mr. Matkovic would come and talk -- or to resolve problems that
4 had to do with the electrical supply installations, to resolve problems
5 about that. There was another gentleman who would come, Andre, Andre
6 Milosavljevic I think his name was. He was also from the government. He
7 was there to resolve the problems of repairing houses, issue humanitarian
8 aid in Malisevo, to the refugees in Malisevo, in areas where there was
9 demolition. They would glass in the windows, and this is all from the
10 notes that are practically, practically recording that, and all these
11 things were interesting to me, and I wrote them down.
12 JUDGE CHOWHAN: Since they were coming, perhaps, as you said, on
13 instructions from Belgrade, well, a person of that level coming there and
14 being present in those meetings, did he express that he was carrying some
15 instructions? Did he guide you in any respect? Did he differ with you
16 in any respect stating that this was the Belgrade's policy or in view of
17 that policy, or just he would be just sitting most of the time getting
18 briefings and listening to you? I mean, coming all the way from
19 Belgrade, he must be carrying some instructions and guiding you on those
20 instructions. Did he perform such -- did he act in that way or what?
21 Can you kindly elucidate. Thank you very much.
22 A. Well, I will try to elucidate. I know that usually at these
23 meetings, no contacts with Belgrade and that part were mentioned, rather,
24 whether he or any of them spoke with anybody from Belgrade. That is
25 something I don't know. That is not present to me as for -- if the
1 deputy prime minister spoke with the prime minister or any other members,
2 I don't know. I wasn't present.
3 What I do know is that in these notes, there isn't half as much
4 written down as was actually said on these political topics. I said that
5 I wrote down the least about that part concerning talks with Mr. Hill.
6 That was pure politics, and I as a soldier wasn't really interested in
7 that. I was entrusted with a specific function, and I never received any
8 kind of indication or suggestion to try to resolve something that
9 somebody else would provide a basis for. I was only ordered by
10 General Pavkovic or the army commander. I was away from
11 General Lazarevic, even though he was my first-ranking superior. I was
12 away from him. He was in Djakovica, and I was in Pristina, so
13 practically I would only occasionally communicate with General Lazarevic,
14 and I cannot simply know whether they had communications with others
15 outside of that group amongst themselves. That is something that I don't
17 JUDGE CHOWHAN: Thank you.
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You're welcome.
19 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. O'Sullivan, no questions, have you? All
21 Mr. Fila.
22 Cross-examination by Mr. Fila:
23 Q. [Interpretation] I would just like to carry on with this line.
24 Yesterday, to a question by Judge Bonomy, and this is page 26380, you
25 said, and I'm paraphrasing, that at the point in time when these meetings
1 were held, which were also attended by civilians, you already had an
2 order from General Samardzic. So I am going to tell you that
3 General Simic also testified here, who was at the 3rd Army forward
4 command post in Pristina at the time, and that he said that
5 General Pavkovic would come to him with an order that he needed to
6 approve for the following day, and then after that you would go to the
7 meeting -- the meetings only after this order was approved, that some
8 orders were given by Samardzic and some by Simic. Do you agree with
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And you would then go to the meeting with such an order. Well,
12 now let us bring to a logical conclusion this line of questioning started
13 by Judge Chowhan. So whatever any of those four civilians said, could
14 that have any influence on an order that was already made or to the chain
15 of command of the army of Yugoslavia in any event?
16 A. It could only in one case, and that would be to submit a request
17 to General Pavkovic for him to report to the army commander and for the
18 army commander to correct or augment his decision. There would be no
19 other way.
20 Q. So this request would go from where, from civilians or from whom?
21 A. Well, mainly from the MUP. The MUP usually would submit things
22 for the helicopter and for this, for that. The requests would
23 initiate -- be initiated by them.
24 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Fila, the gap. There's already a problem
25 building up. Just slow down a bit, please.
1 MR. FILA: [Interpretation]
2 Q. And then the technology was that Pavkovic would again need to go
3 to Samardzic for approval.
4 A. Normal.
5 Q. And then when Samardzic -- or, rather, Simic, because we're
6 treating them the same, approved that, that would be that?
7 A. Yes, but the decision never went there to the meeting. The
8 general would only note that the decision was approved. The document
9 itself never went to that part. I would never take the map to that
10 meeting and say, "General Samardzic has approved it, here." No. It was
11 enough for them to say -- for General Pavkovic to say that the decision
12 was approved, nothing else.
13 Q. All right. Very well. Would you agree with me, then, that any
14 suggestion or anything that the four said did not have any influence on
15 what was done?
16 A. No. Their influence was not really that significant, no.
17 Q. All right. Thank you. The second question that I have arising
18 from a question from Mr. Hannis, and we're talking about this operative
19 inter-resource staff document that you were reading from where Mr. Hannis
20 asked you to read where the Joint Command is being met --
21 A. Yes, yes.
22 Q. At one point, the Prosecutor stopped you. You said you were
23 familiar with the contents. Did you ever prepare anything for
24 General Pavkovic?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. What was that?
2 A. We would prepare for the Pristina Corps information with which
3 General Pavkovic, General Samardzic, and General Perisic, and General
4 Dimitrijevic, until the end of 1998 while practically the meetings were
5 going on up there would go to brief about the situation in the Pristina
6 Corps and the territory. This is what the briefings would be about.
7 Q. All right. And these would be briefings on military matters?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. What I'm interested is -- is was there any mention of civilians
10 or anything who were saying something there or commanding in these
12 A. No. No mention of anything like that was there.
13 Q. And this unsigned statement of yours that you gave to Philip Coo,
14 did you ever have a translation of your statement into Serbian so you
15 could read it, look at it, agree to it, and then sign it? Was this
16 opportunity ever given to you?
17 A. No. No.
18 Q. And how did he introduce himself? What did he say?
19 A. Well, the first time I heard who Philip Coo was, I heard about
20 that here. I had information from my colleagues a year or two ago who
21 testified, who said that he was an expert. Some expert; I don't know
22 what he was doing. But I don't have information about it. I cannot
23 really state if it was even him. I simply didn't notice. I didn't write
24 it down. I didn't write down who this person is that I was talking to,
25 but I can see by the team who was there, I think that there was lady with
1 him also who was doing the work, but I didn't know of him.
2 Q. All right. Does that mean that you never saw that statement? It
3 was never presented to you to read and to sign?
4 A. No, no.
5 Q. All right. Thank you very much.
6 MR. FILA: [Interpretation] That's all, Your Honours.
7 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Visnjic, do you have any questions?
8 MR. VISNJIC: No questions, Your Honours.
9 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you. Mr. Aleksic.
10 MR. ALEKSIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
11 Cross-examination by Mr. Aleksic:
12 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon, General.
13 A. Good afternoon.
14 Q. Could we please call up in e-court 4D525. Could it please be
15 zoomed in a bit.
16 Do you recognise the document, General? I have it in hard copy,
17 too, if that will be easier for you.
18 A. I could not have seen the document because it's an army document,
19 an army command document, but when I was in the Pristina Corps, as for
20 the content --
21 Q. Please look at the bottom of the document. Who was it sent to?
22 If we can have it scrolled down a bit. Yes.
23 A. Yes. Yes. And as I've said, this document was probably
24 addressed straight away to the commander of the Pristina Corps. That is
25 to say that I did not receive all the documents that were coming in from
1 the army. I mean, they went through the office, and they would go to the
2 main persons involved. And part of the documents that have to do with
3 the operations organ the commander would address to me. And part of the
4 documents --
5 Q. That will do, General. That will do. Do you know since you were
6 there in Pristina in the summer of 1998 that every day, briefings were
7 held at the forward command post of the 3rd Army?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Can you tell us who chaired these briefings?
10 A. Well, at the briefings there was the commander of the army, the
11 chief of staff. I am trying to remember now. Then the chief of the
12 operations department. Then there was one of the assistants from
13 logistics. Then there was the head of intelligence on a regular basis.
14 So it was the organs of the command of the army. Between 10 and 15
15 persons, depending on the occasion.
16 Q. And from time to time you were present?
17 A. For the most part.
18 Q. Can you tell us what was discussed there -- or, rather, what the
19 briefings were about?
20 A. Well, it was daily activities that were discussed. It had to do
21 with the elements of combat readiness, as we put it, and problems were
22 discussed, and usually we would take our decisions for approval by the
23 army commander.
24 Q. Thank you. Let me interrupt you at this point. Can we now call
25 up 4D529.
1 MR. ALEKSIC: [Interpretation] I would like to ask the usher to
2 give the document to the witness in hard copy, please.
3 Q. Just a moment, please. In B/C/S it is page 2, the one but last
4 paragraph, and in English it is page 5. And there is an abbreviation
5 there in the document that says -- it seems that you're the person
6 speaking there towards the end of the document. It says "The chief."
7 A. Yes, yes.
8 Q. Can you please read that part?
9 A. On the first or second page?
10 Q. The second page.
11 A. "Combat group 15-2 to the north of the village of Rakovina today
12 around noon repelled the attack of the DTS from the area of the village
13 of Crnljane and the village of Gaj on which occasion 20 terrorists were
14 killed. During the day, preparations were being carried out for the
15 Ratis operation -- or action. The brigade commands and the combat groups
16 were doing the planning. The action starts the day after tomorrow, on
17 the 8th of September."
18 And on the last page, the one but last paragraph and the last
20 A. The chief of the department, that is to say I, explaining the
21 decision of the commander concerning Ratis and also in Papracane. "There
22 is a barracks with about 1.000 to 1.200 terrorists. The objective is to
23 carry out an action very swiftly in order to find mass graves. Later,
24 the command of the PRK is to plan action to Baranski Lug because
25 otherwise part of the forces will ensure things from this direction."
1 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreters note: We did not hear the
2 question or answer because the previous answer didn't finish.
3 MR. ALEKSIC: [Interpretation] I apologise. I will finish. I
4 will repeat it.
5 Q. General, could you repeat this. After you were speaking, after
6 you explained, what happened?
7 A. I've explained the decision --
8 Q. Just repeat the answer for it to be interpreted.
9 A. The commander of the army personally approved it like -- for
10 Ratis like he did in the previous cases.
11 Q. Very well. In relation to that, can we call up in e-court
12 6D1643. Could it be please be zoomed in. Not that much. Not that much,
14 General, in the lower right-hand corner, can you see the
16 A. It's the signature of the corps commander.
17 Q. Could we see the upper part of the map now. Am I right? Is this
18 the decision map for the action that we spoke of just now?
19 A. Yes. In principle, that's it. On the left, there is the
20 approval of the commander, and on the right-hand side is the signature of
21 the commander of the unit whose forces are carrying out the action.
22 Q. Thank you. General, can we have a look at 4D528 now in e-court.
23 MR. ALEKSIC: [Interpretation] And I would kindly ask the usher to
24 give the witness this document in hard copy as well.
25 Could we please have 4D528 in e-court.
1 Q. General, can you please have a look at the B/C/S version. In
2 Serbian it's page 2, item 4, under (a) and (b), and in English it is on
3 page 4.
4 Just tell us first and foremost, General, from whom did this
5 document come; who is it addressed to; and finally, what does item 4 say?
6 A. This is a document of the command of the 3rd Army. It was signed
7 by the army commander after the team from the General Staff toured, I
8 think it was between the 13th and the 15th of August, and on the basis of
9 that he issued specific orders with regard to all elements of combat
10 readiness and in relation to all tasks to the Pristina Corps, that is.
11 Q. Could you tell us now what the specific tasks are in item 4 under
12 (a) and (b)?
13 A. Specifically, number 4 is a task in cooperation and coordination
14 with the MUP forces and in accordance with the deployment of forces in
15 the area to prevent the spill-over of forces from the KiM area into the
16 Rasko-polimlje district and also in the Jablanica and Pcinja district.
17 The mainstay of this activity are the army command and the commander of
18 the Pristina Corps. And the deadline says continuous task.
19 Q. (b)?
20 A. (b), continue coordination and coordinated action with the MUP
21 forces and in accordance with the assessments, provide support to the MUP
22 forces in breaking up sabotage and terrorist groups using measures that
23 will not significantly affect the completion of the primary tasks, the
24 securing of the state border, and the defence of all military facilities,
25 units, and commands.
1 "The mainstay of this activity is the army command and the
2 Pristina Corps command. The deadline, continuous task."
3 Q. Thank you, General.
4 MR. ALEKSIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, the witness said in
5 the introduction of this document, the commander invokes General
6 Perisic's document 4D416. I said that only for the transcript.
7 Q. Thank you, General. Could we please call up in e-court now
9 General, this is a brief document. Could you just take a look at
10 it and tell me what this is about? Or, rather, who the author is, to who
11 it was sent?
12 A. I understand when I read the last sentence, I realised what this
13 was all about. This is an order by which the army commander forms new
14 combat groups in the territory of Kosovo and Metohija and in line with
15 his own authority. Before that, what had been established were forces on
16 the basis of a special order in terms of standing combat readiness levels
17 of the chief of staff throughout the army of the Federal Republic of
18 Yugoslavia, and this was done in a unified manner. So now the army
19 commander as the authorised officer is forming new combat groups as
20 temporary units for carrying out specific tasks.
21 Q. At the proposal?
22 A. At the proposal of the command of the Pristina Corps.
23 Q. Thank you, General. General, yesterday, on page 46, lines 13
24 through 22 in the transcript of your testimony here today -- here
25 yesterday, you said that General Pavkovic gave you some special tasks
1 before the OSCE mission arrived, and you said something about the
2 deployment of units in the area. So could we now please look at 4D381.
3 It's a map, so you will have a look.
4 Please take a look at this map and tell me, can you recognise it?
5 What is on this map? I have a hard copy, too, in black and white if it
6 will be easier for you to compare.
7 A. It would be easier. I mean, I know about this map. This is what
8 I explained in a way until now. This is the deployment of forces because
9 on the 16th of October, an agreement was signed with the mission. I --
10 the mission of the OSCE, that is, on the withdrawal of the army and
11 police from the territory. What was regulated was that three combat
12 groups should be left -- or, rather -- I beg your pardon. Three
13 tactical -- well, yes, combat groups at company level, at company level
14 in the area of Kremovic [phoen]. This is combat group 125/5. Then in
15 the area of Iglarevo. That is combat group 15/3. And combat group in
16 Dulje, 243/1.
17 Q. Thank you, General. So this map corresponds to the situation
18 that you talked about yesterday?
19 A. Yes. And I worked on that in accordance with the order issued to
20 me by General Pavkovic that we should prepare these forces, that we
21 should withdraw the other forces into barracks and carry out our tasks,
22 and that is why I interrupted the activities involved in until then.
23 Q. So this was approved by General Samardzic?
24 A. All tasks. Of course.
25 Q. Thank you. General, yesterday on page 28, lines 5 through 8, you
1 said - I'm moving to 1999 now - that in 1999 you had only two contacts as
2 far as the MUP was concerned. One was on the 19th of April after you
3 received an order from the General Staff on resubordination, and the
4 second one you talked about had to do with Istok. I'm interested in the
5 contact you had on the 19th of April. Can you remember who was present?
6 A. Well, I think it was sometime in the afternoon, 4.00 or 5.00. It
7 could have been around that time. Between 4.00 and 5.00 in the afternoon
8 on the 19th.
9 The members of the police -- or, rather, General Djordjevic,
10 General Obrad Stefanovic, and General Lukic came. Now, I'm not 100 per
11 cent sure where this meeting took place. Well, they came at the
12 invitation of General Pavkovic, I believe, and I didn't know what would
13 be discussed. General Lazarevic was there and a few other officers from
14 the command. And then General Pavkovic gave General Djordjevic a
15 telegram from the General Staff that he read. He didn't read it out
16 loud, but General Djordjevic did read it, and he returned it to
17 General Pavkovic. I mean, he returned this telegram. And a certain
18 explanation was provided. And I know that the question of
19 resubordination was there in relation to the telegram sent by the chief
20 of General Staff in terms of resubordinating the members of the MUP to
21 the Pristina Corps. So that was the content of the telegram because
22 afterwards I took the telegram with me. I had it in the archives then.
23 Quite simply, I mean -- well, what the reaction was. Well, the reaction
24 of General Djordjevic, well, I have to say exactly what happened. He
25 said, what do you mean Ojdanic? Who is he going to command? Those were
1 his words. We were all taken a bit by surprise, and practically they,
2 the members of the MUP, still did not accept that the army would command
3 practically in the entire zone or in the area of Kosovo. In a way, they
4 remained on the basis of coordination as before, or someone -- or
5 everyone carried out their own activities independently in a way.
6 Q. Thank you, General. We will move to another topic. Yesterday
7 and today, General, you told us that you cooperated closely with
8 General Pavkovic, and I believe that you're familiar with his numerous
9 orders about respecting international humanitarian law, and you probably
10 drafted most of them.
11 A. Yes. Yes.
12 Q. Can you please tell me if you know any of his written or oral
13 orders when he addressed his subordinate units or superiors where he
14 asked the opposite from them of respect of international war on
15 humanitarian law?
16 A. Well, all the things that I know about how General Pavkovic acted
17 towards civilians, towards the wounded, towards prisoners of war have a
18 lot of examples where I can show that these were actually implemented in
19 practice. As of June, he tried by all available means to get in touch
20 with the Albanian -- let's say some village -- key people who were
21 conducting the village policy in a way, and his conversation is known
22 down there, and I was present as well as the assistant for morale and a
23 group of people when he received, received support from the Albanian
24 people in the village of Brovina, the village of Morici, and places where
25 he conducted talks with those people and the promise that he would not
1 allow terrorists to enter the villages.
2 Q. Thank you, General. We already have evidence about that.
3 General, my last question is this. Yesterday and today, you
4 talked in detail about this. You as an operative officer at the post
5 where you were, are you aware that there was ever any kind of plan to
6 expel the Albanian civilian population in order to change the balance of
7 the population that would remain in Kosovo?
8 A. No. I'm sure of that. In 1998, I had the plans. My man handled
9 all the plans in 1998 in the Pristina Corps. There wasn't even a draft
10 of such a plan, never mind that it was actually done. In order to make
11 such a plan, a larger group of people would need to work on it. So
12 practically there is no chance that any such plan ever existed. I never
13 heard that there was such a plan with the MUP, either.
14 Q. General, sir, thank you very much.
15 MR. ALEKSIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I have no further
16 questions. Thank you.
17 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you, Mr. Aleksic. Mr. Zecevic.
18 MR. ZECEVIC: I'm sorry, Your Honours, 57, 22. I believe the
19 witness said in the village of Brovina.
20 JUDGE BONOMY: Freudian slip, I'm sure.
21 A. Yes, yes, Brovina.
22 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Aleksic.
23 MR. ALEKSIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, just one
24 clarification. My mistake.
25 Q. General, you said in this context that the General Pavkovic had
1 in June with these local representatives of the population. When was
3 A. 1998, before the conflict. This is when the clashes on the
4 border were just starting. There were only clashes on the border, but
5 there were no major clashes on the territory.
6 Q. Thank you. Thank you.
7 MR. ALEKSIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I apologise.
8 JUDGE BONOMY: Now, Mr. Bakrac.
9 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
10 Cross-examination by Mr. Bakrac:
11 Q. [Interpretation] Good day, General.
12 A. Good day.
13 Q. I am going to be even more brief than my colleague Mr. Aleksic.
14 I have some questions for you, and since you have already talked about
15 and have mentioned the team from the General Staff, I would like to ask
16 you -- and Mr. Hannis showed you Exhibit P1468 [as interpreted]. If you
17 recall, this is an order by the Pristina Corps for Stup Ivoksa [phoen].
18 You had explained that you had been to seen General Samardzic to report
19 to him. In relation to that action, I'm interested if you recall -- I
20 apologise. I gave you the wrong number. It doesn't matter. You recall
21 the order that was shown by my colleague Mr. Hannis?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Do you recall that at that time it was actually the team of the
24 General staff which you said had been in Kosovo at the time when this
25 action was executed, was actually at the forward command post in
2 A. I know that at the time of certain activities down there at the
3 border, General Perisic was there personally at Planeja, but I cannot
4 really link it up. I'm not quite sure if I could say that that happened
5 at that particular moment, but I can say that there were conflicts at
6 Planeja, around Ponosevac, and this was a action that was executed for
7 sure. I know that well. But it would be hard for me to connect that
8 that happened at that particular time. It's been ten years since then,
9 since that event. I would need to see the document.
10 Q. Yes, General, sir. We did hear the testimony of General
11 Obradovic here.
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. So --
14 A. I know when General Perisic was there, I know that there were
15 conflicts and I -- that Commander Pavkovic was there at Planeja, that
16 this is an elevation near Ponosevac, and that fighting was being
17 conducted there, and he was there personally. He watched it happen, and
18 he issued assignments in the sense of securing the state border, joint
19 action and coordination with the MUP and so on and so forth, and the
20 general later told me about this conversation later when they came back.
21 I was personally not there at that time.
22 Q. General, thank you, and just for the transcript, a correction:
23 The order is P1428. That is the order, not P1468.
24 General, sir, can we now clarify just one more thing. You said
25 that on the 20th of January you handed over your duties --
1 THE INTERPRETER: Can the speakers please not overlap.
2 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
3 Q. You handed over your duty, and you said that up until the 20th of
4 February -- yesterday, you said that General Stefanovic in late December
5 1998 took over duties.
6 A. Yes, yes.
7 Q. However, I'm going to show you from his testimony, will you
8 please agree --
9 A. No, no, no. Perhaps I said something wrong. We started our
10 hand-over then, but the hand-over was completed around the 20th.
11 Q. Mr. Stefanovic testified here. I would now like to -- you to
12 concentrate on my question. In December, late December 1998, a decision
13 was made on his appointment to your post, and also, in December 1998 the
14 decision was made for you to go to the army.
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. General Stefanovic said and also in a conversation he said that
17 he remembers very well that it is his Slava, his saint's day on the 20th
18 of January, and that that day he came to the corps to assume duty -- his
19 duties, and this lasted until the 20th of February, and this corresponds
20 to what you have just said, that on the 20th you handed over your duty
21 and that this was completed on 20th of February. Is that true?
22 A. Well, I'm not sure if it was exactly like that, but it's possible
23 that I am mistaken. I'm not able to -- well, I have the impression that
24 I handed over my duties to him, and it went on for quite a long time,
25 from late December. It was not only the hand-over. I was also
1 introducing him into the functions. He hadn't assumed duties in December
2 and January, meaning he was not able to. He hadn't signed that. There
3 were special documents that need to be signed, so he was unable to do
4 that. But the hand-over did last for a while, so perhaps we don't agree.
5 This does not quite correspond in -- with some 10 or 15 days.
6 Q. Thank you, General. Now you have clarified that. Can we now
7 look at Exhibit 1166, please. P1166. It's a Prosecution document.
8 This is an order which is entitled "Order." It's 1966. I
9 apologise once more.
10 It's an order for the break-up of Siptar terrorists in the sector
11 of Malo Kosovo. Please, can you look at paragraph marked with the number
12 4. Let's look at that.
13 Is readiness mentioned in this order?
14 A. No.
15 Q. Can you please look at the last page of this order now. Does it
16 say to whom the order is addressed?
17 A. No.
18 Q. Can you now please look at the next document, which is
19 augmentation, an addition to this document. This is 1967. And can you
20 please tell me in paragraph 4 in this supplement, is there any mention of
22 A. Yes, readiness is defined here. That is why to a certain extent
23 besides what I already explained to the Prosecutor the readiness is also
24 defined here.
25 Q. Can we look at page 2 now. Can we look at the last page. Can
1 you please tell me, General Lazarevic's signature is in the left-hand
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Which documents are signed in the left-hand corner?
5 A. The ones with the weight of an order. Oh, you mean in the left
6 corner. It's like a telegram. That sort of document would be sent --
7 would be signed to the left. The documents that have the force of an
8 order are signed to the left and the right.
9 Q. Does the telegram have to be signed when it is sent?
10 A. A telegram can be sent. It doesn't have to be signed, but the
11 person who sends it off can send it off and forward it pursuant to
12 authorisation. You have such information. For example, the duty
13 operations officer in the combat operations centre would send out combat
14 reports pursuant to authorisation by the commander.
15 JUDGE BONOMY: You really need to observe the pause, but there is
16 a point that seems to need clarification. Documents that have the force
17 of an order are signed where?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If it's just a normal regular
19 order, it's to the right, but if it's sent as a telegram then it's to the
21 JUDGE BONOMY: That clarifies line 63, 3. Okay. Continue,
22 Mr. Bakrac.
23 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
24 Q. General, sir, it is both my mistake and yours. Please, can you
25 wait after I put my question to you --
1 A. Clear.
2 Q. -- before you respond, and then I will also try to wait.
3 Can you now look at this document to see if the person to whom it
4 is addressed is stated here?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Is this document sent to any unit of the MUP or the MUP staff?
7 A. No.
8 Q. Thank you. Can we now please look at document P2106? I
9 apologise. P1878. P1878.
10 You commented yesterday on this order during your
11 examination-in-chief. Can you please look at it, especially paragraph 5,
12 and if you can tell me if the tasks issued to any MUP unit are referred
13 to in this order. Can we look at paragraph -- or the part of the
14 document marked with the 5. That's where the tasks are laid out.
15 A. 5.1 is the task to the 125th Motorised Brigade that consists of
16 the 2nd Battalion of the 58th Light Infantry Brigade as a subordinate
17 unit under the direct command of the commander of the 125th Brigade.
18 This is why it's put like this, 125th, and then in brackets 2/58.
19 Q. And 2/58 is what?
20 A. 2 /58 is also a unit from our brigade, but one battalion is taken
21 out and resubordinated to the 125th.
22 Q. So now you will agree with me --
23 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, it is not clear in the
24 transcript, thus my question was whether this 2/58, was this a military
1 A. Yes, yes. It's an establishment unit classified under R [phoen]
2 of the Pristina Corps, while the 125th Brigade is of a classification
3 replenished with more soldier and senior officer cadre than the 58th.
4 Q. All right. Can we pass to the next page so that we can look at
5 this towards the end. Do you see the second page now?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Is there a task issued to any MUP unit here?
8 A. No, not here. There is only in paragraph 3 where joint
9 coordination is regulated.
10 Q. But the tasks are not mentioned?
11 A. No, no.
12 Q. Let's go back to Exhibit 1966 now, please. Could you please have
13 a look at this order, too, and tell us whether paragraph 3, the task of
14 the Pristina Corps, and after that paragraph 5, task to the units, were
15 tasks given to the MUP units and these documents or not?
16 A. I can't see it on the screen yet.
17 Q. Could we please have a look at the next page.
18 A. No, no. Not here. No.
19 Q. We're looking at the last page. Does it say who this document
20 was sent to?
21 A. No.
22 Q. General, when we looked at these documents, you said yesterday
23 that such documents were sent to the army units and to the MUP.
24 General Stefanovic testified here who said that such orders were not sent
25 to the MUP units, that they were sent only to the units of the army of
1 Yugoslavia. Also, the deputy head of the MUP staff testified here,
2 Mr. Mijatovic, who on pages 22196 -- or rather 42196 and 22339 said that
3 up until the resubordination order was issued on the 19th of April, the
4 one that you spoke about, the MUP only received excerpts from maps and in
5 no way any orders from the Pristina Corps. Will you agree with what
6 these two witnesses said?
7 A. What I know concerns 1998 when I was responsible. That is to say
8 that excerpts were sent to them from the decisions as a basis for
9 coordination. Without the decision, they had nothing to coordinate.
10 That is to say if they don't have the decision, they don't know what to
11 coordinate, so they had to have that.
12 Now, I cannot say how General Stefanovic organised coordination
13 with them. I didn't even know when he went there. I was not very much
14 involved in the writing of combat documents in 1999.
15 In 1998, I was responsible for these combat documents. For 1999,
16 he was the one, and he knows the best what things were like. So I cannot
17 challenge anything that he said. If he said it was that way, then I
18 assume it was that way. I just know that in 1999, I partly took part in
19 the elaboration of documents. I helped in terms of Grom 3.
20 Q. Thank you. General Stefanovic testified about that, too, and you
21 explained that to us earlier on.
22 I assume that there is no need for us to go back to the beginning
23 of the document. It is in front of us on our screens. Is this a
24 computer document?
25 A. Yes, yes.
1 Q. In the interview that my colleagues showed you, in paragraph 66
2 you said when Mr. Coo put this order before you for Rogove, you said that
3 most probably this form was taken out of the computer of the Pristina
4 Corps. Is this a correct reflection of your words?
5 A. Let me just have a look at that, in what context I spoke, and
6 then I'll answer straight away. Sixty-six you said?
7 Q. Yes.
8 A. Well, for the most part it could be put that way, that I can
9 remember that this was discussed. From the point of view of the content
10 involved, it should be this way, that the conversation evolved along
11 these lines. I know for sure that he asked me about this document. I
12 remember that.
13 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter cannot understand Mr. Bakrac.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] And I accept this explanation as
15 far as I know. I know when the action was carried out, but I was not
16 very much involved in the document itself. I only know that on the map I
17 saw, perhaps when I came here, I saw what was marked. I remember that
18 very well, that one battalion of this 58th Brigade was marked on the
19 south-west slopes of Pec and that it was under blockade. I know that and
20 that practically they were not engaged anywhere.
21 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
22 Q. Thank you, General. We only have seven or eight minutes left
23 until the break. Let us try to finish this up. So what you said was
24 correct, that there were such templates or forms in the computer of the
25 Pristina Corps.
1 I do apologise. For the transcript, so it is correct that this
2 kind of template was taken out of the computer of the Pristina Corps.
3 A. Yes, yes.
4 Q. Please allow me to finish my question before answering it.
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. General --
7 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
8 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
9 Q. You said that you were in Pristina at the forward command post of
10 the 3rd Army in 1999.
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Can you tell us whether this command post, this forward command
13 post of the 3rd Army was near the command post of the Pristina Corps?
14 A. Well, in a certain period it was. That is to say that I remember
15 well because -- I mean, we had a big problem to establish a command post
16 already in the end of 1998. That is to say we asked the army command to
17 state in writing that they gave approval to the Pristina Corps to have a
18 command post because the existing command post in the village of Lebane
19 in the immediate vicinity of Pristina could not provide normal conditions
20 for functioning, and that is when --
21 Q. I'm asking you for a simple reason. We don't need such
22 explanations. You were saying yesterday that reports were being sent,
23 and you said it seemed to you, you weren't sure. It's possible that
24 through the operations centre in Nis you got reports from the Pristina
1 Now, I would be interested in the following: Do you remember
2 that the practice was when there were no communications, and they were
3 down quite often as we heard, that they were sent via courier?
4 A. That is quite possible. That is quite possible. I didn't go
5 into that because I had a man who dealt with this question, the chief of
6 communications, one of the operatives. I didn't go into that particular
7 subject matter, so I may make a mistake if I say anything about this.
8 Quite simply, I was not involved in this, and I did not want to give an
9 answer that I would not be certain of.
10 Q. General, I just have one question left -- or, rather, I'm asking
11 you for clarification. A few moments ago, you said to my colleague
12 Mr. Aleksic that you know for sure that as for a plan to expel the
13 Albanian civilian population, that that never existed, and you said in
14 1998. Do you know whether such a plan existed in 1999?
15 A. No. I have never heard of any such plan.
16 Q. Thank you, General.
17 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, thank you. I have no
18 further questions.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You're welcome.
20 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you, Mr. Bakrac.
21 General, just one clarification arising out of that last series
22 of questions. When you went to the 3rd Army, where were you based?
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] When I went to the 3rd Army, as I
24 said yesterday, in the period from approximately the 20th of January
25 until the 20th of February, I did stay in Kosovo to help within the corps
1 command and the forward command post of the 3rd Army in order to carry
2 out some of the regular tasks. In that period, roughly for the most part
3 I was within the Pristina corps. Perhaps I did go away for a day or two
4 briefly, but all of that was very short.
5 JUDGE BONOMY: And after that?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] After that I went to Nis, to Nis,
7 in order to take over from General Mladenovic.
8 JUDGE BONOMY: Sorry. That's what I understood. It was in
9 relation to the question about the delivery of reports, but you've
10 confirmed what I thought. Thank you.
11 We'll take our break at this stage before commencing with the
12 final cross-examination. That's for half an hour this time, General, so
13 could you leave the courtroom, please, with the usher.
14 And we will resume at 10 minutes to 1.00.
15 --- Recess taken at 12.18 p.m.
16 --- On resuming at 12.54 p.m.
17 JUDGE BONOMY: While the witness is coming in, perhaps we can
18 clarify how we shall deal with the notes and the amplification of the
19 illegible portions. Can I take it that no Defence counsel wish to add
20 anything to the lines identified by the Prosecution for further
22 MR. LUKIC: Your Honour, I know for sure that our Defence --
23 JUDGE BONOMY: Sorry?
24 MR. LUKIC: I know that our Defence hasn't seen those yet. We
25 just got the CD. Probably not, but --
1 JUDGE BONOMY: But -- you don't, obviously, have in mind any
2 portions of the thing that you want to quickly check, whether the
3 Prosecution are asking for them to be amplified or not. No.
4 MR. LUKIC: I don't have any plans of doing so.
5 JUDGE BONOMY: All right. Well, one possibility, subject to the
6 willingness of the witness, and it's very much a question of that, is
7 that we ask him simply to write out clearly the passages which are marked
8 and pass it to CLSS for a proper translation rather than deal with it by
9 interpretation as the result of an oral statement. Now, that would seem
10 more satisfactory. It may take a little longer, though, but it is
11 probably a more satisfactory arrangement. Now, unless I hear objection
12 to that, then I will ask Mr. Djakovic if he's willing to do that.
13 If that is done -- sorry, Mr. Lukic.
14 MR. LUKIC: We don't have any objections.
15 JUDGE BONOMY: If that is done, for the purposes of entire
16 transparency it would be necessary for the parties, then, to submit a
17 filing agreeing that the freshly translated passages -- this only affects
18 the English version -- the English translation, may either be substituted
19 for the existing one or go into the -- I think better to go into the
20 record along with the existing one, and subject to that the Trial Chamber
21 would accept that as an additional part of that Exhibit P1468.
22 Now, does anyone see any obstacle to that? Thank you.
23 Mr. Djakovic, we're looking for your assistance. The Prosecution
24 have identified in the notes of the -- the notes of the meetings of the
25 so-called Joint Command that you made a number of passages which it's not
1 been possible to translate because they are not clear, and everybody's
2 agreed that we should try and get this cleared up with as little
3 formality as possible.
4 The suggestion that has been made is that if the copy marked with
5 the passages that the Prosecution wish to have clarified is passed to
6 you, you could write out clearly what each passage says.
7 Now, first of all, would you be willing to do that?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
9 JUDGE BONOMY: Secondly, would you be willing to do it this
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
12 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, that's very good of you. Thank you very
14 Oh, there is a problem though. Mr. Fila.
15 MR. FILA: [Interpretation] No, no. We have no problem. On the
16 contrary. As you know, there are over 1.600 mistakes in the document
17 that we wrote in translation, should it remain in with that many -- that
18 many translations in the document or not. I really don't have a problem
19 with that, but they are mistakes, so it's up to you whether that will be
20 corrected. I mean, I don't want to insist. I don't want to extend the
21 trial. This was written in November, and now it's already May, but you
22 are going to have of an incomplete document, and that worries me because
23 really, every one of the mistakes I pointed out is really there, and it
24 is for you to decide now, and I won't object.
25 JUDGE BONOMY: Since it will be a more complete document, then we
1 can probably worry less.
2 It was our insistence that the Prosecution have identified the
3 passages that seem to them to be the most important. Getting this done
4 at all is a bonus at this stage in the proceedings. I understand there
5 are about 80 of them -- 84. If it turns out -- if it's possible for the
6 communication to be made and it turns out that this can be done quite
7 rapidly, no doubt Mr. Hannis would be happy to submit a supplementary
8 list, but I think we'll do -- try to content ourselves with what's been
10 Now, Mr. Djakovic, before you leave here at the end of today's
11 proceedings, you will be given the marked copy of this document, and you
12 will also be given a clear and as clear a copy as we have of the original
13 version so that you've got the best opportunity to write clearly the bits
14 that are perhaps not quite as clear as they might be because of the
15 copying process, handwriting, whatever. There's a number of reasons for
16 it. And once you do this and return it, we shall arrange for the
17 passages that you have written out to be translated into English. So the
18 man to deal with -- the man who will deal with this is the gentleman
19 immediately in front of me. He will relate to you what -- exactly what's
20 required when he hands over the material to you later on this afternoon.
21 This gentleman here, Mr. Haider.
22 Okay? Is there anything -- everything clear?
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Everything is clear.
24 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.
25 [Trial Chamber confers]
1 JUDGE BONOMY: The final counsel to cross-examine will be
2 Mr. Lukic.
3 Mr. Lukic.
4 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
5 Cross-examination by Mr. Lukic:
6 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Mr. Djakovic.
7 A. Good afternoon.
8 Q. Before we begin, since I am the Defence attorney of Mr. Sreten
9 Lukic, so we're talking about police matters, I would like to ask you if
10 you not knowing something, if you don't know something, to say so because
11 there's no point in answering if you don't know. You don't have to try
12 to explain something if you don't know.
13 First of all, I would like to ask you if you followed these
14 proceedings over the internet.
15 A. Not very much.
16 Q. Did you have the opportunity to listen to the testimony of
17 Mr. Mijatovic and Mr. Adamovic?
18 A. No.
19 Q. I'm going to stop occasionally. It doesn't mean that I'm not
20 happy with the answer but that we're waiting for the transcript to record
21 what we are saying.
22 I can see on page 43, line 21, today, you mention people with
23 their titles and their last names, but you also refer to Obrad. Who did
24 you mean when you say "Obrad"?
25 A. Obrad Stefanovic.
1 Q. Obrad Stefanovic. When was the last time you saw Mr. Obrad
3 A. Four months ago. Approximately, it's been four months.
4 Q. All right. First, I'm going to ask you something about police
5 organisation, legal framework. We're going to go through that very
6 quickly, probably, and then we're going to move to factual matters.
7 Did you have the opportunity to read the Law on Internal Affairs?
8 A. No.
9 Q. Did you read the rules on the organisation of internal affairs?
10 A. No.
11 Q. Did you read the rules on the systematization of internal
13 A. No.
14 Q. Did you have the opportunity to read the decision on the
15 formation of the PJP units?
16 A. No.
17 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Can we please look at P2113 on
19 Q. As you can see, this is a document that you've already been shown
20 issued by the command of the 125th Motorised Brigade, and the document
21 refers to this document of the Joint Command. In the first paragraph,
22 number 1104 from the 6th of October, 1999. Do you recall being asked
23 about this document?
24 THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness please repeat his answer.
25 JUDGE BONOMY: Can you repeat the answer, please.
1 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
2 Q. Can you please repeat your answer? It was not recorded in the
3 transcript. You said --
4 A. Yes, yes. I'm just trying to remember.
5 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Ackerman.
6 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, on line 13 it says 6th of October,
7 1999, and the document itself says 6 July of 1998.
8 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Lukic.
9 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour. Thank you, my learned
11 Q. [Interpretation] When you were asked, you said that you sent this
12 document marked 1104-6, and you said that probably General Lukic was
13 supposed to see to it that his organs also find out about this document
14 and that this would probably -- was to be done by his assistants. You
15 cannot say with certainty whether Sreten Lukic ever dispatched this
16 document 1104-6 further on to the police?
17 A. No.
18 Q. Thank you.
19 JUDGE BONOMY: Are you -- are you clear that number 1104-6 was
20 sent to Mr. Lukic?
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I would have to see the signature
22 part to be able to say anything.
23 JUDGE BONOMY: Do you mean the end of this document or the
24 signature part of --
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes, the end of this document.
1 No, no. Actually, the previous one, 1104-6.
2 JUDGE BONOMY: Would you expect it to have been sent to him?
3 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, that question was answered by the
4 witness yesterday. It's at, I'm sorry, page 75 of yesterday's transcript
5 on line 3. "Did that document number 1104-6 of 6th July also go to the
6 MUP?" The answer: "No, no. There was no need."
7 JUDGE BONOMY: We formed the view that the answers were not clear
8 on this subject yesterday, Mr. Ackerman. I see my transcript regrettably
9 has been brought up-to-date, so I don't have the right reference. Oh,
10 no, I may have it.
11 You see, that was an incomplete answer you gave me. It then goes
12 on. "The one from 125th? You mean 1104-6? No, no. There was no need."
13 Now, the 1104-6 was not from the 125th.
14 MR. ACKERMAN: No. That's right, and then he goes on to say --
15 JUDGE BONOMY: It is a confusing answer, and that's what I'm
16 trying to clarify now.
17 MR. ACKERMAN: What our next question was -- I don't mean the one
18 from Zivanovic but the one he received from -- you understand which I
19 understand is, and he said, "I know. It definitely didn't go there
20 because I personally drafted it, and I know it didn't." I don't think
21 there's any inclarity about it at all, but if you want to go back into
22 it, it's fine with me.
23 JUDGE BONOMY: You see, if you go to line 11, you get reference
24 to Colonel Zivanovic when he showed the document with the words "Joint
25 Command." The MUP received the same document from General Lukic. It's
1 difficult to understand how that would happen without Lukic getting the
2 originating document.
3 So I understand your point on this, but we found the overall
4 situation less than clear. And it's helpful, Mr. Lukic, if you can
5 clarify it.
6 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
7 Q. [Interpretation] You've heard the discussion --
8 JUDGE BONOMY: Just one second because the question I did ask was
9 interrupted, and the question was: Would you expect the document 1104-6
10 to have been sent to Mr. Lukic?
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It would rather be no than yes, and
12 let me explain that briefly. If there is a previous order from the army
13 commander banning the use of the army in specific situations without his
14 knowledge and specifically -- or exclusively for the support of the MUP,
15 so I think that this document 1104-6 was done on the basis of that
16 document of the army commander. So it arises from that part.
17 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Lukic.
18 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
19 Q. Mr. Djakovic, you also talked about the implementation of
20 documents and that General Pavkovic and General Lukic actually
21 represented bodies comprising the Joint Command. You say what the two of
22 them would agree would be implemented, and then as you say, not they
23 personally but their assistants in the relevant sectors.
24 So in relation to this, I would ask you this: How many sectors
25 had General Lukic as part of the Kosovo and Metohija staff in Pristina?
1 A. I was directed by him personally to two people for purposes of
2 coordination. I was directed to Mijatovic, and Mijatovic most frequently
3 then sent me to Adamovic. I did have contacts with Mijatovic but very
4 rarely. He would pass me to Adamovic more often.
5 Q. All right. Do you know how many men the MUP staff had?
6 A. I don't know. All I know are the activities that had to do with
7 General Obrad Stefanovic, with Adamovic, and partially to Mijatovic. My
8 affairs with them, I didn't have any contacts with other organs. Mostly
9 my contacts were with these people.
10 Q. Do you think that Obrad Stefanovic was a member of the MUP staff?
11 A. I don't know. All I know is that he had specific authority to
12 deploy and engage the PJP units. I don't know if this authority -- this
13 authorisation came from General Lukic or not, but he gave me elements to
14 engage PJP units in order for them to be technically done in the way that
15 was essential to us so that this decision could be approved by the army
17 Q. All right. Thank you. And now I would like to look at 6D293.
18 We have a lot of documents like this. I'm going to show you one
19 of them. You can see here document from the internal affairs secretariat
20 of Uzice being sent to the MUP of the Republic of Serbia, to the police
21 administration, to the PJP command. The document is from the 22nd of
22 March, 1999.
23 Do you know that at the time there was a PJP command? Are you
24 aware of that, and do you know who was in that command?
25 A. I know of the function from what I understood of Obrad
1 Stefanovic, that he was in the police administration, the chief of the
2 police administration. This is what I know purely from some personal
3 contacts. Otherwise, I was never -- I never had the opportunity to see
4 these documents.
5 MR. IVETIC: Your Honours, for the sake of the transcript at page
6 79, line 15, I believe the witness said in Serbian the word "sef,"
7 [phoen] which means chief of the police administration.
8 JUDGE BONOMY: Did you say that, Mr. Djakovic?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I said that he was responsible for
10 the police administration. As for the function that he had, as I say, I
11 don't know, but through personal contacts I knew that he was responsible
12 for -- within the framework of the police administration. It's possible
13 that I did say the word "chief."
14 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you. Mr. Lukic.
15 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
16 Q. [Interpretation] Well, this is not in dispute anyway.
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. All right. So unrelated to this document do you know how the
19 planning of regular activities in MUP was conducted? How did that
20 proceed? Annual plans, monthly plans?
21 A. Well, no. I really cannot say that.
22 Q. Well, this is why I said at the beginning if you don't know,
23 yeah, you can just say that since this is not really your area of
25 Are you aware and did you read relevant documents so that you
1 would know about the chain of command in the MUP?
2 A. Well, I know something about that purely from contacts with
3 people that I had contacts with down there.
4 Q. So in relation to that, did you know if the MUP staff was an
5 organisational unit?
6 A. I think that it was.
7 Q. Well, the MUP staff was not an organisational unit. It was not
8 an organisational unit, but anyway, let's move on. Do you know how
9 reporting --
10 JUDGE BONOMY: Just a moment. The translation -- I think that
11 that answer ended with "I think that it was," and that it was Mr. Lukic
12 who -- yeah.
13 MR. LUKIC: [In English] Yes.
14 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you very much.
15 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
16 Q. [Interpretation] So now I'd like to ask you whether you know how
17 reporting took place within the MUP directly and the lines of reporting
18 on the sides.
19 A. I know what I know from the direct contacts I had with people,
20 from General Lukic, Obrad Stefanovic, Adamovic, Mijatovic, and so on. I
21 know that General Lukic liaised with the secretariats of the interior
22 within the territory of Kosovo. I think there were seven secretariats as
23 far as I can remember. He also had around 24 departments of the interior
24 that relied on these seven secretariats within the municipalities. So it
25 is these seven largest municipalities. I heard that. They had direct
1 communication with the minister of the interior, too. I heard that, as
2 well, and that they reported with regard to certain issues pertaining to
3 their functional tasks, crime traffic, and so on that, that they informed
4 the minister of the interior about that, and that General Lukic
5 communicated with the minister of the interior, a separate line in terms
6 of the tasks that he had received from the minister. That is what I know
7 from the people I contacted with.
8 Q. That is more than we expected. Thank you. In respect of
9 reporting, do you know what kind of communications resources the MUP
10 staff had in 1998?
11 A. Most often, I saw that they had Motorolas. At the command post,
12 General Lukic's once, I happened to see him talking to somebody. Now,
13 was it the secretariat? Was it one of his units? I don't know, but he
14 was talking on a Motorola, that is to say from his command post. And the
15 subordinate units for the most part had Motorolas. I don't know what
16 type. But with regard to communications or signals, rather, I was never
17 really much of an expert, and it's not that I was really that well-versed
18 in these matters.
19 Q. Thank you. When you say command post, you're probably referring
20 to the MUP staff.
21 A. The office, the place where General Lukic commanded and carried
22 out the tasks that he had. For me, that is his command post.
23 Q. We are a bit in military terms now, but we do understand each
24 other, don't we?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Do you know what communications resources existed at the MUP
2 staff during 1999, especially after the 29th of March, because you
3 yourself know that the SUP building in Pristina was hit on that day.
4 A. I don't know. There was never any need for me to resolve such
5 matters. Within the command of the Pristina Corps, there was a chief of
6 communications who had contacts with the chief of communications from the
7 MUP staff.
8 Q. Thank you. As for any command over actions, is it indispensable
9 to have technical resources in order to have communication? Can there be
10 command if there are no technical facilities for having permanent contact
11 with units?
12 A. Well, it really cannot be done that way. There have to be
13 possibilities for commanding.
14 Q. Thank you. Did you personally ever see a written order of the
15 MUP staff?
16 A. No.
17 Q. What about Sreten Lukic? Did he often go out into the field, or
18 was he mostly in Pristina?
19 A. Well, from time to time -- well, he spent more time in Pristina,
20 a lot more time in Pristina.
21 Q. In your view, could someone who was not a member of the PJPs
22 command the PJPs? If you can give an answer to this question at all. If
23 you cannot, just say so.
24 A. Well, no one could.
25 Q. Thank you. We had witnesses here, and I'm not going to go into
1 the actual names and what it was that they were saying and who said what,
2 but we did have witnesses here who were members of the PJP who testified
3 about the command structure of the PJP. Would they be more familiar than
4 you with the command structure of the PJP, that is to say of these units?
5 A. Well, that's for sure.
6 Q. Thank you. In Kosovo in 1998, you said yourself that Sreten
7 Lukic was there, Obrad Stefanovic, Vlastimir Djordjevic. I apologise for
8 having misspoken.
9 Do you know, first of all, about the relationship between Obrad
10 Stefanovic and Sreten Lukic? Who was whose superior, if you know?
11 A. I don't know. I don't have any document, but I know within my
12 own functional duties with who I resolved certain problems. Now, who was
13 subordinated to who, I really don't know, and who had what kind of
15 Q. Very well. Thank you. You were asked, but I would like to ask
16 you too. Did you directly participate in drafting the plan for
17 combatting terrorism?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. As for this plan that you wrote up -- or, rather, in whose
20 writing you participated, were the police units envisaged to participate
21 together with the units of the army of Yugoslavia and these
22 anti-terrorist actions?
23 A. In certain stages.
24 Q. Thank you. I'm going to skip something. Perhaps we will have to
25 go back but not now, but anyway, 4D495. Could that please be shown to us
2 We see a map in front of us. Could it please be zoomed in a bit
4 Was this kind of map sent to Dusan Samardzic, army commander, for
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. So the map where the police units are marked and the army and
8 police units?
9 A. That is in accordance with how work maps should be kept.
10 Q. I'm sure that you're a better expert on this than I am, so I'm
11 just seeking further clarification.
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Did you make excerpts of maps from the main maps in view of the
14 units that were on this map?
15 A. Yes, excerpts were made.
16 Q. Did you send these excerpts to the units that are marked on the
17 decision map?
18 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter did not hear Mr. Lukic.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes. Of the MUP. If you mean
20 the MUP. They were sent to the people who were on the MUP staff, and
21 then they further distributed it. Further on, they had some obligations
22 to carry through before sending instructions to their subordinate units.
23 That is very important.
24 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
25 Q. Very well. First of all, I would like us to look at some
1 excerpts from maps for lower-ranking units. First of all, it is 6D1618.
2 While we're waiting for that, you'll see it is about the Cicavica
3 action, and it is the 8th PJP detachment. Do you recognise the
5 A. Yes. It is the draftsman who processes documents.
6 Q. Very well. This is one of the excerpts that was made and sent
7 through the MUP staff, inter alia, to the PJP units?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Just for the transcript, who wrote this excerpt?
10 A. Again, it's the technical draftsman. He is ordered to do this,
11 to make these excerpts for all adjacent units, all the units involved,
12 and this command is supposed to assess the situation and to make
13 decisions and write an order and the decision on the map. So this is
14 just a basis for coordination for the unit to which it is sent. This is
15 not the order itself. It's not the decision, either. This is an excerpt
16 from the decision of the commander of the Pristina Corps.
17 Q. Can we now look at 6D1620.
18 JUDGE BONOMY: Can I ask you to clarify one thing. You said that
19 maps were passed to people on the MUP staff and then they further
20 distributed the extract, and this is how your words have been translated:
21 "Further on, they had some obligations to carry through before sending
22 instructions to their subordinate units." Now, what were these
23 obligations that they had?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, that means that it's
25 part of the obligations that the command or the neighbour, the unit
1 acting in concert, has in respect of the planned coordination. That
2 means that this command, once it receives this extract or excerpt from
3 the decision, not that particular one, but all commands, they have to
4 have a process take place in the commander's head. He should see where
5 the place of his unit is and the role of his unit in view of the tasks to
6 see who is on his right, who is on his left, and on the basis of that, he
7 works out the basic concept or idea for combat documents. That is to say
8 every command, including the MUP command -- or, rather, the MUP
9 detachment, including the combat group, brigade, has to carry out this
10 process. This is a purely professional part, so that ultimately their
11 own decision would be made. So every brigade commander made his own
12 decision on how forces will be used in accordance with the idea of the
13 superior commander. That's the way it is from the general staff down to
14 the company, that is to say the entire process.
15 The detachment command in order to perform with top marks has
16 three or five hours at its disposal. That involves making the decision
17 map and writing the order.
18 JUDGE BONOMY: Now, you're talking in military terminology when
19 you say all this. Are you actually speaking from personal knowledge that
20 that is what would happen in a MUP detachment -- PJP detachment which
21 received the extract?
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Yes. That has to happen in
23 accordance with the rules. I am talking about military rules. Now, how
24 the MUP regulated this, I never went into that, and the command of the
25 Pristina Corps did not have jurisdiction in terms of having control over
1 the MUP forces.
2 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you. Mr. Lukic.
3 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
4 Q. Thank you, Mr. Djakovic. You don't know exactly what all took
5 place at the MUP staff?
6 A. I don't after this.
7 Q. Thank you. We have 6D1620 here now. That is a decision on this
8 map, right? Do you know from what year this map is?
9 A. Let me just have a look at the sector.
10 Q. You can see Kosmac action.
11 A. 1998. 1998. I believe it's 1998 because things were done this
12 way in 1998.
13 Q. All right. And this is the excerpt for the 8th detachment. This
14 is a coded map, isn't it?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. So axis are drawn in on a map that has been coded previously, or
17 is it coded later? How does it happen that we have both on one map? Can
18 you please tell us?
19 A. It's possible since after coordination at the level of the MUP
20 staff and the Pristina Corps and the implementation of the duties that we
21 had at our level, the commands would from both sides receive the
22 excerpts, and then based on the excerpts they would organise the joint
23 action along specific axis, which means that the commander of the 8th
24 detachment and the military unit that was supporting the MUP. This would
25 be in the regulations. It's a duty. And without that, the units would
1 not be able to function because they would then fire at each other. So
2 if there was no coordinated action, they would be affected by artillery
3 fire or something like that from the army, so I assume that the
4 commanders in the field probably had the maps -- on their own maps on the
5 decisions agreed how they would communicate in the course of combat in
6 order to keep each other informed if they were not close to each other.
7 If they were near one another, they could agree on the spot if they would
8 stop firing or continue in some other axis or things like that.
9 I simply cannot give you an answer for each individual case.
10 Q. All right. But it says "Coded map Drim." Is that some of usual
12 A. Well, no. This just applied to this map. You couldn't have
13 several maps with the same name. That was not something that happened.
14 Q. Can we now look at 6D1619, please. This is a decision on the
15 map. Again, we're talking about Kosmac, but it's an excerpt for the
16 PJPPZ company, Prizren company, so excerpts were done for independent SUP
17 units as well. Do you recall?
18 A. Yes, yes. It was an independent unit at the level of a
19 detachment, and that's why this was done for the PJP police units
20 together with the staff members, since a company was an independent unit
21 at the level of a detachment because there were nine companies within
22 Kosovo. Two municipalities had two each, and seven municipalities had
23 one each, and so this was done the same according to the same principle.
24 JUDGE BONOMY: I think you said, Mr. Lukic, PJPPZ. Is that
1 MR. LUKIC: [In English] That's right. It's for Prizren,
2 abbreviation for Prizren.
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
4 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
5 Q. So now let's just look at 6D1621, please. This is the Drenica
6 sector, and it's an excerpt for the 35th PJP Detachment. Was this
7 drafted at the time when you were in the Pristina Corps? Do you
8 recognise this, or was this drafted in a different way, this map?
9 A. Just one moment, please. The draftsman is the same. I would
10 have to have the time when the activity was executed. We did have
11 activities in Drenica in 1998, and several times at that.
12 Q. It's my mistake. I forgot that you are not actually the one that
13 draws the map. Excuse me.
14 Let us now look at P1878.
15 JUDGE BONOMY: I think, Mr. Lukic, we should call it a day at
16 this stage and not --
17 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
18 JUDGE BONOMY: -- cause difficulty for the afternoon.
19 As yesterday, Mr. Djakovic, we have to abandon the courtroom to
20 another court -- another case for the afternoon, so if you could please
21 leave the courtroom with the usher. Shortly, the court deputy,
22 Mr. Haider, will be in touch with you and pass to you the documents that
23 we would like you to deal with this afternoon, and please also bear in
24 mind that you do this job in splendid isolation and must not communicate
25 with anybody other, obviously, than court staff for this purpose about
1 the evidence in the case.
2 Now, could you please leave the courtroom with the usher, and
3 we'll see you again here tomorrow at 9.00.
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Very well.
5 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.45 p.m.,
6 to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 21st day
7 of May, 2008, at 9.00 a.m.