1 Wednesday, 27 April 2005
2 [Open session]
3 [The witness entered court]
4 [The accused entered court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 9.04 a.m.
6 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, I believe you had concluded your
8 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have a few more questions,
9 Mr. Robinson.
10 JUDGE ROBINSON: A few more questions, yes.
11 WITNESS: DRAGAN JASOVIC [Resumed]
12 [Witness answered through interpreter]
13 Examined by Mr. Milosevic: [Continued]
14 Q. [Interpretation] I have a topic that is linked to the document
15 that was supplied later yesterday, at the end, and something also to do
16 with a document we had earlier.
17 Mr. Jasovic, would you take a look at tab 4 now, please. This is
18 a criminal report. Do you recognise the document? It's at the end of the
20 Is that another criminal report, and do you recognise the
22 A. Yes, I do recognise the document, because I can see from that same
23 document that it -- the date is the 10th of October, 1998, in Stimlje.
24 That is the police station in Stimlje.
25 Q. Yes, that's the police station you used to work in and which comes
1 within the frameworks of the secretariat in Urosevac; is that right?
2 A. Yes, the secretariat in Urosevac.
3 Q. Who compiled this criminal report?
4 A. The criminal report was filed by Destan Sabanaj, an inspector for
5 homicide and sexual abuse.
6 Q. That is one of your inspectors, is it?
7 A. Yes, it's a colleague of mine. He worked as a crime inspector of
8 the SUP of Urosevac.
9 Q. Here it says Captain Destan Sabanaj; is that right?
10 A. Yes, Destan Sabanaj is the name.
11 Q. Now, do you know what happened to the perpetrators who were
13 A. "On the 10th of October, 1998, at around 10.00, 1000 hours, a
14 group of armed Siptar terrorists, a terrorist gang of the KLA, launched an
15 attack using automatic weapons and hand grenades against the family houses
16 and members of the family of the household of Vebi Qerimi."
17 Q. You don't have to read it out to us. We can see it in the
18 document. And when it comes to the criminal report signed by Captain
19 Destan Sabanaj, he's an Albanian, and here we see the term used "an armed
20 group of Siptar terrorist gangs."
21 A. Yes, that is indeed a criminal report compiled and filed by Destan
23 Q. Thank you. That's all I wanted to hear from you with respect to
24 the assertions about the derogatory term for Albanians, "Siptar," being
1 A. I can add here that in tab 2. -- or, rather, it's an Official Note
2 - I think it was 2.30 - I indicated that the registered informer told us
3 that a house would be attacked or, rather, the house belonging to the said
4 individual, which was done on the 9th of October, 1998, this took place.
5 And it was a man who had two sons. They were policemen. One worked in
6 Lipjan, and the other worked in the police station of Stimlje. The third
7 son worked in the administration in Lipjan, and the fourth son was an
8 employee in the Municipal Assembly of Stimlje. So that was a motive, too,
9 for the terrorist attack on his house and on the members of his family.
10 Q. In this criminal report we can also see that on location 164
11 casings were found of 62 calibre made in China, a pin and a safety lever
12 of a hand grenade, also Chinese made. Very well. I apologise.
13 Mr. Jasovic, just one more topic that I'd like to broach as
14 briefly as possible. The SUP of Urosevac, was it authorised for the
15 Kacanik municipality as well? Did it have competence over that?
16 A. Yes. The Internal Affairs department did come under that.
17 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Gentlemen, I'd just like to draw
18 your attention to point -- let me just find it. It's the same paragraph,
19 66. Two pages, under (i) -- two pages later, under (i), and this refers
20 to the Kacanik municipality, it says: "In the period from March 1999 to
21 May 1999 the SFRY forces and Serbia launched a series of massive offences
22 against several villages in the municipality of Kacanik which resulted in
23 the deaths of more than 100 civilians." And then it goes on to say that,
24 "On or about the 24th of March, 1999, the village of Kotlina was attacked
25 by forces of the FRY and Serbia. In the course of the attack most of the
1 houses were burnt down and at least 17 persons killed." That is 66 --
3 JUDGE KWON: 66(L).
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] 66(L)(i).
5 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
6 Q. What I'm asking, Mr. Jasovic, therefore, refers to the assertion
7 set out in that paragraph, and it is linked to it. Tell me, please,
8 Mr. Jasovic, within the frameworks of your operative duties, did you
9 follow the work of the KLA in the Kacanik municipality?
10 A. Yes, that is true, and not only in Kacanik, as I've already said,
11 but also on the territory of Urosevac, Strmac, and Stimlje, because
12 Strpce, Stimlje and Kacanik come within the frameworks of the authority of
13 the SUP of Urosevac.
14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Gentlemen, I think it would be a
15 good idea if we were to place this map on the ELMO perhaps. It's your
16 copy. It's a copy I received from you, and it shows the position and
17 location of Kacanik and Kotlina.
18 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. Let it be placed on the ELMO.
19 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It's page number 12, and you'll be
20 able to see it on page 16 as well.
21 JUDGE KWON: It's Exhibit 83.
22 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
23 Q. Can you see it? To the left. You don't have to look at the
24 screen, actually, you can look at the map.
25 JUDGE KWON: Yes, further. Further. Yes.
1 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, we have seen it, and I think the witness has
2 located it.
3 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
4 Q. Kotlina is to the south of Kacanik, which means further down.
5 JUDGE ROBINSON: Kotlina.
6 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Kotlina, yes.
7 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
8 Q. Have you found it?
9 A. Yes, I've found it.
10 Q. It's right at the bottom of the map, on a level with number 16,
11 the red 16. But we can see it.
12 Now, in the left-hand corner, you have the Macedonian border, do
13 you not?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. And here we have the kilometres, the scale. So can we see that it
16 is in the border belt, approximately two kilometres from the Macedonian
18 A. Yes, it's in the border belt towards Macedonia.
19 Q. Thank you. Now, in this border belt, were -- was the terrorist
20 KLA organisation very active?
21 A. From the statements which I collected in the interviews I
22 conducted with Albanians, I learnt that in the village of Krivaja there
23 was the headquarters of the so-called KLA, that is to say the 162nd
24 Brigade, I think it's name was Agim Bajrami, and that the commander of the
25 staff was Qamil Ilazi and that his nickname was Bali; and that in addition
1 to that, in the village of Kotlina I know -- and in another village,
2 Pustenik, I do know for a fact that there were the substaffs of the KLA.
3 In the village of Kotlina, for instance, the commander of the substaff was
4 -- I think his name was Selim Kuci, and his deputy Miljanin Kuci. While
5 in the village of Pustenik, the commander of the substaff was Ruki Suma.
6 I also know on the basis of the interviews I conducted that in the
7 village of Kotlina there was a KLA clinic, and I -- or infirmary, and I
8 think that the same kind of infirmary existed in the village of Ivaja.
9 Q. All right. Can we then say that you were well-informed with the
10 situation in the Kacanik municipality, which, as you said, comes under the
11 competence and authority of your Secretariat of the Interior?
12 A. Yes. I knew it well because the KLA staff in Kacanik, for
13 example, and in the village of Ivaja was formed later on if we compare it
14 to the Stimlje area.
15 Q. All right.
16 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Now, Mr. Robinson, as you know, this
17 witness was included in the list of witnesses at the 11th hour, and I have
18 a large number of documents which have to do with the activities of the
19 KLA, the statements, in fact, that this witness took and which are linked
20 to that area, the area where Kotlina is located, and it relates to para
21 66(L)(i) of the indictment. I didn't have the possibility of having them
22 translated except the one, which Professor Rakic translated himself
23 yesterday and which we supplied you with, so I'm going to go through the
24 one you have been supplied with, and if you agree, perhaps I could put
25 some of the untranslated statements on the ELMO for you to be able to just
1 gain a general impression of what kind of information they had at their
2 disposal with respect to KLA activities in the region.
3 MR. NICE: Well, Your Honour, just --
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] So this one --
5 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Nice.
6 MR. NICE: -- before that happens, the Court may want to remember
7 that this witness became relevant specifically in relation to Racak and
8 following notification of his presence in Court by the Prosecution. The
9 accused didn't announce any earlier intention on the 65 ter filings to
10 rely on this witness or to rely on him for the present purpose. Now, at
11 an earlier stage in relation to another witness the Court said it was
12 going to confine him to what was provided by the 65 ter. It's a matter
13 for the Court.
14 Of course, if we go into another area of so-called crime base
15 material with this witness, it will broaden certainly the nature of the
16 inquiries that I will have to make and it will inevitably eat up some of
17 the time that the accused had allocated indicatively by his earlier
18 finding of evidence. It's a matter for the Court. I'm not going to
19 object if the Court's happy to have it extended in this way.
20 JUDGE ROBINSON: My own view is that we should hear it. If a
21 matter arises in relation to inquiries that you have to make, then you can
22 make an appropriate submission, application to us on that point.
23 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Nice, when was tab 1.58 disclosed to the
25 MR. NICE: Yesterday, I think.
1 JUDGE KWON: Yesterday.
2 MR. NICE: Yesterday, sometime in the morning.
3 I didn't take particular point on it then. I didn't know what was
4 coming and I don't want to be seen to be taking technical points.
5 But if we're going to be doing an enlargement the Court at least
6 has got to consider the matter.
7 [Trial Chamber confers]
8 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, the statements that you are
9 seeking to put into evidence through this witness, do they specifically
10 relate to the incident in (L)(i)?
11 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] In tab 1.58, which I submitted to
13 you yesterday and which has been translated, it has to do with this
14 directly, because in that statement, which was taken on the 10th of March,
15 1999, as you will see, there is mention of a particular person or, rather,
16 two persons who are on list L of the alleged civilians who had been killed
17 by the police, and these are members of the terrorist organisation of the
18 KLA. It will be quite obvious in the case of other witnesses too. So
19 everything that is written here is quite incorrect. So it does directly
20 bear on this.
21 JUDGE ROBINSON: Are you going to call witnesses in relation to
22 that incident?
23 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] As for Kotlina, I'm going to call a
24 witness who has photo documents related to Kotlina. It will be quite
25 clear how incorrect all of this that is written here is, and also it will
1 be quite obvious what actually happened in Kotlina.
2 This is a statement which was undoubtedly taken by Mr. Jasovic.
3 With this witness, I shall go through his statement, and I just want a few
4 things to be established in this way.
5 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Kay, do you have any submission on this?
6 MR. KAY: Well, it sometimes arises that a witness comes with
7 further information that can throw light on the events that are the
8 subject matter of this trial, and it would seem to me that he's a valuable
9 witness for the accused in that regard. The Prosecution to date have been
10 reserving their position on cross-examination. That issue is yet to be
11 determined. But if it is such important evidence, then the Trial Chamber
12 no doubt can hear it and then decide how it is to be dealt with further on
13 in the proceedings.
14 JUDGE BONOMY: Do you know anything more about the other
15 statements? We're quite clear about this one, but you don't know anything
16 about the others --
17 MR. KAY: No.
18 JUDGE BONOMY: -- or whether they have a direct bearing on that
19 paragraph in the indictment.
20 MR. KAY: I haven't seen them. I've only seen our tab 1.58.
21 [Trial Chamber confers]
22 JUDGE ROBINSON: The Chamber unanimously will allow 1.58 to be
23 adduced, and by majority it will not allow evidence from the other
24 statements to which Mr. Milosevic referred. So 1.58, yes, Mr. Milosevic.
25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well.
1 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
2 Q. Mr. Jasovic, would you please be so kind as to look at tab 1.58.
3 If you haven't got it, I can give you a copy straight away. This is the
4 statement that you took on the 10th of March.
5 A. Yes. I haven't got a copy with me here, no.
6 Q. Is that it?
7 A. Yes. This is a statement that was taken on the 10th of March,
8 1999, on the basis of an interview conducted with an ethnic Albanian. I
9 can confirm the authenticity of this document, because the said document
10 was signed by the interviewed person as well as by myself and by my
11 colleague Momcilo Sparavalo.
12 Q. All right. Please look at the content of this statement now,
13 because it pertains precisely to this area, Kacanik and Kotlina. The
14 person who gave the statement, he joined the KLA, didn't he?
15 A. Yes. As I can see at the very beginning of the statement, the
16 said person stated that he voluntarily joined the KLA in the village of
17 Ivaja, municipality of Kacanik, where the Main Staff of the KLA for
18 Kacanik was located.
19 Q. All right. Towards the end of the first paragraph of the
20 statement he said that he was issued an automatic rifle with ammunition
21 while, he says, "I was not issued a uniform because there weren't any."
22 A. Yes. That's only logical. On the basis of statements, KLA
23 members were issued with weapons, but I know that on the basis of
24 statements, interviews, and notes, at first not all KLA members had
25 uniforms of the KLA.
1 Q. All right. Is it not obvious from this statement that precisely
2 in that area the KLA had 380 members?
3 A. Yes, I can see that.
4 Q. It says here, towards the end of the second paragraph, that the
5 substaffs -- yes. In the village of Kotlina, municipality of Kacanik, and
6 in Pustenik, Brava Mahala, municipality of Kacanik. So the substaffs of
7 this group called the KLA were there.
8 A. Yes. The stubstaffs were in Kotlina and in Pustenik and Mahala
9 Brava, municipality of Kacanik.
10 Q. All right. Can you read this last line on page 2, the last
11 sentence from the beginning to the end. It says the substaff of the KLA
12 in the village of Kotlina included 150 members of the so-called KLA. Can
13 you see that?
14 A. Yes. He said that in the substaff of the KLA in Kotlina there are
15 150 members of the KLA, and also there was an infirmary where doctors
16 worked, that is to say Doctors Naser Laci, and Xhevdet Cuni.
17 Q. All right. Please look at the next page. And I'm just going to
18 ask you for some information. The one but last paragraph. The longish
19 one on page 2. It says in the village of Ivaja in the so-called KLA, he
20 says who was there with him, and then he mentions all their names, and
21 then one, two, three, four, five -- in the fifth line, it says Miljaim
22 Gani Loku from the village of Kotlina. Then it says who else from the
23 village of Kotlina, there are others from Kotlina too. And then four
24 lines further down Salji Vljasi?
25 A. Salji Bajram Vljasi.
1 Q. Yes. Please look at list L from the indictment. Please look at
2 L, which has to do with Kotlina. Does it include the names of persons
3 mentioned in the statement given by this member of the KLA whom you had
4 interviewed? Can you see Schedule L now?
5 A. Yes, I see it.
6 Q. I could not identify more or, rather, my associates could not
7 identify more than what I already said.
8 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic.
9 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes?
10 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, there are names that are in the list, and
11 they are KLA -- presumably KLA members, but so what? So what? And this
12 is a matter that I have to raise with you as to how the Defence is being
14 The allegation in (L)(i) is that on or about the 24th March,
15 Kotlina was attacked by forces of the FRY and Serbia, and in that attack
16 at least 17 persons were killed. But you don't answer that allegation
17 merely by showing that there was KLA activity in Kotlina. You will answer
18 that allegation, in my view, by bringing evidence from perhaps a member of
19 the Serb -- Serbian or FRY forces who was involved on that day to say how
20 the attack started and perhaps to give evidence, if that is the case, that
21 the FRY and Serbian forces were responding to an attack by the KLA. So if
22 you have that kind of evidence, that's what you must bring to refute or to
23 throw a reasonable doubt on the allegation that is in (L)(i), because that
24 is all you have to do to throw a reasonable doubt on the truth of the
25 allegation in (i).
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 The allegation is that FRY and Serbian forces attacked and 17
2 persons were killed. You would refute that or throw some reasonable doubt
3 on the truthfulness of that by adducing evidence that the attack was in
4 fact started by the KLA and the FRY and Serbian forces were reacting to
5 that attack and in the course of that attack 17 persons were killed. But
6 you don't refute it simply by showing that there was KLA activity in the
7 area, because I don't know that the Prosecution is denying that there was
8 KLA activity in the area.
9 So if you have that evidence, then I hope you will be bringing it.
10 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] You can be sure I will be bringing
11 it. Do not worry, Mr. Robinson. I will certainly do that.
12 The burden of proof is on Mr. Nice in terms of all these
13 assertions, but the roles keep being reversed here all the time. I have
14 to prove that something that is being claimed is not true; he's not
15 supposed to prove that it is true.
16 As for paragraph (L), which has to do with all of this and even
17 more than that, look at this further on, "which resulted in the death of
18 over 100 civilians." He talks about civilians. First of all, even that
19 is incorrect in the very first sentence, and then he says in Kotlina 17
20 out of these 100 civilians. And there is constant reference to the
21 members of the KLA terrorist organisation as civilians, innocent victims.
22 The authorities of Yugoslavia or Serbia did not produce the
23 terrorist organisation of the KLA. You could see for yourselves here the
24 extent to which terrorism was active, how many persons they killed. You
25 saw that from the interviews conducted by this witness how many Albanians
1 they took away, abducted, killed, not to mention Serbs.
2 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, let me make it absolutely clear
3 that nothing that I have said rearranges the burden of proof. That's a
4 very serious matter. The burden is always on the Prosecution. But
5 whether they discharge the burden which is on them depends on the evidence
6 which is adduced. We will have to assess the evidence which is before us.
7 And they are very likely to discharge that burden if the only evidence
8 that we are going to have is that there was KLA activity in the particular
10 I think you have adduce evidence which is much more specific. And
11 I am glad to hear that you will bring it, though I am worried as to the
12 time, because you still on Kosovo, and you're beyond one-third.
13 And I am not inviting the perfunctory comment which you usually
14 make in response, that this demonstrates the unfairness of the allocation
15 of time to you, so please don't make that. But continue.
16 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I will not say that now. I will
17 continue, Mr. Robinson. However, I wish to remind you that 1.000 soldiers
18 and policemen were killed, and 1.000 soldiers and policemen who were
19 well-trained, well-protected, were not killed by unarmed civilians in
20 operations described here by Mr. Nice.
21 MR. NICE: [Previous translation continues] ... in my respectful
23 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. Continue with the evidence, Mr. Milosevic.
24 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
25 Q. Let us just establish this, Mr. Jasovic: Based on this statement,
1 on what is stated here as to what other persons were with him in the KLA,
2 do we see the names of Loku Milaim and Vlashi Sali, which can be also
3 found on Schedule L where they're listed as victims who died at the hands
4 of the Serb forces, as is stated here?
5 A. Yes. The said person, in addition to other KLA members, also
6 listed Eli Loku [phoen] and Vlashi Sali on the 10th of March, 1999, which
7 is two weeks before the events in the village of Kotlina. These two
8 individuals, Loku and Sali, can be found on the list of those who were
9 killed in Kotlina on the 24th of March, 1999.
10 Q. All right. Let us not dwell on this much longer. Just a few more
11 questions. Based on your answers, I took it, Mr. Jasovic, that you
12 continue to have contacts with Albanians from Kosovo and Metohija in your
13 present job, which is the same job that you have had for several decades
14 now. Did I understand you well that you continue to have contacts with
15 the Albanians from that area, from Urosevac?
16 A. Yes, that's correct. As I have stated yesterday or the day
17 before, in the Secretariat of the Interior of Urosevac in Leskovac, we see
18 Albanians of different background coming there. I said that a number of
19 Albanians coming there express a wish to see me, and I accommodate them.
20 And as a result of that, we are informed about what is going on. They're
21 also informing us about what had taken place before we departed.
22 Q. Did I understand you well that what you were trying to say just
23 now was that you keep receiving information from these visiting Albanians
24 and that information pertains both to the time period before the 10th of
25 June and after the 10th of June?
1 A. Yes, that's correct, because before the 12th of June, 1999, we had
2 a lot of terrorist attacks. And talking to these Albanians, we acquire
3 information about the perpetrators of those acts.
4 Q. In these conversations and information that flows to you now, do
5 you compile notes and reports based on the information that you receive
6 now, the ones similar to what we saw?
7 A. Yes. We write down both Official Notes, reports, and we also have
8 several written statements that we have taken.
9 Q. Thank you, Mr. Jasovic.
10 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have no further questions,
11 Mr. Robinson.
12 [Trial Chamber confers]
13 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Jasovic, in relation to the -- to this
14 particular matter, do you have a recollection of the person or persons who
15 gave you the information of the names? I'm talking about the ones from
16 yesterday, rather. We had reserved consideration of that matter. You
17 were to review the matter overnight.
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Out of a total of 30 Official Notes
19 and reports, I remember the names with persons I talked who supplied
20 information for 20 [as interpreted] of these documents. However, in eight
21 cases, I worked together with Mr. Sparavalo, and I should probably need to
22 speak to him about that.
23 [Trial Chamber confers]
24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I heard 22.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, 22.
1 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes?
2 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] There is a mistake, both in
3 interpretation and in the transcript, most likely. The witness said that
4 out of 30 Official Notes, he can list now 22. Not 20 but 22. And as for
5 the remaining eight, he cannot remember the names, but since he worked
6 with Mr. Sparavalo on them, he assumes that Mr. Sparavalo would be able to
7 help you, but he has the 22 names now.
8 JUDGE ROBINSON: That makes it clearer. Do you have a list to
9 show how these names relate to particular statements?
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I have a list.
11 JUDGE ROBINSON: In private session. In private session.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
13 [Private session]
11 Pages 38871-38875 redacted. Private session.
2 [Open session]
3 MR. NICE: Your Honours, the evidence of this witness was first
4 forecast and dealt with six sitting days or five sitting days ago, on the
5 14th of April, when Your Honour indicated that you would hear from the
6 witness, it was then expected, on a Tuesday to come, cross-examination to
7 be postponed to a date to be fixed. There's been an interruption since
8 then occasioned by the ill health of the accused, but the position remains
9 the same, that I'm not in a position to cross-examine on this material
10 today and would need a significant period of time sufficiently to explore
11 it in order properly to fulfil my functions.
12 Summarising the position, we now have as potential exhibits,
13 because I realise final decisions about admissibility are being deferred,
14 we have about 90 or thereabouts statements and reports of which well in
15 excess of 20 deal quite specifically with matters relating to the Racak
16 count in the indictment, the other, whatever it is, 70 or so documents
17 dealing with allegations of KLA activity generally.
18 The Chamber's obviously going to be assisted by the clearest
19 explanation of Prosecution position on all this material, and for that, as
20 I say, a significant amount of time will be required. I would ask that
21 cross-examination be postponed, and I'm happy to deal with the period of
22 any postponement in one of two ways; either to bring you up-to-date from
23 time to time with the time I expect to seek or to need, or alternatively
24 to have a fixed period of time now that might be subject to further
1 JUDGE ROBINSON: I did say that cross-examination would be
3 MR. NICE: To a date to be fixed, yes.
4 JUDGE ROBINSON: We'll consider it.
5 Mr. Kay.
6 MR. KAY: The Prosecution, of course, have had 90 per cent of
7 these documents within their archives anyway. The tabs that are
8 translations actually come from them, and so this is part of the materials
9 that is available to them, has always been available, and the materials
10 that they should have considered in the first place concerning the
11 activities of the KLA in Racak area, which has been a primary issue within
12 this case.
13 It's clear the witness wouldn't finish in cross-examination today,
14 and it may well be a preferable course for Mr. Nice to cross-examine him
15 for the rest of the day, then release the witness, allow him to return,
16 obtain his notes, and come back in a fairly short period of time and
17 Mr. Nice resume his cross-examination on another date with the witness
18 having brought his original materials with him.
19 Just dealing with other matters, there are witness delay issues
20 occasioned if the cross-examination is forestalled, because the next
21 witness is very short indeed, a witness dealing with a crime incident that
22 is in a narrow period of time, and the witness after that, there has not
23 been a waiver issued by the time that was originally agreed to enable him
24 to give his evidence. That's the witness Paponjak, which was dealt with
25 some time ago, and the waiver was expected last week, but the board
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 dealing with waivers simply didn't deal with his case last week, as we've
2 been advised by the embassy here.
3 But it seems to me the Prosecutor should be able to deal with this
4 witness if he's challenging what he says. All this material has been with
5 them for a long while, unless it has not even been considered in the
6 construction of their case.
7 JUDGE ROBINSON: If there is to be a postponement, the time should
8 not be long because we'd like to deal with it when the evidence is still
10 MR. KAY: This is the fear of everyone, that's it's difficult to
11 take up the thread at a later -- later stage.
12 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, do you -- do you wish to say
14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I was just waiting for the
15 microphone to be switched on.
16 Yes, Mr. Robinson. I really don't see a single reason for
17 treating this witness differently than other witnesses, and you would be
18 doing so if you're asking for a postponement of the cross-examination.
19 For 20 -- it's been 20 days since this whole binder was handed over to
20 Mr. Nice. The witness has testified here. I see no reason to postpone
21 the matter any further.
22 A moment ago, Mr. Kay said that it was possible to provide these
23 translations because Mr. Nice already had them. So there's no
24 justification for making the witness come back again.
25 The mention of additional notes is something that the witness will
1 do his best to find and to send to the Registrar, as you said. It wasn't
2 linked to the examination-in-chief, and it doesn't represent any
3 impediment or obstacle to Mr. Nice going ahead with his cross-examination,
4 especially since, as I understood it, most of what the witness has said he
5 isn't challenging. But it's up to him, it's up to him to say that. So I
6 don't see any reason for us to postpone the cross-examination.
7 MR. NICE: Your Honour, I am simply not in a position to
8 cross-examine a witness unless I have a position to take in relation to
9 all this material.
10 Now, as to the witnesses concerned, I need to have a position on
11 whether what they -- what the witnesses, the statement makers, I need to
12 have a position as to whether what they say they stand by or not and there
13 may be many other inquiries that have to be made.
14 JUDGE ROBINSON: The accused makes the point that you've had this
15 binder for 20 days. You mentioned five working days.
16 MR. NICE: I said five sitting days and I gave the dates. Twenty
17 days is nothing like enough to deal with an inquiry of this scale. This
18 is a very major inquiry that will have to be made. Let me make it quite
19 clear that the accused has also had this material for a long time, served
20 on him, or whatever percentage of it was served on him by the Prosecution,
21 and never indicated that he was going to rely on it because he didn't put
22 it in the 65 ter material. So it wasn't something that we should
23 realistically expect that he was going to rely on. It came up because of
24 the to and fro of the evidence about this witness starting with
1 Now, so far as the present position is concerned, present
2 evidential position, three statements have been explored in some detail
3 and the witness has already been cross-examined on the basis of those
4 three statements in another case. I'm not intending particularly to
5 explore those same issues with him until I've had the opportunity fully to
6 consider what my position has to be.
7 Now, I simply can't go further. It wouldn't be responsible for me
8 to do so. And it was made quite clear that cross-examination would be
10 The accused having sought now to rely on this material, which --
11 and indeed it's not only available to be him because it was provided by
12 the Prosecution as Rule 68 material, but we understand also obtained by
13 him because he spoke of a receipt independently, he having obtained it and
14 given no earlier warning that he was going to rely on it, I must be
15 entitled to the time to deal with it. It's also possible that this
16 material may lead to some concessions. I simply don't know. But now that
17 it's been -- being relied on, I need a chance to investigate it.
18 JUDGE BONOMY: I think, Mr. Nice, the point Mr. Kay was making was
19 that one might have assumed that the Prosecution had indeed considered the
20 significance of this material and already formed a view on it since it's
21 been in your possession and that for that reason this shouldn't be coming
22 as completely novel input, and therefore if time is to be allowed at all,
23 and indeed cross-examination wouldn't necessarily finish today, then the
24 period should be a short one.
25 MR. NICE: Your Honour, as to --
1 JUDGE BONOMY: No doubt your investigations have already
3 MR. NICE: Well, they have to an extent, although of course I was
4 dependent on how the accused was going to put his case, I was dependent on
5 limited resources, and also I was dependent on knowing who the anonymous
6 sources were as to tab 2.2 and the various subtabs there, some of that is
7 anonymous. Now it's not.
8 But resources are not infinite so far as the Prosecution is
9 concerned, and in the time that's passed since leave was first given to
10 call this witness and then leave in the -- an explanation given --
11 JUDGE ROBINSON: Not infinite, Mr. Nice, but they are comfortably
13 MR. NICE: Your Honour, absolutely not. If I may say so -- let me
14 just give you an example. In a sense this shouldn't be being done in the
15 presence of the witness, but it probably doesn't matter.
16 The investigation that took place, I think it was over the Easter
17 break, to deal with the position of three of these statement-makers --
18 perhaps the witness should withdraw.
19 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. Let the witness leave the courtroom.
20 [The witness stands down]
21 MR. NICE: Your Honour, before I return to my theme, just let me
22 make --
23 JUDGE ROBINSON: It should be made clear that the witness is not
25 MR. NICE: No. And it should, of course, be clear to the accused
1 that -- I'm sure he understands that what passes in the absence of the
2 witness must in no circumstances be communicated to the witness by himself
3 or by his associates.
4 Second point, before I forget it. I made clear a couple of days
5 ago to Ms. Anoya, I think it was, that I would not be seeking to do any
6 cross-examination at the end of this witness's evidence and I think I
7 communicated that elsewhere as appropriate.
8 Returning to the nuts and bolts, the three witnesses who were the
9 subject matter of the investigation over the Easter break required a
10 mission of a total of something like seven days for an investigator and
11 five for the lawyer concerned. As it happened, at inconvenience to them.
12 But that's the inevitable scale of exercise required by consideration of
13 material like this if it's done on the particular basis it was done then.
14 Now, I'm not at all sure at the moment, because I needed to hear
15 the witness and form a view, what will be the nature of the investigation
16 I must make, or I must have made on behalf of the Prosecution, but it is
17 bound to be substantial. There are, as I say, over 20 statements or
18 reports that identify as KLA activists people mentioned in the Racak
19 count. If there is any truth or substantial truth in what those
20 statement-makers are recorded as saying, then there might be implications
21 for this particular count, and it is absolutely essential that the
22 Prosecution takes a considered position before it starts to cross-examine
23 this witness, and indeed I repeat, I'm not in a position to do so today.
24 So I would invite the Chamber to say that the appropriate course
25 is to adjourn the cross-examination completely, and for a significant
1 period of time because that is what will be required to deal with material
2 that simply wasn't listed by the accused. Indeed, I notice also, of
3 course, he didn't list either 1. -- the last document we were looking at
4 today either. None of this stuff was listed when it could have been. If
5 he had listed it, different approaches might have been taken.
6 JUDGE ROBINSON: All right. Thank you, Mr. Nice.
7 MR. KAY: Just to add one matter. This is plainly Racak
8 investigation material. This should have been investigated years ago. We
9 get a lot of newspaper articles and press reports and everything there is
10 from the media, but this is hard evidence that should have been
11 investigated. It's been with them for a long period of time. That's the
12 sort of material that should be considered in a trial like this, original
13 evidence, and that is our point in opposing this application for an
15 [Trial Chamber confers]
16 JUDGE ROBINSON: Let the witness be brought back.
17 [The witness takes the stand]
18 JUDGE ROBINSON: It was the Prosecutor who first brought the
19 potential for this witness to give evidence in this case, and when he
20 brought that to the attention of the Chamber, it was observed that the
21 person had not been listed on the 65 ter list. Principally for that
22 reason the Trial Chamber then indicated that cross-examination would be
23 postponed, although we would hear examination-in-chief. The Prosecutor
24 was, therefore, entitled to rely on that statement from the Trial Chamber
25 of the postponement of cross-examination. However, the extent of the
1 postponement is another matter.
2 This is material that was undoubtedly in the possession of the
3 Prosecution. In the interests of the continuation of this trial, the
4 efficient continuation of the trial, the Chamber has determined that the
5 period should be a short one, and the witness will, therefore, return for
6 cross-examination on Tuesday, the 17th of May. That week we are sitting
7 Tuesday to Thursday, the 17th to the 19th.
8 That's the Chamber's ruling.
9 MR. NICE: I'm grateful.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] May I ask a question, please?
11 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I should like to ask the Trial
13 Chamber to be given an escort, because I was a witness in the Isak Musliu
14 and Fatmir Limaj trial for the Prosecution.
15 JUDGE ROBINSON: To be given an escort? Could you clarify that?
16 What do you mean by "an escort"?
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, for security reasons, an
19 JUDGE ROBINSON: Do you mean for the period between now and the
20 17th when you return?
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, linked to my testimony in the
22 accused's trial Isak Musliu and Fatmir Limaj.
23 [Trial Chamber confers]
24 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Jasovic, I'm still not clear as to what you
25 mean by an escort. Over what period of time and where?
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] May I tell you in closed session,
3 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, in private session.
4 [Private session]
11 Page 38887 redacted. Private session.
16 [Open Session]
17 [The witness entered court]
18 JUDGE ROBINSON: Let the witness make the declaration.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will speak
20 the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
21 JUDGE ROBINSON: You may sit.
22 WITNESS: ZVONKO GVOZDENOVIC
23 [Witness answered through interpreter]
24 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, you may begin.
25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Robinson.
1 Examined by Mr. Milosevic:
2 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Mr. Gvozdenovic.
3 A. Good afternoon, Mr. President. How are you doing?
4 Q. Mr. Gvozdenovic, please tell us, first of all, where you're from,
5 where you lived, where you went to school, et cetera.
6 A. I was born on the 1st of December 1957, in Skopje. I lived in
8 Q. Did you always live in Pec and work there?
9 A. Yes, throughout my stay there, I lived and worked in Pec.
10 Q. What is your family status?
11 A. Right now my family situation is a very difficult one. I used to
12 have four children. A young daughter died, and the bandits, the
13 terrorists, killed my son Vukosav in Kosovo, and I have a 14-year-old
14 daughter and an 18-year-old son now.
15 Q. I am mindful of the fact that you are a victim, Mr. Gvozdenovic,
16 so I am just going to put questions to you that are absolutely essential.
17 Tell me, do you know how intensive the activities of the terrorist
18 organisation KLA were in Pec and in the surrounding area in 1998?
19 A. Well, let me tell you. They were very intensive, but I cannot say
20 that they were the KLA. They were actually bandits. They were bandits
21 gone astray. You know, it's different when you call them an army. They
22 were bandits. What they did is something that no one would ever do, and I
23 cannot call them anything else.
24 Q. I understand that, Mr. Gvozdenovic. I used the term "KLA"
25 because --
1 A. All right.
2 Q. -- because they used it and that is how they were discerned. But
3 of course they were terrorists. No doubt about that.
4 Tell us, Mr. Gvozdenovic, in that area, where were the most
5 intensive conflicts between our security forces and the KLA?
6 A. As for the town of Pec, I'm going to talk about that, it was about
7 five kilometres away from Pec.
8 Q. Oh, from the centre of Pec it is five kilometres away, Loxhe?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Do you have any knowledge about the terrorist activities of the
11 KLA against the police at that time?
12 A. Yes, of course. I know about that. As a matter of fact, after
13 every killing that was committed against the members of the police and the
14 army, I attended their funerals. I can even give their names, if it is
15 absolutely essential. In Loxhe, a terrible massacre was committed over
16 Serj Imperovic [phoen], Mirka Radunovic [phoen], and some other policemen.
17 All of them were policemen, and the police has this in its own files.
18 Q. What were the relations like within the community, the interethnic
19 relations, relations among people in general?
20 A. From the fall of Rankovic in 1966 until 1999 when they carried out
21 this cleansing, the relations were very bad. I can tell you that. From
22 one period to another, they became worse and worse.
23 Q. You said a moment ago that there were major disruptions in these
24 relations in the 1960s.
25 A. Yes, yes.
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 Q. And you brought that in connection with the removal of Rankovic.
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. What were the consequences? What happened? How did the members
4 of the Albanian national minority behave and how did the Serbs behave?
5 A. Well, let me tell you. The Siptars, of course, after the fall of
6 Rankovic, at least that's what they thought at the time, they thought that
7 their time had come to shine. From the first demonstrations they had in
8 1968 until the demonstrations in 1981, the only objective of the Siptars
9 was quite simply to cleanse Kosovo from the Serbs, and I think that they
10 really succeeded in doing that.
11 Q. All right. What was characteristic of their behaviour at the time
12 from the 1980s onwards? What happened? I'm just referring to Pec, where
13 you lived throughout, as you said yourself. Did people leave their jobs
14 or were there any boycotts?
15 A. Boycotts, yes. Yes, indeed. But as far as the year 1974 is
16 concerned, when they got their own constitution, at that moment we the
17 Serbs really got into a position that was unenviable then. You had to
18 know the Albanian language in order to be able to get a job. So the
19 Siptars were turned into a majority, and there was this majority rule. In
20 order to be able to work, you had to know the Albanian language.
21 Q. I'm just going to deal with the end of 1998 and the beginning of
22 1999 now. Do you remember that in town, at the end of 1998 and the
23 beginning of 1999, was a presence of international monitors felt there,
24 and what do you know about that?
25 A. Yes. The verifiers came, headed by Mr. William Walker, at the
1 beginning of October. They were present. They came, in fact, to monitor
2 the situation. However, we can see ourselves how they monitored it then
3 and how they're monitoring it now.
4 Q. Where were they staying?
5 A. They were staying near Salib Nana, towards Bijelo Polje and near
6 the railway station and near that motel there. Believe me, I can't
7 remember the name just now.
8 Q. Did they employ local staff?
9 A. Yes. Yes. It was Siptars. As for the Serbs, I really don't
10 know, but there were probably very, very few of them. But all younger
11 people among the Siptars worked for them. For what reason, this is
12 something I really don't know.
13 Q. Were they present in Pec in mid-December 1998?
14 A. Yes, yes.
15 Q. Please could you describe what happened on the 14th of December,
17 A. On the 14th of December, 1998, a terrible unheard-of crime was
18 committed, unheard of in the 20th century. I must say that even the ETA
19 and IRA, major terrorist organisations in the world, never did any such
20 thing. Where there were children involved, there were no terrorist
21 attacks anywhere in the world, but in Kosovo, in the -- on the 14th of
22 December, this was a crime that can only be compared to the Smerica
23 [phoen] crime from the Second World War in Kragujevac. These were
24 bandits. No army would do that, not even the KLA as we call them now.
25 Q. You are now talking about what happened in Pec where your son was
2 A. Yes. Yes.
3 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we please just play videotape
4 number 1, tab 1, very briefly.
5 [Videotape played]
6 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] There's just another brief clip
7 that we can play immediately in order to save time, and then the witness
8 is going to comment on both.
9 [Videotape played]
10 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well. I think that will do.
11 Thank you.
12 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
13 Q. Mr. Gvozdenovic, let us just deal with this. The second clip that
14 we saw was a recording of what happened before the murder in Panda; is
15 that right?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. The second clip, does it not show that when the forces controlling
18 the state border clashed with the terrorist group that was coming in from
19 Albanian into the territory of our country?
20 A. Yes.
21 MR. NICE: [Previous translation continues] ... all that.
22 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.
23 MR. NICE: These are two clips without any soundtrack, so it's
24 impossible to know from viewing them and trying to listen to them, if
25 there's any soundtrack, what they say, and really the witness should be
1 asked neutral questions.
2 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Milosevic. "Does it not show," clearly
3 leading. Reformulate the question.
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right. I'm going to reformulate
5 the question.
6 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
7 Q. Mr. Gvozdenovic, what does this clip show where dead persons can
8 be seen, weapons in the snow, what we saw here just now? What does this
10 A. What is shown here is that Albanian separatists wanted to -- and
11 bandits wanted to get into the territory of Kosovo. Those were not the
12 first border crossings. Let me tell you, this happened quite often even
13 earlier, that this was an organised terrorist gang that tried to get
14 weapons across.
15 As far as I remember, and I remember well because there was
16 satellite TV where I worked at the time, we saw on the BBC and CNN how our
17 army dealt with this operation. This is military, so I don't want to go
18 into that.
19 Q. All right. I just wanted to ask you whether there is any relation
20 between what happened then and the crime that was committed in Panda.
21 A. Let me tell you, there are some indications as far as two cases
22 are concerned, what happened at the border and on the 4th of October,
23 1998, when again there was an attack launched at a hospital where Siptar
24 bandits were as patients. See what we are like? We were even treating
25 them. We were giving them medical treatment. Then a group, I don't know
1 what this organiser of theirs was called, I think his name was Jakupi but
2 the police will know that, and then in that hospital a woman with another
3 member of her gang tried to set free these wounded persons who were in
4 hospital. However, the police security detail that was there to guard
5 them reacted. She tried to throw a hand grenade but she didn't manage to
6 do so, so they liquidated her. Mirveta [phoen] was her name. She got
7 killed, and this other person was wounded, this other bandit who was with
9 MR. SAXON: Your Honour --
10 JUDGE BONOMY: Can I be clear? Were you in this hospital
11 observing this happening? What is the basis on which you're able to tell
12 us this?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. Bonomy, of course I wasn't at
14 the hospital, but there is --
15 JUDGE BONOMY: You see, at the moment I don't understand the basis
16 of which you have this information, and it would be helpful if we knew
17 that so we could assess what value it might have. But that's not your
18 fault. Thank you.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, believe me, there is police
20 information. There is military information, then there is OSCE
21 information from Mr. Walker, and then the ambassador, please help me with
22 the name, the French ambassador who was there. Please. I mean, they were
23 there. They were all there then.
24 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
25 Q. Mr. Gvozdenovic, I asked you whether any link was established
1 between this clash with the forces that were securing the border and the
2 terrorist group and the crime in Panda.
3 A. There probably is a link. They sustained major losses, and they
4 probably had to do something for their mentors in order to prove their
6 Q. All right. Tell me, who was in Panda at the time of the attack?
7 A. Mirza Sabovic, the owner of the cafe Panda, was in the cafe,
8 together with his brother-in-law Lazovic. That's their cafe, and they
9 live upstairs, so their wives were upstairs.
10 Q. Who was in --
11 A. In the cafe itself, you mean?
12 Q. Yes.
13 A. Yes. There were 13 of them. I was working that evening when this
14 attack occurred. According to this information, there were about 13
15 persons in the cafe.
16 Q. How many young boys were killed then?
17 A. Six boys were killed then. My son Vukosav Gvozdenovic, my Kum
18 Svetislav Ristic, Ivan Radevic, Dragan Trifunovic, Zoran Stanojevic, and
19 the young boy Ivan Lazovic only 14 and a half years old. I must mention
20 Vlado Loncarevic who was wounded then and who is still suffering severe
21 consequences of that, and Mirsad Sabovic, the owner of the cafe, who was
22 wounded in the foot.
23 Q. Mr. Gvozdenovic, please look at tab 2 and tell us, does it contain
24 a report on the on-site investigation that was carried out in Panda after
1 A. Ah, yes, yes.
2 MR. NICE: No translations into English have been provided.
3 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, why?
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] To tell you the truth, Mr. Robinson,
5 I don't know. I believe that all of this was translated. However, this
6 is a report on the on-site investigation that was conducted there.
7 Perhaps you can mark it for identification. Let's see what it contains.
8 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, this is becoming, as far as the
9 presentation of your case is concerned, the norm, and it is unacceptable.
10 I'm not satisfied that you make a sufficient effort to meet the procedural
11 requirements of the Tribunal.
12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson, I really cannot make
13 an extra effort in order to make translations.
14 JUDGE ROBINSON: You can't even explain. Was it submitted for
15 translation as it should have been?
16 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It should have been submitted,
17 Mr. Robinson.
18 [Trial Chamber confers]
19 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, I observe that none of the
20 documents is translated except in relation to some photographs. This is a
21 flagrant breach of the procedural requirements, which are there for a
22 particular reason. It's to facilitate the conduct of the proceedings in
23 an efficient manner. I'm not going to allow it. You can have the witness
24 give evidence -- give so much evidence as he can, but I'm not allowing any
25 of these. It's just once too often.
1 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right, Mr. Robinson.
2 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
3 Q. Mr. Gvozdenovic, please open up tab 3, and with all my apologies
4 for forcing you to look at these photographs.
5 MR. NICE: [Previous translation continues] ... and can I forecast
6 a similar difficulty arising with the next witness, who deals with Pec.
7 In respect of that witness, we have received three lever-arch files of
8 documents, almost none of which has any English translation. However, in
9 those documents there are many photographs of a potentially distressing
11 The Chamber will probably recall that in the Prosecution's case
12 there was no effort made to use material that might in any way
13 sensationalise or excite the imagination unnecessarily, and it may be that
14 at this stage of this witness's evidence, before we look at what's shown
15 in the tab, as the accused wishes, some thought should be given to the
16 relevance of both this witness's evidence and what I forecast to be the
17 intended evidence of the next witness.
18 The Pec Panda cafe killings were dealt with by at least three live
19 witnesses in the Prosecution's case, as well as being detailed in such
20 books as "Under Orders" and "As Seen, As Told." The relevance of the
21 killings to this indictment may lie in what followed from them, there
22 being expressed uncertainty as to the precise cause or perpetrator of the
23 killings at the time.
24 One's of course reluctant to take a point like this where the
25 father of one of the young men killed in the cafe is before you, but
1 before time is taken and before air time is taken broadcasting potentially
2 distressing photographs, I would invite the Chamber to check whether this
3 evidence about the Pec Panda killing is truly relevant, and the decision
4 made here may have an effect in relation to the following witness.
5 JUDGE ROBINSON: You say it's not relevant. Are you saying that?
6 MR. NICE: I'm questioning its relevance because it's not a fact
7 of the indictment. It was dealt with. It's well before this Court and
8 the public that there was this very serious, terrible event, of course,
9 whoever was the perpetrator. The question is what is this witness going
10 to add to what we already know?
11 JUDGE BONOMY: What do you accept about who the perpetrator was?
12 MR. NICE: The evidence is unclear, or not clear.
13 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, there --
14 MR. NICE: Your Honour, yes. I return to my last point. If it's
15 material to know that and if this witness can add to that body of at
16 present uncertain material, then I --
17 JUDGE BONOMY: You have indicated that what happens thereafter may
18 be relevant. Are you then saying that who did it is not relevant?
19 MR. NICE: It may not be relevant, actually, because -- no, it may
20 not be relevant. It's the perception and what follows from the perception
21 that is significant, as a matter of fact. But in any case, that's my
22 invitation to the Chamber before we go down the road that I think this
23 accused is likely to be taking us with this and with the following
25 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you, Mr. Nice.
1 [Trial Chamber confers]
2 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, we'll allow you to lead evidence
3 on it. You were going to have displayed the photograph which is in tab 3?
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes. The translation is here. And
5 could this please be placed on ELMO.
6 As for the remark by Mr. Nice as to the relevancy --
7 JUDGE ROBINSON: [Previous translation continues] ... whether it
8 is really necessary to have these distressing photographs displayed. We
9 can see them. What purpose is served by having them displayed on the
10 ELMO? What forensic purpose?
11 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It does have probative value and
12 weight, Mr. Robinson, in order to show the extent of and brutality and
13 savage conduct exhibited by somebody who burst in and killed the children.
14 And if the father sitting here does not object to this being placed on the
15 ELMO, then I don't see who else should be objecting. Let the witness
16 decide. If the witness says that it should not be placed on the ELMO, I
17 will agree with that decision.
18 [Trial Chamber confers]
19 JUDGE ROBINSON: Very well, Mr. Milosevic. Go ahead. Go ahead
20 and ask -- put the question to the father.
21 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
22 Q. Mr. Gvozdenovic, the photographs that are on the ELMO now, do they
23 show the victims of this crime in the Panda cafe?
24 A. Yes. This is my son Vukosav and Dragan Trifunovic.
25 Q. Where were you when this crime occurred?
1 A. At that time I was at work in the Mozart cafe. I worked there as
2 a security officer.
3 Q. When did you hear about this event?
4 A. I heard about it at 8.00 or 8.15, 8.20. My Kum had called me and
5 said that something terrible had happened at the cafe and asked me where
6 my late son was, and I said he's probably at home and then she [as
7 interpreted] said, well, you will have to go to the hospital, something
8 terrible has happened.
9 I see to Mr. Nice everything concerning this event seems to be
10 irrelevant. It looks as though there are good bandits and bad bandits and
11 that this was done by some good bandits, apparently.
12 What is especially dramatic is that when this happened, our police
13 immediately blocked the entry leading to Kapisnica [phoen] and the
14 approaches leading into the town towards hospital precisely so as to avoid
15 any potential clashes and physical contact between them and the Serbs who
16 were naturally revolted.
17 When I arrived, the owner of the cafe was waiting for me there.
18 He took me to the hospital. There were a lot of people in front of the
19 hospital, about 3.000 people. Nobody dared tell me what happened. Nobody
20 could summon up the courage.
21 I went in and asked whether my late son was alive. Nobody could
22 tell me anything. I went upstairs where they were lying. When I saw the
23 sight, I could not watch it. I just realised that it was him lying there
24 with his friends.
25 The two injured persons, one of them was my Kum who,
1 unfortunately, later died in Pristina, and the younger, Zoki, the other
2 wounded person and they were transferred to Pristina where, unfortunately,
3 they later died.
4 Q. All right. Please tell me, did the members of the Verification
5 Mission go to this site?
6 A. Yes, Mr. Walker came for just a minute or two, just looked at it
7 and left. There was another man, a German there. I apologise to the
8 Trial Chamber for not being able to tell you his name, however, it is
9 written down somewhere in the MUP.
10 Q. Now, please tell us, what was the reaction of the Serb in Pec to
11 this event?
12 A. I have to tell you, in view of the nature of this crime, I have to
13 tell you that the Serbs behaved with dignity. They did not want to
14 blemish in any way through their behaviour the death of these victims.
15 And I want to thank the citizens once again for a very dignified memorial
16 service that was held.
17 Q. When was the funeral held and the memorial service and who
18 attended it?
19 A. The funeral was attended by Patriarch Pavle and some 30.000
20 citizens from Pec. Anybody who was able to come came. People came
21 despite the blockades, despite the fact that they were risking their lives
22 in order to express their condolences and share with us the pain.
23 Q. After the event, did you go regularly to the graveyard where your
24 son and his friends are buried?
25 A. Yes. Two years later, I went to the graveyard.
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 Q. You went there two years later. Why did you wait for two years?
2 A. Well, that's completely obvious. We even went to see Mr. Gelbard,
3 asking him to enable us to visit this cemetery. He promised us he would.
4 However, for some unknown reasons, Mr. Gelbard never contacted us in order
5 to help us go to the cemetery.
6 Q. So it was only two years later that you managed to go to the
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. When did that take place?
10 A. That was in 2002. And I have to tell you that when we arrived, we
11 found a terrible site.
12 Q. You mean you went to the cemetery where all of these young men
13 were buried?
14 A. This is the Orthodox cemetery in Pec.
15 Q. And what did you find there?
16 A. We found a terrible sight there at the cemetery. Toppled
17 tombstones, Zoki Stanojevic's tombstone and Janko Bradovic's [phoen]
18 tombstones were destroyed. We managed to raise again one tombstone and
19 the other we didn't manage. The crosses were broken. You can see a cross
20 in one of the pictures. When we went there after the funeral in 2002,
21 there were no crosses or anything there.
22 Q. All right. You said that this can be seen on the photographs.
23 There is no need to translate that. That's in tab 6.
24 A. It seems that everything needs to be translated for them.
25 Q. What you're trying to say is that when you arrived two years
1 later, the cemetery was destroyed; the tombstones, the crosses, everything
2 was damaged.
3 A. Yes, that's right. I have to tell you that the Italian soldiers
4 who were there as security escorts and who videotaped all of this, they
5 were crying. The Italians videotaped all of this.
6 Q. And you were forced to go to the cemetery under the protection of
7 Italian security troops.
8 A. Yes, and they treated us very fairly.
9 Q. Did anybody give you an explanation for that, how it was possible
10 that something like that happened?
11 A. Well, we don't need really an explanation. Nobody guarded the
12 cemetery. When they were able to kill these children, why wouldn't they
13 be able to destroy the tombstones? Nothing is sacred to them, nothing
14 that is Serbian. You know yourself that in 1981, they set on fire the Pec
15 patriarchate, and that was the first sign.
16 Q. Mr. Gvozdenovic, based on what you know, after the KFOR arrived,
17 were any other Serbian children killed in Kosovo and Metohija?
18 A. Yes, that happened in Gorazdevac.
19 Q. Gorazdevac is a village that you know well?
20 A. Yes, quite well.
21 Q. When did that happen in Gorazdevac?
22 A. I think -- I'm not sure any more because there were so many
23 events, that I couldn't really follow in view of all my problems.
24 Q. Mr. Gvozdenovic, you were in the village of Bijelo Polje?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. What happened in Bijelo Polje?
2 A. In that village, when we arrived the first time there, they
3 already started building houses for the Serbs who were supposed to be
4 returning there. I have to tell you that these people are working under
5 very difficult circumstances. However, they are very enthusiastic. What
6 happened was terrible, and that happened on the 17th of March, and
7 everything that they had built was torched, destroyed. And unfortunately,
8 the last time I was there in the cemetery in Pec, on a religious holiday,
9 I saw that these people are exhausted. I really have no words to describe
10 it. The circumstances they live under are so difficult. They're
11 practically living in a ghetto.
12 Q. Can Serbs return now to that area?
13 A. Well, let me give you my opinion. This is my personal opinion,
14 nobody else's. It would be very difficult for them to return.
15 MR. NICE: [Previous translation continues] ... interrupt but I
16 wonder the relevance.
17 JUDGE ROBINSON: It's not relevant. Move on to another question.
18 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well.
19 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
20 Q. Mr. Gvozdenovic, you said yourself that throughout the time you
21 were in Pec and you were present in all these events, you were there.
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Now, with respect to the events in Pec, deportation is mentioned,
24 the deportation of Albanians during the NATO pact aggression from Pec,
25 their deportation. Do you know anything about the deportation of
1 Albanians from Pec?
2 A. As far as I know, there was no deportation. I personally was
3 there. I was there myself. And since the Siptars accepted NATO as their
4 liberators, they probably had two goals; one was to show their
5 humanitarian catastrophe, and the other, for some reason they know, that
6 the Serbs should be the targets of the NATO bombs.
7 Q. Very well. Mr. Gvozdenovic, you consider there was no
8 deportation. Now, let me ask you something else. Do you happen to know
9 whether there were any -- there was any agitation on the Albanian side for
10 Albanians to leave Pec?
11 A. Certainly. I was present. I was in the post office as a security
12 detail and I met several of them and asked them why they were leaving, and
13 a few of my friends told me that people were going from house to --
14 prompting them to leave and not to talk to me. So I was present. I heard
15 about that and saw that, and of course in the 40 years that you spend
16 living there, you are bound to have Albanian friends, and they --
17 Q. These people told you, did they, that they were going round
18 houses, prompting people to leave and join up with their compatriots?
19 A. Yes. And I know that my neighbours gave their keys to some
20 elderly Serbs to look after their houses, their homes and property, to
21 prevent them from being looted and set fire to. So that happened in my
22 own street. I know about that personally. I can't tell you about other
23 things, but I'm telling you about where I was and things I know based on
25 Q. Were you in Pec throughout when all this was going on, the whole
2 A. Yes, yes, I was.
3 Q. Did you see any violence towards Albanians in Pec during this
4 period of time?
5 A. Please believe me when I say that not a single -- and actually,
6 the police were also surprised to see people going out onto the streets.
7 There was general chaos that reigned, but they did their best to convince
8 people not to leave. However, this was a chain reaction, and you couldn't
9 stop it. It was a snowball effect.
10 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have no further questions,
11 Mr. Robinson.
12 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you, Mr. Milosevic.
13 Mr. Saxon.
14 Cross-examined by Mr. Saxon:
15 Q. In the town of Pec, you lived in a dead-end street called Pariska;
16 isn't that correct?
17 A. No, Pariska, Pariska Street.
18 Q. Pariska Street. My pronunciation was wrong. And for a period of
19 time you sold newspapers in a kiosk; correct?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. During the 1990s, you were also a member of a political party
22 called the Serbian Radical Party; correct?
23 A. No, that's not correct.
24 Q. Were you a member of any other political party?
25 A. Yes; the Serbian Renewal Movement.
1 Q. You mentioned that the Albanians in Pec had two goals when they
2 left the area after the NATO bombing began, and you said the first goal
3 was to show the humanitarian catastrophe that had befallen them; right?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Well, so following up on that logic, then, the idea would be to --
6 for the members of the Albanian community to leave their homes for a
7 while, go to a place like Montenegro or Albania, and wait for
8 circumstances to be more convenient for them to return home; right? That
9 would be the logic of this goal?
10 A. Well, I don't know what their logic was.
11 Q. Well, if Albanians were voluntarily leaving their homes, can you
12 see any reason why they would burn their own homes? Can you see any
13 reason for that?
14 A. Well, let me tell you I'm sure that there was a reason. If they
15 burnt their houses, then they would have ascribed this to the Serbs,
16 perhaps. That might be one of the reasons.
17 Q. And if they looted their own property? Can you think of a good
18 reason for looting one's own property and destroying one's own businesses?
19 A. No. I said that most probably -- I can't actually say for sure,
20 tell you about something I didn't see. On our side I'm sure that there
21 were people who abused that kind of thing and looted a Siptar house, but
22 I'm talking about my own street where my neighbours, the Siptars, would
23 give people their keys to look after their property, their homes. Isn't
24 that proof enough that they had trust and confidence in our people?
25 Q. Well, you see, we've had some other proof in this case. There was
1 a report that was submitted in this case that was called "Under Orders."
2 This is Exhibit 145. It's a document produced by an organisation called
3 Human Rights Watch. And it said that -- and I'm reading from page 290 of
4 this report, where it was said that, "Within the first week of the war, an
5 estimated 90 per cent of Pec's ethnic Albanian population had been
6 forcibly expelled."
7 You didn't see any of this activity where you were?
8 A. I don't understand your question. Can you repeat it, please?
9 Q. My question was quite clear.
10 The same report on the same page said: "The ethnic cleansing
11 operation in Pec was among the best organised in Kosovo, with buses
12 waiting in the city centre to take people south towards Albania."
13 Are you saying you didn't see any of this activity? Is that your
14 testimony today?
15 A. I -- if you listened to what I was saying carefully, then I said
16 that this was going on in front of the post office and in the centre, and
17 so that day or the following day I didn't see a single bus nor truck
18 parked. And I've been telling you very clearly our police, our people,
19 whenever they could, did their best to influence the Siptars, their
20 compatriots, to prevail upon them not to leave because the Serbs know full
21 well what population exoduses mean. They had many displacements
22 themselves and know full well what that means and entails.
23 Q. You said that this was going on in front of the post office. What
24 was going on in front of the post office and in the centre? What was
25 going on?
1 A. People had gathered there. They didn't know where to go. They
2 were being -- the Siptars were forcing them out of their houses. Now, who
3 would leave their homes just like that, without any reason? They had to
4 do so under duress. They were coerced to do so.
5 My house was set fire to, but I went -- if my house was set fire
6 to, I would go back.
7 Q. So it's your testimony that there was a group of Albanians who
8 were forcing other Albanians to leave their homes and go to Albania;
10 A. Yes, precisely that. That's precisely what I'm saying.
11 Q. Well --
12 A. There were decent, honest Siptars there who wanted to carry on
13 living there together with us but we know the politics where it was
14 created. You know that better than me, I'm quite sure.
15 Q. Speaking of politics, let's just try to step back for a minute,
16 and if you were an Albanian organisation trying to force people to leave
17 their homes for political purposes, for purposes of political power, do
18 you think it would be in your political interests to burn down those homes
19 and their businesses behind them?
20 A. Sir, even if I was an Albanian, I would never advise that to
21 anybody or tell them to do that. That's completely beyond all reason.
22 Q. Let's assume that what you're saying is correct, that Albanians
23 forced Albanians to leave their homes and go to the border. Can you think
24 of any logical reason why the Albanian population at the border would feel
25 compelled to leave all of their identity documents behind?
1 A. I wasn't there, so I can't talk about that.
2 Q. Did you know a man named Ndrec Konaj in Pec?
3 A. No.
4 MR. SAXON: Your Honour, I'd like to ask the usher's assistance,
5 please. If we could have a copy of Exhibit 3, map 6 placed on the ELMO.
6 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.
7 MR. SAXON:
8 Q. This is a map produced by the Office of the Prosecutor showing
9 routes that Kosovo Albanian citizens took when they left the city of Pec.
10 You can see there is a green line heading to the north and then to the
11 north-west into Montenegro, and we also see a green line heading south to
12 the town of Prizren and then to the west again to the Albanian border. Do
13 you see those lines?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Ndrec Konaj testified to this Chamber -- and, Your Honour, I'm
16 referring to Exhibit 112, and trial transcript 3778 to 3781 from the 25th
17 of April, 2002. Mr. Konaj explained how he and his family were forced to
18 leave their homes by Serbian police in the town of Pec, that homes were
19 being set on fire by Serb forces, and that -- that they were placed on
20 buses in the centre of Pec and then taken to the town of Prizren or close
21 to the town of Prizren and subsequently put on other buses to the Albanian
22 border, and that the Serb police in Pec not only organised this bus
23 transportation but even provided the drivers of the buses.
24 Are you saying you didn't see any of this activity?
25 A. Well, I don't know how it turns out now that the person that told
1 you that and when I told you what I saw, that you believe him to be right.
2 That's how it would appear, wouldn't it?
3 Q. Do you know a man named --
4 A. Do you have proof of those buses? Were they filmed deporting
5 those people, the trucks or whatever? Do you have any proof and evidence
6 to show us?
7 Q. Do you know a man named Besnik Sokoli?
8 A. No, I don't know him but I've heard of him. I've heard of the
10 Q. Besnik Sokoli testified in this courtroom on the 27th of February,
11 2002 - and this is at pages 1144 to 1155 of the transcript - and he
12 describes how Serb forces were looting and burning homes in his
13 neighbourhood in Pec, forcing residents to flee, how he began to walk with
14 his family from Pec to the Montenegrin border, but then he was stopped by
15 Serb police and told to go back to Pec because buses had been arranged to
16 carry the Albanian population to Albania, and he subsequently walked back
17 to the centre of Pec where there were thousands of Albanian citizens
18 gathered, and during the course of the 27th and 28th of March, 1999, these
19 thousands of people were placed on buses and driven to the Albanian border
20 via Prizren.
21 Is this all new to you?
22 A. I state again, do you have a picture today in the twenty-first
23 century of those buses, of those trucks, showing the people being
24 deported? Am I telling lies or am I telling the truth? All you're doing
25 is showing me a map and making me look at the route they took. Everybody
1 knows the route they took and what was going on and what happened and why
2 they left. If you listen to me carefully, I explained that.
3 They had two goals for leaving. One-- or two reasons: One, to
4 show to the world their humanitarian catastrophe, and secondly, that the
5 Serb people should be exposed to NATO bombing. That's the whole point of
6 it, but I don't think you want to listen. You have your own -- well,
7 things that suit you.
8 Q. And after the end of March 1999, there were virtually no
9 Albanians left in Pec; correct?
10 A. Why don't you ask me whether after 1999, when KFOR entered, there
11 was a single Serb left who had lived there for centuries? They had lived
12 there for centuries. You keep asking me about the Siptars, whereas you
13 know why I'm here and what you should be asking me about. You're asking
14 me about the Siptars' deportation and I've told you why.
15 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Gvozdenovic, you must answer the questions to
16 the best of your ability.
17 MR. SAXON:
18 Q. I'll repeat --
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. President, the questions are
20 being repeated non-stop. If he asks a question, we can move on.
21 JUDGE ROBINSON: If we find that they're repetitive, we'll say so.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Very well. Thank you.
23 MR. SAXON:
24 Q. The question is after the end of March 1999, there were virtually
25 no Albanians left in Pec; correct?
1 A. As far as I know from sources -- now, I wasn't able to bring in
2 all the documents with me because I didn't know that's what we would be
3 discussing and that you were going to ask me that. I would have brought
4 you documents from the post office where I worked, where the Siptars on
5 that day, before the Italians arrived, they suddenly appeared. Three
6 thousand pension slips were handed out. Can you imagine? Three thousand
7 people turned up to receive their pensions from the state of Serbia that
8 they never recognised.
9 Q. Sir --
10 A. So I don't know where they were until that time.
11 Q. Sir, would it be fair -- would it be fair to say that you feel
12 some hostility towards the Albanian population of Kosovo?
13 A. I really don't know how you came to that conclusion. I told you
14 nicely that when I worked in the post office I had friends and sat with
15 them and talked to them and tried to dissuade them from leaving their
16 native town.
17 Q. We'll talk about how you --
18 A. It's something that I wouldn't wish upon even my greatest enemy.
19 Q. We'll talk about that in a moment. Do you know a man called
20 Edison Zatriqi?
21 A. Well, the surname is familiar but not the name, because there are
22 many people with the surname Zatriqi in Pec.
23 Q. Edison Zatriqi owned a bus company in Pec in 1998 and 1999. It
24 was called Flamingo Tours. Does that ring any bells?
25 A. Yes. Yes. He was a neighbour of mine, yes, from Flamingo Tours.
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 Q. Did you have any -- any problems with Mr. Zatriqi's integrity?
2 A. He was a well respected citizen of Pec, as far as I know, and I
3 think one of his sons worked in the state security service.
4 Q. Well, Mr. Zatriqi testified in this court on the 25th of April,
5 2002 - and this is at page 3807 to 3808 of the transcript, and it's
6 Exhibit 113 - and Mr. Zatriqi testified that on the 23rd of March 1999,
7 the day before the NATO bombing campaign began, he was forced to turn over
8 several of his buses to Serb policemen and that he subsequently saw his
9 buses and buses being -- and buses owned by other Kosovo Albanian
10 transport companies, he subsequently saw these buses being used to
11 transport Kosovo Albanians to the border.
12 Did you hear anything about that?
13 A. No. Truly I haven't heard about that, so I can't tell you about
14 something I didn't see. All I'm telling you of is what I personally saw
15 and where I personally was, and I stand by every word I say when I talk
16 about things like that.
17 Q. Well, during your direct examination you talked about a lot of
18 things that you didn't see, but I will move on.
19 Mr. Zatriqi's buses were burned at the end of the war. Do you
20 think that would be in Mr. Zatriqi's benefit to burn his property himself?
21 A. I tell you again, I didn't see it, and I can't talk about things
22 that I didn't see.
23 Q. Do you think it would have been in the -- to the benefit of the
24 KLA or, as you call them, the bandits, to burn the property owned by
25 Kosovo Albanians such as the buses owned by Mr. Zatriqi?
1 A. I didn't see that, so I can't see whether they were bandits that
2 set this on fire or what.
3 Q. You were a reserve police officer, weren't you?
4 A. No. I worked in providing security for the post office and a
5 private pizzeria, Pizza parlor.
6 Q. The truth is you know full well how the deportation of Kosovo
7 Albanians from Pec occurred because you took part in it, didn't you?
8 A. I don't understand the question. How do you mean "take part"?
9 Q. That you were a member of a paramilitary unit, and in particular
10 you took part in the deportations of Catholic Albanians living on a street
11 called Boro Vukmirovic in the town of Pec after the start of the NATO
12 bombing campaign in March 1999, didn't you?
13 A. No. How could I have been in a paramilitary unit if I worked as a
14 security detail for the post office? There is documentation to bear that
15 out. This is quite amazing. I don't know who supplied you with that kind
16 of information. Can you show me the document showing a photograph of me
17 deporting anyone, or is there a single Siptar here who testified ever
18 mention my name and surname? Can you imagine? I'm a parent who came in
19 here to talk about the violent killing of my child, and you ask me whether
20 I deported somebody.
21 Mr. President, this is really beyond all reason.
22 Q. Mr. Gvozdenovic, it's your testimony today, then, that you took
23 absolutely no part -- remember you are testifying under oath today -- that
24 you took absolutely no part in the deportation of Kosovo Albanian citizens
25 in Pec? Is that your testimony?
1 A. Yes. How could I have taken part in something when I worked as a
2 security detail for the post office? You can find proof of that, that I
3 provided security for buildings and facilities that were being safeguarded
4 from being stormed by terrorists or bands of gangs. So we were providing
5 security for socially-owned and state-owned property. And there are
6 documents and lists to bear that out. I did shift work. You can see my
7 shifts. This is quite ludicrous. I don't know where you get that from.
8 Q. And as a person who worked in security matters, occasionally you
9 had to travel around, didn't you?
10 A. No. My house was quite near from my work, place of work, so I
11 didn't need to use any transport.
12 Q. But the post office you worked at, that was in the centre of Pec,
14 A. Yes. Yes.
15 Q. It's your testimony today that you did not see any systematic
16 deportation of Kosovo Albanian citizens from the centre of Pec in March of
17 1999? Is that your testimony?
18 A. I'm telling you again, while we were working, until I left work,
19 when I come in the evening to take up my shift and duty, take over duty
20 from the person before me, I would go round the facility, tour the
21 facility. So when I toured the facility, I would meet my friends the
22 Siptars when that happened.
23 So let me repeat: I talked to them and I tried to dissuade them
24 from leaving their homes. And let me tell you again, we Serbs know full
25 well what it means to leave your homes. And I wouldn't even wish it upon
1 my greatest enemy. So I keep repeating this same thing to you. I would
2 like to see proof and evidence of my deporting anyone. Really.
3 Q. Who did you try to dissuade from leaving their homes? Can you
4 give us a name?
5 A. There were a lot of them, and I don't want to give the names of
6 those people now because there can be repercussions. There can be
7 repercussions. There are specific people in that respect. I don't want
8 to put anybody into a difficult situation.
9 MR. SAXON: Your Honour, may we please move into private session
10 for a moment?
11 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. We will move into private session.
12 [Private session]
5 [Open session]
6 MR. SAXON: Are we in open session?
7 THE REGISTRAR: Yes.
8 MR. SAXON:
9 Q. You testified previously that you were never a member of the
10 reserve police; is that correct?
11 A. During -- or, rather, 1979 I did my military service, and as a
12 reservist, I was involved with the military but then there were more
13 Siptars there then so they were the ones who were in command. I don't
14 know why you're asking about this. Everybody knows this very well.
15 Q. My question is very simple: Were you ever a member of the reserve
16 police in Pec? Yes or no, please.
17 A. No, no, no. The reserve police, no.
18 Q. Well, I'd like to show you a document.
19 MR. SAXON: Perhaps this could be distributed, marked for
20 identification and given to the Judges. A copy can be given to the
21 witness, please. Okay. If a copy could be placed on the ELMO, then.
22 Q. You can take a look, sir, at the very first page. This is a
23 document entitled "Formational posts of the reserve police department
24 detachment (local community) Centar."
25 Momir Radulovic is the commander, Stefan Stanjevic the deputy
1 commander, and Dragan Vucinic assistant of the reserve police detachment.
2 A little bit further down, it says Slobodan Zivkovic, the commander of the
3 2nd Company Puhovac, and then a little bit further down we see the first
4 platoon at Patrijarsijska street. I'm sorry for my pronunciation, or lack
6 On the next page we see the 2nd platoon at Pariska Street,
7 and a bit further down we see two groups of names, and in the second
8 group, at number 6, we see -- excuse me, at number 7, we see the name
9 Zvonimir Gvozdenovic. Do you see that?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. That's you, isn't it?
12 A. No. There's another Gvozdenovic in Pec. First of all, I do not
13 live in Patrijarsijska Street. We have already established I live in
14 Pariska, and there is major difference involved.
15 Q. This platoon is the platoon for Pariska Street. Is there
16 another Zvonimir Gvozdenovic living, or who lived on Pariska
18 A. No, but let me tell you I do not understand at all how my name got
19 there, because I worked at the security for the post office, so I could
20 not have been in this group at all. Everybody knows that very well.
21 Would a state company allow me to go to some kind of paramilitary unit?
22 And after all, these were not paramilitary units the way you want to
23 portray them.
24 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Saxon, is the first name of this witness Zvonimir
25 or Zvonko? Are they the same one?
1 MR. SAXON: It's my understanding that they are variations of the
2 same name, Your Honour.
3 JUDGE KWON: Could you clarify that with the witness.
4 MR. SAXON:
5 Q. Your formal name is Zvonimir, isn't it, sir, your formal first
7 A. Yes. Yes, yes.
8 MR. SAXON: Your Honour, I have no further questions.
9 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you, Mr. Saxon.
10 MR. SAXON: I would ask that this be entered as an exhibit, Your
11 Honour, if this is the appropriate time.
12 THE REGISTRAR: That will be 867.
13 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. And I believe we have some photographs, if
14 the accused wishes to have them exhibited. We'll do that later.
15 Any re-examination?
16 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Just one question, not to keep this
17 witness any longer. I'm just going to put one question so he wouldn't
18 have to stay during the break as well.
19 Re-examined by Mr. Milosevic:
20 Q. Mr. Gvozdenovic, you explained a few moments ago that you worked
21 at the post office.
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. If I understood you correctly, you said just now that towards the
24 very end of the war, 3.000 Albanians came to receive their pensions at the
25 post office.
1 A. Yes, yes.
2 Q. You said that in response to what was said that the Albanians were
3 driven out of Pec.
4 A. Yes, yes.
5 Q. From who did they receive this pension at the post office?
6 A. Well, it's well known; from the state of Serbia, not Albania.
7 Q. So pensions are received once a month, right?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. So on this same day, they all came and took their pensions?
10 A. Yes, yes. Documentation is there and all of this can be
12 Q. Thank you, Mr. Gvozdenovic.
13 A. You're welcome.
14 JUDGE ROBINSON: Well, Mr. Milosevic, do you want to have the
15 photographs exhibited, and the video?
16 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] By all means. By all means. I
17 tendered all of it. And also you can take the on-site investigation
18 report and have it marked for identification, and also the other documents
19 that you refused to admit because they had not been translated.
20 [Trial Chamber confers]
21 JUDGE KWON: I'm not sure whether we exhibited the previous
22 witness's binder as D295, and we'll reserve the next number for the
23 schedule, reference schedule, and then give this binder the next number.
24 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour. So D296 will be reserved for
25 the schedule, and then D297.
1 JUDGE ROBINSON: Have you given numbers for the video and the
3 THE REGISTRAR: [Microphone not activated]
4 JUDGE ROBINSON: 297?
5 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour. 297, tab 1, tab 3.
6 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. As we had indicated before, Mr. Milosevic,
7 the untranslated reports will not be admitted.
8 Mr. Gvozdenovic, that concludes your testimony. Thank you for
9 coming to give it, and you may now leave.
10 And we are adjourned for 20 minutes. We are adjourned.
11 --- Recess taken at 12.20 p.m.
12 --- On resuming at 12.42 p.m.
13 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, your next witness.
14 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Radovan Paponjak is my next
16 witness, Mr. Robinson, but now during the course of the break I
17 established that he is not accessible. Professor Rakic informed me that
18 last night an official from the Victims and Witnesses Unit in his presence
19 said to Mr. Paponjak to be prepared at 2.15 to be transported to the
20 prison in order to be able to see me. According to what Mr. Rakic knows,
21 he went to church. He could not get in touch with him over the telephone,
22 and he dialed both his mobile telephone number and his hotel. So he is
23 not available, but through no fault of his own. As I said, last night the
24 official concerned told him that he should be ready at 2.15 to be taken to
25 see me at the prison.
1 I am prepared to question him, but unfortunately, he is not here
3 [Trial Chamber confers]
4 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Kay, is that the same witness as you thought
5 had not been given clearance to give evidence?
6 MR. KAY: Yes. That's Paponjak anyway, but he could probably have
7 been dealt with by Mr. Milosevic for an hour until anything material to
8 that issue was dealt with, then we've got the intervening week for the
9 waiver to come through. So I think a decision had been taken just to get
10 on with it and deal with him, which was my view anyway.
11 JUDGE BONOMY: So why -- well, you probably can't answer this, but
12 why would Professor Rakic not make it clear that the arrangement was
14 MR. KAY: I don't know.
15 JUDGE BONOMY: The explanation don't make much sense to me at the
17 MR. KAY: No. Perhaps -- I think these are unrelated issues. I
18 think they're not merged in any way. There was this other problem, but as
19 a technical hitch on the waiver, the decision was made just to get on with
20 it, which was in the interests of the trial.
21 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, perhaps Mr. Milosevic can explain why
22 Professor Rakic wouldn't make it clear that that was not an appropriate
23 arrangement, that the witness would have to be here today.
24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I cannot give an explanation. I
25 only received this information from Professor Rakic, that your official
1 from here told Mr. Paponjak to be ready today at 2.15 at the same time
2 when he informed Jasovic and Gvozdenovic that they should be ready in the
3 morning in order to be brought here. That is the only information I have,
4 and I received just now during this last break.
5 I did not ask Professor Rakic any additional questions because I
6 didn't think that there was any need for me to put any other questions to
8 May I just add that Professor Rakic tried to reach him by phone.
9 In his hotel room there was no answer, and his cell phone is off. He
10 tried to reach him from here.
11 All in all, Mr. Paponjak is not absent through any fault of his
13 JUDGE ROBINSON: Well, regrettably, we'll have to adjourn. We
14 will lose -- we will have lost about an hour and 15 minutes.
15 Mr. Milosevic, in future, I think all the -- all the arrangements
16 must be made to ensure that your witnesses are present, within reason, of
17 course. It's a little unclear to me why the witness is not here,
18 notwithstanding the explanation that you have given. But we will adjourn,
19 and we will resume on --
20 MR. KAY: The 3rd of May is the new date, we believe. 4th.
21 JUDGE ROBINSON: On Wednesday, the 4th of May. We will resume on
22 Wednesday, the 4th of May, at 9.00 a.m.
23 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 12.50 p.m.,
24 to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 4th day of
25 May, 2005, at 9.00 a.m.