1 Wednesday, 17 October 2007

2 [Open session]

3 [The accused entered court]

4 [The witness entered court]

5 --- Upon commencing at 9.04 a.m.

6 JUDGE PARKER: Good morning.

7 The affirmation still applies, Mr. Hutsch, as you have come used

8 to the idea by now.

9 It should be possible today, should you wish, for you to speak in

10 German, but the questions will be put to you in English and it will be up

11 to you.

12 Mr. Mettraux.

13 MR. METTRAUX: Thank you very much, Your Honour.

14 WITNESS: FRANZ-JOSEF HUTSCH [Resumed]

15 Cross-examination by Mr. Mettraux: [Continued]

16 Q. Good morning, Mr. Hutsch.

17 A. Good morning.

18 Q. Last night when we left off, I wanted to ask you a few more

19 questions about what you say you observed in the village of Ljuboten on

20 the 12th, in particular about your suggestions of having met in the

21 village Mr. Tarculovski, Johan, and Mr. Stojanov, Goran. Do you remember

22 saying that?

23 A. Yeah, I think so, yeah.

24 Q. And do you recall that, again, nothing in your notes of the 12th

25 mention you meeting either of those persons. Do you agree with that?

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. And is it correct that you have mentioned to the Office of the

3 Prosecutor that you, prior to that event, you had said to have met, or to

4 have seen in any case, Mr. Tarculovski on a number of occasions. Is that

5 correct?

6 A. Not on a number of occasions.

7 Q. Do you remember how many times you had seen? Was it one time, two

8 times?

9 A. One time.

10 Q. And do you recall where that was?

11 A. It's already in the -- in the transcript.

12 Q. Is that the meeting which you have mentioned which took place in

13 Tetovo. Is that correct?

14 A. Did we speak about the 12th, or did we speak about the general

15 term.

16 Q. I am asking you -- you indicated that you said you saw

17 Mr. Tarculovski in the village of Ljuboten on the 12th of August of 2001.

18 Is that correct?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. And you've indicated also that you had met Mr. Tarculovski on at

21 least one prior occasion, prior to this event. This is the 27th of June,

22 2007, page 2772. Do you recall that?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. And do you recall that you had mentioned meeting Mr. Tarculovski

25 in the village or the town of Tetovo?

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. And is that correct that you have suggested that the person who

3 introduced you to Mr. Tarculovski was Mr. Goran Zdravkovski. Do you

4 recall saying that?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. And do you remember what the position of Mr. Zdravkovski was at

7 the time?

8 A. I think he was the commander of a special police unit.

9 Q. Do you remember the name of that unit?

10 A. Probably the Tigers.

11 Q. Can you remember anyone else present on that occasion when you

12 said you met Mr. Tarculovski through Mr. Zdravkovski?

13 A. The manager of the -- not the manager. The manager of the textile

14 factory Teteks, and the man, he was also manager of the hotel Tetovo

15 Theke.

16 Q. An aside from this occasion, when you said you met Mr. Tarculovski

17 in the town or city of Tetovo, do you recall any other occasions when you

18 met Mr. Tarculovski?

19 A. Another time when he was guarding the president.

20 Q. And do you recall mentioning to the Office of the Prosecutor, in

21 your statement, that you had several conversations and interviews with

22 Goran Zdravkovski? Do you recall saying that?

23 A. I said that I met him sometimes, yes.

24 Q. Well, do you recall specifically saying that you had several

25 conversations and interviews with him?

1 A. I had interviews with him.

2 Q. Did you publish any of those interviews, Mr. Hutsch?

3 A. It was not a interview like you tried to -- to make now. It was

4 more background speech where he was explaining me the general situation in

5 the Tetovo area.

6 Q. Well, isn't the situation that you have never met with

7 Mr. Zdravkovski, Mr. Hutsch?

8 A. I suggest that we can, first, take him face to face to me; and,

9 second, is that we can ask the manager and the receptionist of the Tetovo

10 Theke hotel.

11 Q. Isn't the truth that you never met Mr. Tarculovski in Tetovo in

12 the month of March 2001, as you claimed?

13 JUDGE PARKER: March or June?

14 MR. METTRAUX: Well, the statement, Your Honour, suggests the

15 month of March.

16 Q. Was it March or June, Mr. Hutsch?

17 A. March.

18 Q. Isn't the case, Mr. Hutsch, that you never met Mr. Tarculovski in

19 Tetovo in the month of March of 2001?

20 A. No, it is not the truth.

21 Q. Isn't the truth, Mr. Hutsch, that Mr. Tarculovski at the time was

22 the body-guard of the prime minister?

23 A. I'm not aware what he was doing in this time.

24 Q. Isn't the truth, Mr. Hutsch, that you have invented this story.

25 Do you agree with that?

1 A. So, we have two other witnesses, and I think we can -- we can go

2 further with that.

3 Q. Well, I'd like to show you a statement, Mr. Hutsch.

4 MR. METTRAUX: This is Rule 65 ter 1D309.

5 Q. Mr. Hutsch, what will appear in front of you is a statement of

6 Mr. Goran Zdravkovski, who you've mentioned and who you said introduced

7 you to Mr. Tarculovski, and it was a statement taken by the Defence of Mr.

8 Boskoski earlier this year.

9 I would like to read to you the statement. You can see that, at

10 paragraph 1, he was asked to give a statement by the Defence of

11 Mr. Boskoski. His name, date of birth is in paragraph 2; his father's

12 name.

13 Then, at paragraph 4, it says: "On 25th of May of 2001, I became

14 commander of the Tigers unit."

15 First, I'd like to draw your attention to the date, Mr. Hutsch.

16 It is the 25th of May, 2001. Can you see that?

17 Mr. Hutsch, can you see paragraph 4?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. So, in fact, in March of 2001, he was not the commander of the

20 Tigers unit. Is that correct?

21 A. That's written here, yes.

22 Q. If we go down to paragraph 5, it says this: "I was asked to

23 comment on the following paragraph from a statement which I was told was

24 written in the statement, as printed, of a German journalist named

25 Franz-Josef Hutsch. It is paragraph 163 of the statement.

1 "At the time, Johan Tarculovski was the commanding policemen in

2 Tetovo. We met on several occasions when I had conversations and

3 interviews with Goran Zdravkovski, former command of the Tigri unit.

4 "In the course of our conversation, I said I wanted to go to the

5 front line in Tetovo, as near as possible. He accompanied me as far as

6 the main road passing by the orthodox church in Tetovo. A unit of police

7 reservists was positioned in the street.

8 "Goran Zdravkovski introduced me to Johan Tarculovski. On that

9 occasion, Tarculovski and I talked about the current situation. I visited

10 the positions which were under the command of Tarculovski. He was wearing

11 a camouflage police uniform. I did not hear anything about his rank. I

12 saw police reservists and armed civilians at these positions."

13 So this is taken from your own statement, Mr. Hutsch.

14 Then, Mr. Zdravkovski was asked a few questions, and he said

15 this: "Firstly, I want to say that I never met Franz-Josef Hutsch. I

16 never gave a interview or talked to this person in Tetovo or anywhere

17 else."

18 So, do you agree, Mr. Hutsch, that, at least as far as this

19 statement is concerned, there is a pretty strong discrepancy between that

20 you gave here and what Mr. Zdravkovski is saying. Do you agree with that?

21 A. I suggest that we will call up Mr. Tastanovski, Milesav

22 Tastanovski, and the manager from the Theke hotel to confirm that I met

23 around middle up to end of March. I think it was the second week in March

24 around --

25 [Overlapping Speakers]

1 Q. Well, let's deal with Zdravkovski --

2 A. -- probably --

3 Q. -- for a minute --

4 A. -- and let me finish, or we turn to a point where I answer your

5 questions with "yes" or"no."

6 Q. I will you to answer the question, Mr. Hutsch, if you --

7 A. I answer that we could take two other witnesses, and that this

8 meeting with Mr. Zdravkovski took place in the in the Teteks textile file

9 in Tetovo; and among these were Mr. Tastanovski, Minister Tastanovksi, and

10 the manager from the Theke hotel.

11 Q. Well, do you agree, and I will put the question to you again,

12 Mr. Hutsch, do you agree that, according to the statement of Mr.

13 Zdravkovski, this meeting that you are alleging never took place? Do you

14 agree with that?

15 A. No.

16 Q. Are you suggesting that this statement is not contradicting your

17 version?

18 A. If you just meet somebody who is confirming that is what is

19 written, I think we are wasting time. You don't need me for that, because

20 you with present that to the Court or the Chamber without me.

21 Q. I will ask the question a third time, Mr. Hutsch. Do you agree

22 that the statement made by Mr. Zdravkovksi in relation to the suggestion

23 that you had a meeting with him at which he introduced to Mr. Tarculovski

24 is contradicted by his statement? Do you agree with that?

25 A. Yes.

1 Q. If we go to paragraph 7, Mr. Hutsch, it says this: "Secondly, I

2 must say that, at the time of the events in Tetovo, I did not know who

3 Johan Tarculovski was. I have never met Johan Tarculovski. I know him

4 from the media."

5 And at paragraph 8 it goes on to say: "On 18, 19 March 2001, I

6 worked in the DBK state security and counter-intelligence. I was not the

7 commander of the Tigri at the time."

8 And at paragraph 9, he says: "I was not physically present in

9 Tetovo at the time."

10 And then at paragraph 10, it says: "The statement that I

11 introduced Mr. Tarculovski to this journalist is false. As I have said, I

12 did not know Mr. Tarculovski at the time, nor did the events that

13 Mr. Hutsch talked about took place."

14 And then at paragraph 12, he reiterates the fact that: "I became

15 commander of the Tigri on 25th of May of 2001."

16 So let me put these propositions to you, Mr. Hutsch.

17 A. There's another witness who was taking part in this meeting that

18 was a police officer, and I think it was a inspector, I'm not sure, who

19 was works in the counter-drug section of the Ministry of Interior. He was

20 trained in Germany in Buchholz in der Nordheide. Buchholz is written

21 B-U-C-H-H-O-L-Z. This inspector also were in this -- in this meeting.

22 Q. Well, let me put the question to you, first, Mr. Hutsch. Would

23 you agree that, according to the statement of Mr. Zdravkovski, the

24 assertion contained in your statement contained at least five major

25 contradictions with his statement, about the position which you claim

1 Mr. Zdravkovksi had at the time, about his alleged presence in Tetovo at

2 the time, about your alleged meetings and conversations with him, about

3 the alleged meeting you, Mr. Zdravkovski, and Mr. Tarculovski, about

4 Mr. Zdravkovksi acquaintance with Mr. Tarculovski, and there is actually a

5 sixth about his role and position.

6 Do you agree with that?

7 A. Yes.

8 MR. METTRAUX: Your Honour, I also refer for the transcript to the

9 evidence of (redacted) of the 14th of June of 2007. I apologise.

10 Could that be redacted, Your Honour, the name? I believe the name might

11 have been --

12 JUDGE PARKER: Yes.

13 MR. METTRAUX: This would be page 2108 and following about the

14 date at which he ceased to be the commander of the unit.

15 Q. Mr. Hutsch, do you recall that you said you saw another individual

16 in the village of Ljuboten on that occasion, a man called -- that you said

17 was called Goran Stojkov. Do you recall saying that?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. Is it correct also that, again, there is no reference of

20 Mr. Stojkov being present in Ljuboten in your notes of the 12th of August

21 of 2001. Is that correct?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. And is that -- had you been informed -- or I should put it that

24 way. Are aware of the fact that Mr. Stojkov was interviewed by the Office

25 of the Prosecutor?

1 A. No.

2 Q. Are you aware of the fact that Mr. Stojkov told the Office of the

3 Prosecutor that, on that date, he was in the town of Ohrid where the

4 preparations for the Ohrid Agreement were being made?

5 A. No.

6 Q. Are you aware that at that time Mr. Stojkov was the body-guard of

7 the prime minister?

8 A. No.

9 Q. You've indicated, I believe, in your statement, that when you

10 first -- when you say you first met Mr. Stojkov in the village of

11 Ljuboten, you say, you didn't know his last name. You knew him as Goran.

12 Is that correct?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. And you've indicated, I believe, to the Prosecutor that you

15 learned about his last name, you say, as Stojkov from another person. Do

16 you recall saying that?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. Can you name the person who you say gave you the name of that

19 person?

20 A. That was my -- my language assistant.

21 Q. And do you know where your language assistant got the name from?

22 A. No.

23 Q. I'd like to go, Mr. Hutsch, for a moment to the 12th of August.

24 That's Sunday. You've indicated in your evidence in chief and in your

25 statement that you left the village at around 5.30, 1730. Do you recall

1 that?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. Do you recall what road you took to go back from where you say you

4 were on the 12th.

5 A. We were passing the road to Rastak and going over the -- the east

6 road to Skopje.

7 Q. And did you go directly to Skopje at the time?

8 A. No. I had a meeting with some other people afterwards in the

9 early evening.

10 Q. Do you recall who those people were?

11 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: The interpreters request

12 the speaker not to overlap, please.

13 MR. METTRAUX: Mr. Hutsch, we're being asked again to pause.

14 THE WITNESS: And, probably, may I have the transcript here on the

15 screen. Thanks a lot.

16 MR. METTRAUX:

17 Q. Sorry, Mr. Hutsch. I will ask the question again. Do you recall

18 who those people were, the people that you had the meeting with, after you

19 say you left the village of Ljuboten?

20 A. Yeah, I recall.

21 Q. Can you give the names of those people?

22 A. No. They don't have to do nothing with this case.

23 Q. Well, in that case, I will insist and ask you to give us the name,

24 Mr. Hutsch, please.

25 A. No.

1 Q. Is there any particular reason are you suggesting they are some of

2 your sources again?

3 A. They are interview partners of mine.

4 Q. Did you publish any paper in relation to these people?

5 A. I did so, yes.

6 Q. Could you indicate what articles you published in relation to

7 these people?

8 A. For example, things that were in context with the war in

9 Macedonia.

10 Q. Could you be a bit more precise perhaps, Mr. Hutsch?

11 A. No.

12 Q. And where did this meeting you, you say you had, take place?

13 A. One of the meetings was in the old Caravanserai, one of the

14 restaurant in the old Muslim part of Skopje, and the other one took part

15 in the area of the shoe factory.

16 Q. And, again, was anyone else present with you? Was anyone of your

17 language assistant present with you?

18 A. There were in this moment the Albanian language assistant with me,

19 but both meetings were done in German and in English.

20 Q. And the interpreter is one of those persons you don't want to give

21 the name of. Is that correct?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. And can you recall at what time those meetings, you say you had,

24 finished?

25 A. 1930, around.

1 Q. And after that time, do you recall what you did?

2 A. I went to the -- to the hotel.

3 Q. And was your hotel in Skopje?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Do you recall the name of the hotel?

6 A. It was the Dal Met Fu.

7 Q. Was that the hotel where you stayed?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. And was that the same hotel that you stayed all that week?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. And you've indicated also that later, on that night, you went to

12 the Dal Met Fu restaurant. Is that correct?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. And that is the restaurant which is part of the same hotel. Is

15 that correct?

16 And you indicated to the Office of the Prosecutor that around

17 8.00 p.m. on that night, the 12th of August, you saw Mr. Boskoski, you

18 say, with a person you believe, or you say, was a person known by the

19 nickname "Bucuk." Do you recall saying that?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. Is it correct, sir, again, that this is not something that you had

22 put in your notes. Is that correct?

23 A. Not in the notes that -- that I that you have already, yes.

24 Q. Are you suggesting, Mr. Hutsch, that there are other notes which

25 clue that pick meeting which you haven't given to the Office of the

1 Prosecutor?

2 A. I have notes for example with the number plate of a car.

3 Q. I will come to that particular issue in a moment. I wish to ask

4 you a few questions about that.

5 Did you know shows particular notes to the Prosecutor, Mr. Hutsch?

6 A. No.

7 Q. Is that correct also that you declined to provide the original of

8 your notes to the Office of the Prosecutor, and I'm talking about the 12th

9 and the 14th, that you insisted to keep those and that you only gave a

10 copy. Is that correct?

11 A. No. I gave the original notebooks from the 12th and 14th to the

12 Prosecutor.

13 Q. But you kept the originals. Is that correct?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. Well, Mr. Hutsch --

16 A. I got them back.

17 Q. Yes. There's a document I'd like to show you, Mr. Hutsch. That's

18 Rule 65 ter 1D304.1.

19 Mr. Hutsch, what will appear in front of you is a statement of the

20 director of the Dal Met Fu hotel, where you say you stayed that night on

21 the 12th and also, as you just said, the rest of the week. It is a

22 statement taken by the Defence ever Mr. Boskoski.

23 I will read out what this person you said. His name is Branislav

24 Dimitrov. At paragraph 1, he says: "I have been the director of the

25 Dal Met Fu Bed and Breakfast Hotel in Skopje for many year, I think, since

1 1993 until present. The hotel has six rooms which is why it was

2 registered as a bed and breakfast. I was the director in 2001, too.

3 "Proper records are kept of all of the hotel guests in the

4 register of guests. In keeping with the regulations, the register of

5 guests must be kept for seven years. The register of guests for 2001 is

6 kept in the hotel archives. All guests staying in our hotel are properly

7 registered. When I was asked whether Franz-Josef Hutsch had been a guest

8 in our hotel in 2001, I consulted the register of gusts before providing a

9 answer."

10 Paragraph 5 says: "Franz-Josef Hutsch was a guest in our hotel in

11 August 2001. He stayed in room 14. The arrival was registered on 22nd

12 August, 2001, and departure on 31st August, 2001. He proved his

13 identity," -- sorry, "he proved his identify with an identity card issued

14 by the Federal Republic of Germany, number 1078343868."

15 So, in fact, Mr. Hutsch, isn't that correct that not only did you

16 not stay at the Hotel Dal Met Fu, as you claim, during those days, but I

17 am putting it to that you were not in Skopje at the time. Is that

18 correct?

19 A. That's false. And I suggest to -- to have a look at the register,

20 especially after the experience of the German government with the El Masri

21 case, where hotel registries in Macedonia changed suddenly. There's

22 another point wrong. An identity card has much more numbers than this

23 one. So it is impossible, for example, and it is false, for example, that

24 my identity was proved with a card number like that.

25 Q. Well, I'm putting to you, sir, that it's again one of those

1 stories you have made and that, in fact, you did -- you were not where you

2 claim to have been. Do you agree with that?

3 A. I think, Your Honour, if it is possible, I would like to answer in

4 German.

5 JUDGE PARKER: I believe it should be so, if you would commence,

6 we will check that it is working.

7 [Witness answered through interpreter]

8 MR. METTRAUX:

9 Q. Mr. Hutsch, can you start responding so we can verify whether the

10 translation is working?

11 A. Yeah.

12 [Interpretation] Mr. Mettraux, your hypothesis, that will not be

13 any more true if you repeat it.

14 Q. Well, in that case, Mr. Hutsch, I will show you a document which

15 may assist you.

16 MR. METTRAUX: It is Rule 65 ter 1D304.2.

17 JUDGE PARKER: While that is coming up, Mr. Mettraux, would you

18 please indicate the correct spelling of the name of the hotel and the

19 restaurant.

20 MR. METTRAUX: Absolutely, Your Honour. It is, I believe, D-A-L,

21 M-E-T, F-U, Dal Met Fu. Simply for Your Honours -- an indication to Your

22 Honours, this is in e-court as one single document. This is the register

23 of the hotel from page 1D00-2902 to page 1D00-2917. This is an English

24 translation of the original which is to be found at pages 1D00-2886 to

25 1D00-2901 and it covers the period from 8, 9 August of 2001, to 30, 31st

1 August of 2001.

2 Q. Mr. Hutsch --

3 MR. METTRAUX: I wonder if only one of the document could be shown

4 at this time so that the entire columns could be apparent on the screen.

5 A. What I notice here is that in the original -- well, here you can

6 see the English copy. But in the original, throughout the days, it's the

7 same handwriting every day. But at that time there was not only a young

8 woman, a young student working there, I think her name was Snjezana, but

9 at the same there was a student of arts of who-- a male student of arts

10 who was working in the reception, so I'm rather surprised that everything

11 is written in the same handwriting here.

12 Q. I'll ask you this, Mr. Hutsch: Do you know if, at the time when

13 the six people that you see on the screen -- I'm sorry, they're actually

14 five people. There was twice the same name. Do you know if, at the time

15 when those people were registered or noted in the record, there were

16 several people at entrance of the hotel at the reception? Are you

17 aware -- are you-- Do you have knowledge after that fact?

18 A. There were a few other guests there, I know that. I am not

19 authorised to talk about one of the guests. The authorisation that I got

20 from the German Minister of Defence, so I can't talk about that person.

21 But the guests, I knew the guests, and one of them can confirm my presence

22 there over a longer period of time. You could get this information

23 through the German Ministry for Foreign Affairs and then the Ministry of

24 Defence.

25 Q. I will ask you my question once again, and I will ask to you

1 answer it. Are you -- do you have knowledge that, at the time when the

2 guests that appear on this particular page, that there had been several

3 people in the reception of the hotel? Are you suggesting that you have

4 knowledge of that fact?

5 A. There were a number of people present. It depended on when one

6 was there. Usually, the young female student was there in the morning and

7 the other male student was there in the afternoon and at noon time, and in

8 the evening, I believe, but I'm not sure. I think there was -- the male

9 student was there until about 10.00 in the evening.

10 Q. I will ask you the question a third time, Mr. Hutsch. At the time

11 when those particular guests were entered into the log-book, do you have

12 knowledge of the fact that several people worked at the reception of the

13 hotel, yes or no?

14 A. There was only one person there at a time.

15 Q. So, if I can ask you the next question then, do you agree that

16 your name doesn't appear on this particular page of the register. Do you

17 agree with that?

18 A. Yes.

19 MR. METTRAUX: Can we turn, please, to the next page.

20 Q. Do you agree that on the dates 10, 11 August, your name doesn't

21 appear on the register of the hotel. Do you agree with that?

22 A. Could you please show me the original in Macedonian.

23 Q. That would be, I believe, starting at 1D00-2887.

24 A. I see, once again, that it is exactly the same handwriting for all

25 the names written throughout, which is very, very much a surprise to me.

1 Q. And perhaps can you answer my question. Do you see your name on

2 this page, Mr. Hutsch?

3 A. No, I don't.

4 MR. METTRAUX: Can we turn to the next page in the English, please,

5 first?

6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm quite satisfied with the

7 Macedonian version here.

8 MR. METTRAUX:

9 Q. I'll show you the English version first, Mr. Hutsch.

10 Can you see your name anywhere on this page. That's the record of

11 the 12 and 13 of August of 2001?

12 A. No, I can't.

13 MR. METTRAUX: Can Mr. Hutsch be shown the same page in

14 Macedonian. That would be 1D00-2888, please.

15 Q. That's the same page in Macedonian, Mr. Hutsch. Do you see your

16 name anywhere?

17 A. No. But I do note here that from the number, 254, there is a

18 different handwriting, which is very carefully written, very perfectly

19 written.

20 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... any suggestions to be made

21 about that, Mr. Hutsch?

22 A. You're the master of drawing conclusions.

23 Q. I'm asking, Mr. Hutsch. That's the only --

24 A. I could only speculate here, and I don't wish to do so.

25 Q. But you agree, a minute ago, you were saying that there was

1 something suspicious about the fact that one person appeared to have

2 written a number of record into the transcript. Do you recall that??

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... on anything suspicious about

5 the fact that a different person has written certain of the names there?

6 A. It's rather strange, because all the guests would arrived at the

7 same time, and there was only one -- if there was only one person there to

8 write all the names down. I do know that the people, the guests arrived

9 at different times of day. So there would be not this continuity and not

10 such a system in the writing here. Here, from the 8th until the 13th of

11 August, only one person was doing the work, and there is no deviation in

12 the handwriting at all and I think that ought to be analysed.

13 Q. Well, what about, perhaps, Mr. Hutsch, if there was one person

14 that was making all those entries at once, do you think it is a

15 possibility?

16 A. That would be odd, because I checked in with several different

17 people and the other guests, too. They were met by different people.

18 This is the experience that the German government had in the El Masri

19 trial, too, the very same thing, which is also an investigative committee

20 of the European commission, by the way.

21 Q. Let's keep with that document for the time being.

22 MR. METTRAUX: I will ask the registry it to go to the next page

23 in the English, please. That would be, I believe, 1D00-2905.

24 Q. Do you see your name anywhere, Mr. Hutsch. It is the period 13,

25 14, 15 of --

1 A. No, I don't know.

2 Q. Would you like to see the Macedonian as well?

3 A. Yes, of course.

4 MR. METTRAUX: Could I please bring up 1D00-2889, please.

5 Q. Do you have any additional comments, Mr. Hutsch, to make on this

6 page?

7 A. I would only be repeating myself.

8 MR. METTRAUX: In that case, can we turn to the next page, please,

9 of this document.

10 Q. Can you see your name anywhere on this page? This is the period

11 15 to 17 August, 2001?

12 A. No.

13 MR. METTRAUX: Can we turn to the next page, please.

14 Q. Can you see your name anywhere on the record. This is 16 to 18 of

15 August?

16 A. No.

17 MR. METTRAUX: Can we turn to the next page, please.

18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] However, I was not in Skopje at that

19 time;. I was in Germany.

20 MR. METTRAUX:

21 Q. Can you see your name anywhere on this page, Mr. Hutsch, 17 to 19

22 of August?

23 A. No.

24 MR. METTRAUX: Can we turn to the next page, please.

25 Q. This is the period covering 19 to 21st of August of 2001. Can you

1 see your name anywhere?

2 A. No.

3 MR. METTRAUX: Can we turn to the next page, please.

4 Q. This is the period from 20 August to 22 August. Can you see your

5 name anywhere on this page?

6 A. Could I see the Macedonian original, please.

7 Q. Of this particular page?

8 A. Yes, please.

9 MR. METTRAUX: If the registry could please bring up 1D00-2894.

10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You know exactly what I'm going to

11 answer.

12 MR. METTRAUX:

13 Q. Well, would you wish to comment on this page, Mr. Hutsch?

14 A. Yes. You can see between the number 288, it should be 288 and

15 292, the numbers are wrong at the bottom. It should be a -- I think the 3

16 is wrong.

17 And from the 21st of August, you can see number 288 and 299 or

18 293. It is the very same handwriting. There was absolutely no change of

19 personnel in that hotel, so one person was present at the reception 24

20 hours a day.

21 Q. Or that was the person who would make the annotation in the book.

22 Do you agree with that, Mr. Hutsch?

23 A. But that is the reception book, you said.

24 Q. That's correct. And you made a comment about the number,

25 Mr. Hutsch, and I'm not sure that the transcript picked up exactly what

1 you are suggesting. You said it should be 288 and 292. The numbers are

2 wrong at the bottom.

3 A. It started from 288, and I'm not sure whether that's 299 or 293.

4 There are seven guests missing if the numbers are to continue in proper

5 order.

6 Q. In any case, the official translation of this Tribunal has

7 interpreted that as being a "3," Mr. Hutsch, so that is 2-9-3, 293.

8 MR. METTRAUX: But I would like it turn to the next page in the

9 English, please. That is 1D00-2911.

10 MR. SAXON: Mr. Saxon.

11 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, Mr. Saxon.

12 MR. SAXON: Can my colleague please clarify where the official

13 interpreter of this Tribunal has clarified, not that it is the

14 interpreter's business to clarify, but where the interpreter has clarified

15 that the number is "293" as opposed to "299."

16 MR. METTRAUX: Well, Your Honour, it is page 1D00-2910. This is

17 the Defence document it is translated. It is a Defence document

18 translated by CLSS. It is DEF 10057 Doc. I think the document is still

19 on the screen, Your Honour.

20 MR. SAXON: I can see that now. Thank you.

21 MR. METTRAUX: If we can turn to the next page, please.

22 Q. Mr. Hutsch, can you see your name on this page?

23 A. Yes, I can.

24 Q. And it says it is number "296." Is that correct?

25 A. Yes.

1 Q. It says,"Franz-Josef Hutsch, born 3rd April 1963, [indiscernible]

2 Aachen, Germany," then it says, "ID card the Federal Republic of Germany,"

3 and then there's a number. It says that you stayed in room 14, and your

4 arrival is noted as the 22nd of August of 2001. Is that correct?

5 A. Yes. But what is not correct is the number of my identity card or

6 my passport. It was not possible to enter Macedonia with -- with a

7 identity card at the time. The number of the ID card, a German ID card,

8 is much longer.

9 Q. Well, can you recall from the top of your head what the identity

10 card -- your identity card number is, Mr. Hutsch.

11 A. It has -- it contains your birthday, and I don't see my birthday

12 here.

13 Q. But isn't it the record that German ID cards have on the top the

14 general numbering. Isn't that correct?

15 A. No. Part of the number -- part of the number contains one's

16 birthday.

17 Q. And do you recall arriving back from Germany on or around the 22nd

18 of August of 2001, Mr. Hutsch?

19 A. Yes, I do.

20 Q. And that's, again -- I'm sorry. You went to the Dal Met Fu hotel

21 at that time. Is that correct?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. And you were registered as a guest in the log-book. Is that

24 correct?

25 A. Yes.

1 MR. METTRAUX: If we can turn to the next page --

2 [Overlapping speakers]

3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Could you show me the Macedonian of

4 this page, too, please?

5 MR. METTRAUX: This would be 1D00-2896, please.

6 Q. And you are under number 296, Mr. Hutsch.

7 A. What is surprising here is that it looks like the handwriting of a

8 older person; whereas, both of the people working at the reception were

9 young people. The lady was in her early 20s. I think that was the first

10 writing, handwriting we saw, but I'm not sure, and this handwriting here

11 is certainly not the handwriting of a young student, a young person at the

12 reception.

13 Q. You are able, Mr. Hutsch, to approximate the age of a person by

14 his or her writing. Is that correct?

15 A. There would seem to be indications here. I do not believe that

16 this is the handwriting of a young person but this may be speculation on

17 my part, you're right.

18 MR. METTRAUX: Could we turn please to the next page of that

19 document.

20 Q. And do you agree, Mr. Hutsch, that you were registered the next

21 day as guest of the hotel. It is number 300. Is that correct?

22 A. Yes.

23 MR. METTRAUX: If we can turn to the next page, please.

24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] 305, I believe.

25 MR. METTRAUX:

1 Q. 300, I believe and 305. You are correct twice, Mr. Hutsch, yes.

2 One-- under 300, between the 23rd of August to the 24th of August; and

3 under 305, between the 24th of August and the 25th of August. Is that

4 correct?

5 A. Yes.

6 MR. METTRAUX: And then if we can turn to the next page. I'm

7 grateful.

8 Q. You're recorded, under number 310, is that correct, between 25th

9 of August to 26th of August, the same room?

10 A. Yes.

11 MR. METTRAUX: And if we go to the next page.

12 Q. You're recorded, again, under 314 for the period 26 to 27 of

13 August.

14 A. Yes.

15 MR. METTRAUX: And the next page, please.

16 Q. Under 319 for 27, 28th August. Is that correct?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. Perhaps, I'll ask you that. Do you recall how long you stayed?

19 Did you stay in Macedonia after your return to Germany until that point in

20 time when you started working for the embassy, or do you recall having had

21 any trips abroad in the meantime?

22 A. I would have to verify that.

23 Q. Do you recall going anywhere else in the country during this

24 period, the end of the month, to, you say, the middle of September?

25 A. Yes. You mean in Macedonia, do you?

1 Q. That's correct.

2 A. I would have to check that.

3 If I'm not mistaken, on the 31st, or is it the 30th? No, the 31st

4 of August, or on the 1st of September it was, that I left Skopje and I

5 think I went to Tetovo, because the German soldiers were there.

6 Q. I'll ask you a question, Mr. Hutsch, first, about the record of

7 the hotel. Do you agree that as far as this record of the hotel is

8 concerned, and based also on the statement of the director of the hotel,

9 these two documents suggest that, contrary to that you claimed, you did

10 not stay in that hotel at any time during the time relevant to those

11 events when you said that's where you stayed. Do you agree with that?

12 A. That is what you have shown here.

13 Q. And to go back to the events that you have mentioned on the 12th

14 of August, you have indicated that you say you saw Mr. Boskoski with a man

15 nickname "Bucuk" in the hotel -- I'm sorry, in the restaurant of the hotel

16 Dal Met Fu at around 8.00. Is that correct?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. And is that also correct, Mr. Hutsch, that, at no time during the

19 two interviews which you had with the Prosecutor, did you give any name or

20 any nickname of this person which you have now identified as "Bucuk."

21 A. That is true.

22 Q. And --

23 A. The name "Bucuk," I learned the name in May or June of this year

24 from a German official from the Landeskriminalamt in Hamburg, and I saw a

25 photo of the fellow and noted that the photograph corresponded to the

1 person that I had met. That was the occasion on -- when I first heard the

2 name mentioned.

3 Q. Can you mention the name of that German official, please,

4 Mr. Hutsch?

5 A. You know very well, and I think that was part of your evidence,

6 the evidence that you have brought here, that contacts with the press --

7 there were contacts with the press, including with the speaker of

8 Mr. Boskoski, and you know the context involved in such talks with

9 journalists.

10 Q. I'm going to ask you my question again, Mr. Hutsch. Could you

11 please give the name of the German official who you say showed you a

12 picture of the person you claim is "Bucuk"?

13 A. I would suggest that you contact the Landeskriminalamt in Hamburg.

14 Q. I will ask the question a third time, Mr. Hutsch. Could you

15 please give you a name of the German official which you claimed showed you

16 a picture of the person whom you say is "Bucuk"?

17 A. Mr. Mettraux, the last four days we have been discussing German

18 press law, and my answer is that in Germany we do have a law which

19 protects one's sources, and I must protect my sources here.

20 MR. METTRAUX: Your Honours, I will ask that the person be asked

21 to give the name of this particular official.

22 JUDGE PARKER: You have asked, Mr. Mettraux.

23 MR. METTRAUX: And can I ask the Court to ask Mr. Hutsch to give

24 the name.

25 JUDGE PARKER: Well, I'll do it for the form.

1 MR. METTRAUX: I'm grateful.

2 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Hutsch, are you able and willing to provide the

3 name of that person?

4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I would like to use the

5 Jonathan Wendell decision in this respect.

6 JUDGE PARKER: Is your answer "no"?

7 THE WITNESS: [In English] Sorry?

8 JUDGE PARKER: Is your answer "no"?

9 THE WITNESS: No -- yes. Sorry.

10 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.

11 MR. METTRAUX: I'm grateful to Your Honour.

12 Q. Mr. Hutsch, I'm putting it to you that you are, once again, making

13 up stories on the spot. Do you agree with that?

14 A. [Interpretation] Mr. Mettraux, Saint Augustine said, Hypotheses do

15 not become more true when they with repeated, and he was a very wise man,

16 Saint Augustine.

17 Q. Is that correct, sir, that in December 2006, when the Prosecution

18 interviewed you, you said didn't know the name of the man whom you claimed

19 to have seen with Mr. Boskoski on the 12th of August, you say, in the

20 Dal Met Fu restaurant. Is that correct?

21 A. That is true.

22 Q. But at the time, already, you were trying to associate

23 Mr. Boskoski with this person "Bucuk." Is that correct?

24 A. In the proofing stage, before the trial or before my evidence in

25 July or June, we discussed this point and I mentioned the name "Bucuk."

1 Mr. Saxon, who is very a very open and fair person, made a note

2 about it which was disclosed to you. It is true that, while I was

3 speaking to the Prosecutor, I did mention the name "Bucuk" but did not

4 have a clear name or any particular details about this name.

5 Q. Are you saying that in December of 2005 when -- of 2006, I

6 apologise, or at any other time, you actually mentioned the name "Bucuk"

7 in that context. Is that correct?

8 A. I just said that I only learned the name much later, and it was

9 during the proofing phase, in preparation for my testimony, that I did

10 mention the name.

11 Q. And, during the preparation for your testimony, you conducted a

12 investigation with the German police. Is that correct?

13 A. No. It was during research on another subject that it came up. I

14 was shown a photo, and this name was mentioned in relation to organised

15 crime.

16 Q. So you are saying that the picture of Bucuk came by coincidence.

17 Is that your evidence?

18 A. I was shown the photo, and I do think I did recognise the person

19 that I had seen earlier.

20 Q. But my question is were you researching this person in particular

21 or are you saying that --

22 A. No, I wasn't.

23 Q. So the picture came out by coincidence. Is that correct?

24 A. Yes, that's true.

25 Q. Is it correct that, prior to that time, you had sought to link

1 Mr. Boskoski to Mr. Bucuk in another way when you were being interviewed

2 by the Office of the Prosecutor. Is that correct?

3 A. I was shown a video-clip of a crowd of people with this individual

4 in the crowd, and a Mercedes.

5 Q. Is that correct also, Mr. Hutsch, that at the time you told the

6 Prosecutor that you had taken down a number plate of a Mercedes who you

7 say this person was driving at the time?

8 A. I said that he got into the Mercedes and then he drove off with

9 it. Now whether he was the owner of this particular Mercedes, I cannot

10 tell.

11 Q. Well, but you gave a plate number, didn't you, to the Office of

12 the Prosecutor about what you claimed were a car of Mr. Bucuk or a car in

13 which he was driving. Do you agree with that?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. You made a particular note of that fact, Mr. Hutsch?

16 A. Yeah.

17 Q. And did you give those notes to the Office of the Prosecutor?

18 A. No.

19 Q. Mr. Hutsch, I'm putting it to you that, again, this story is a

20 fabrication by you and that Mr. Boskoski was not, in fact, at the

21 restaurant Dal Met Fu on the 12th of August of 2001 around 8.00, as you

22 testified. Do you agree with that?

23 A. I repeat, I would only repeat myself.

24 Q. Will you please answer the question, Mr. Hutsch.

25 A. No, I do not agree with you, also as I deferred in all other

1 points with you.

2 MR. METTRAUX: Could the witness please be shown what is Rule 65

3 ter 1D865.

4 Q. Mr. Hutsch, this is a statement taken by the Office of the

5 Prosecutor of the former and then prime minister Mr. Ljupco Georgievski.

6 Do you recall Mr. Georgievski as the prime minister at the time?

7 A. Yes.

8 MR. METTRAUX: If I can ask the registry to please turn to page --

9 page 4 of this document, please. That is 1D00- -- well, perhaps page 3

10 first. It is 1D00-7520. Can we go down to the last paragraph of that

11 page, please.

12 Q. Mr. Hutsch, it is to show you the context of the questions that

13 were being asked of the witness. He is being asked if Ljube Boskoski came

14 to his office on Sunday, 12 August of 2001, and he says that he did not;

15 and then the question that is relevant here is on the next page.

16 MR. METTRAUX: If we could please turn. Thank you.

17 Q. Mr. Hutsch, if you can locate the first full sentence on that

18 page, it starts with the word: "The next entry of my diary."

19 Can you see that?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... "The next entry of my diary

22 is that, at 7.00 p.m., I attended a co-ordinative meeting with a

23 parliamentary group which was preparation for the signing of the Ohrid

24 Agreement, which was due to happen the next day. The meeting, I believe,

25 took place in Cair municipality building, but I'm not sure about this

1 fact. I'm not sure, but I think that Ljube Boskoski also attended the

2 meeting.

3 "There were at least 50 people present there because our

4 parliamentary group was quite large at that time. The whole parliamentary

5 group was present at this meeting. Ljube Boskoski, as representative of

6 the government, was supposed to be there; but, as I told, I am not sure

7 about this.

8 "I believe that I did not have any other conversation with Ljube

9 Boskoski on Sunday of 12th of August, 2001, but, again, I'm not sure about

10 this fact."

11 So would it be a fair summary, Mr. Hutsch, to say that at --

12 starting at around 7.00 p.m., on the 12th of August, Mr. Georgievski

13 attended what you said a co-ordinative meeting of his parliamentary group

14 about the Ohrid Agreement?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. And he believed, although he was not sure, that it took place in

17 the Cair municipal building. Is that correct?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. But you believed, but he wasn't sure, that Mr. Boskoski, as

20 representative of the government, attended that meeting. Is that correct?

21 A. Yes.

22 MR. METTRAUX: Can the witness now please be shown what is Rule 65

23 ter 1030.

24 Q. What you will have on the screen, Mr. Hutsch, is a report by the

25 police. It has been given to us by the Office of the Prosecutor.

1 MR. METTRAUX: Could we have the English version as well, please.

2 Q. It's entitled Report, Mr. Hutsch, and it says this: "During our

3 working hours, between 8.00 and 20.00 hours, we acted according to order

4 number 2396."

5 It says: "A meeting took place at the VRMO-DPMNE, Internal

6 Macedonian Revolutionary Organisation Democratic Party for Macedonian

7 National Unity, headquarters, where the following attended: Ljupco

8 Georgievski, Ljube Boskoski, Nikola Gruev, as well as other deputies,

9 accompanied with security personnel of 100 persons."

10 Can you see that, Mr. Hutsch?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. So do you agree that this document would, in fact, suggest that

13 Mr. Boskoski attended the particular meeting. Do you agree with that?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. And you would agree, as a result, that he could not have been at

16 two places at the same time. Do you agree with that?

17 A. So, if you haven't got any other proof, and if you read both

18 texts, it doesn't tell you when Mr. Boskoski came to the meeting; and,

19 secondly, I have got two different times, because it is given 19.00 hours,

20 but here it says in the report that it was over at 8.00 p.m., 2000 hours.

21 So I cannot understand your conclusion.

22 Q. Well, the 19.00 hours, sir, was, according to Mr. Georgievski, the

23 time at which the meeting started. The hours mentions here are the

24 working hours of the gentleman -- or appears to be the working hours which

25 the gentleman served in this capacity. Do you agree with that?

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. Sir, do you recall that, at the beginning of your testimony, I had

3 asked you a number of questions about your sources of income in the year

4 2001. Do you remember me asking you that?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. That was on the 28th of June, 2007, page 2843 to 2844, and you

7 told me that your only source of income had been your work as a

8 journalist. Is that correct?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. And I also asked you a question as to whether you had ever been a

11 salesman and whether you had been in the business of selling clothes or

12 coffins, and you said "no." Do you recall that?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. It's at page 2843 to 2844. And, in your statement to the

15 Prosecutor and, again, in your testimony here, you have indicated that, in

16 your view as a journalist, it was very important to remain neutral and

17 impartial. Do you recall saying that?

18 A. Yes, I do.

19 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... important not to be seen as

20 siding with either of the two sides. Is that correct?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. And you also said that you were merely a neutral observer. Is

23 that correct?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. And, in the Milosevic trial, you also acknowledged having worked

1 as a so-called embedded journalist with the KLA. Do you recall that?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. And you also explained to the Trial Chamber in the Milosevic case

4 that, after your time in Kosovo, you kept in touch for several years with

5 members of the KLA. Do you recall saying that?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. And you have also said that you had quite a number of contacts

8 with the members of the NLA, this time in Macedonia, during your time in

9 2001. Is that correct?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. And you mentioned, I believe, that you met, in particular, with

12 Mr. Gezim Ostreni known as "Plaku," about 75 to 85 time in a period of two

13 month between, approximately, the middle of September to the middle of

14 November. Is that correct?

15 A. Yeah.

16 Q. Isn't that correct that, in fact, you had at the time a business

17 relationship at the time with Mr. Ostreni. Do you agree with that?

18 A. No.

19 Q. Is that correct that you, in fact, received money from Mr. Ostreni

20 in the year of 2001?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Is that correct that you received money from Mr. Ostreni because

23 you were selling goods to him. Do you agree with that?

24 A. No.

25 Q. Can you tell this Chamber why you received money from Mr. Ostreni?

1 A. Sorry, this is not covered. I have started saying by I have the

2 son [as interpreted], but this is not covered my agreement of my ability

3 of giving evidence. I have to ask you to look into that, whether I can

4 actually say something, because otherwise this would be a punishable

5 offence.

6 MR. METTRAUX: Your Honour, can we go into private session.

7 JUDGE PARKER: Private.

8 [Private session]

9 (redacted)

10 (redacted)

11 (redacted)

12 (redacted)

13 (redacted)

14 (redacted)

15 (redacted)

16 (redacted)

17 (redacted)

18 (redacted)

19 (redacted)

20 (redacted)

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11 Pages 6367-6388 redacted. Private session.

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted)

4 (redacted)

5 (redacted)

6 (redacted)

7 (redacted)

8 (redacted)

9 (redacted)

10 [Open session]

11 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're in open session.

12 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.

13 MR. METTRAUX: Thank you, Your Honour.

14 The first document which the Defence would seek to tender at this

15 stage, although I should mention for the record also, that it has been put

16 quite extensively to Mr. Hutsch in his evidence, but we believe it may be

17 important for the Chamber to have the full article.

18 It is the article from the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung of the

19 3rd of May of 2001 prepared by Mr. Rub, journalist for the FAZ, and it

20 talks, inter alia, about reports and the testimony of Mr. Hutsch.

21 This is it Rule 65 ter 1D280. This is tab 11 of the binder.

22 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, Mr. Saxon.

23 MR. SAXON: I was simply going to ask what tab of the binder it

24 was, Your Honour. Thank you.

25 MR. METTRAUX: Tab 11, Mr. Saxon.

1 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, it will be received.

2 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit 1D241, Your Honours.

3 MR. METTRAUX: The second document, Your Honour, is Rule 65 ter

4 1D254. This would be tab 51 of the binder.

5 This is, again, an article prepared by Mr. Hutsch, this one on the

6 15th of August of 2001. It is called, "Macedonia: Who is warning to

7 watch out for Albanian Tricks." It was shown to Mr. Hutsch, in particular

8 in relation to the matter of Tetovo and the location of Mr. Hutsch at the

9 time.

10 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.

11 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit 1D242, Your Honours.

12 MR. METTRAUX: The next document, Your Honour, is Rule 65 ter

13 1D255. This is, again, a piece written by Mr. Hutsch. This one on 16

14 August 2001.

15 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: Could the counsel please

16 slow down when they mention difficult facts. Thank you.

17 MR. METTRAUX: The title of the document is,"Macedonia: Count

18 down for the German Army Deployment," and it is again a piece written by

19 Mr. Hutsch. It was, again, put to Mr. Hutsch in the context of his

20 cross-examination for the same purpose as the previously document.

21 It is tab 52, Your Honour.

22 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.

23 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit 1D243.

24 MR. METTRAUX: Your Honour, the next document is to be found under

25 tab 76 of the binder. It is Rule 65 ter 1D304.2, and it is the record of

1 the Dal Met Fu hotel in Skopje, both in English and in Macedonian.

2 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Saxon.

3 MR. SAXON: Your Honour, the Prosecution would object to the

4 admission of this document at this time. Not only could this witness not

5 speak to how this document was created or prepared, the witness suggested

6 that entries in the document were either incorrect or falsified.

7 So, in the submission of the Prosecution, it would not be

8 appropriate to tender this document via this witness.

9 If the Defence likes, they can certainly bring the person or

10 persons who purportedly created this document during their Defence case

11 and discuss it then, but we don't believe this is it the appropriate time

12 or manner to receive this document.

13 MR. METTRAUX: Your Honour, perhaps a brief reply.

14 Two matters: I believe the issue of reliability or otherwise of a

15 document will be for the Chamber assess and not for the witness.

16 The second matter which Mr. Saxon has raised is the issue of the

17 person who took those notes, and, indeed, we have presented a short

18 statement from the director of the hotel to Mr. Hutsch. It will be the

19 Defence decision to decide whether or not the witness should be called

20 whether live or as a Rule 92 bis witness, which in turn may have, and

21 perhaps it would have, some relevance to the issue of weight, if any, to

22 give to this document.

23 However I don't understand the Prosecution to be suggesting that

24 the documents is false or otherwise. This document was obtained by the

25 Defence from the hotel directly, and I don't understand Mr. Saxon to make

1 a issue of authenticity.

2 If, as Mr. Saxon believes, they are some issues in relation to the

3 reliability of this document, we believe it can be a issue of weight, and

4 the document should therefore be admitted, we believe.

5 JUDGE PARKER: The Chamber would take the view it should be marked

6 for identification, Mr. Mettraux, and not admitted as a document, because

7 the witness does not accept it as accurate and cannot otherwise speak

8 about its content.

9 MR. METTRAUX: I'm grateful to Your Honour. In that case, I will

10 move on to the next -- I move on to the next document on the list.

11 Yes, I'm sorry. The marking has to be made.

12 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit 1D244, marked for identification, Your

13 Honours.

14 MR. METTRAUX: The next document, which we would seek to tender at

15 this stage, is under tab 107 of the binder. This is Rule 1D370, and this

16 was the record made about the dispute between Mr. Hutsch and the FAZ. It

17 is published in the FAZ, the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, and it is

18 dated the 11th of June of 2007.

19 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.

20 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit 1D245, Your Honours.

21 MR. METTRAUX: The next document, Your Honour, which we'd seek to

22 tender at this stage, was actually on it's Prosecution Rule 65 ter list.

23 This is Rule 65 ter 216.

24 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: Could counsel please slow

25 down. Thank you.

1 MR. METTRAUX: I'm informed it now has a 1D number as well. It is

2 also 1D925, Your Honour. This is a daily log sheet dated the 12th of

3 August of 2001. It comes from the archives of the OSCE, and it was

4 provided to us by the Office of the Prosecutor. Your Honour will recall

5 that it contains a number of references to a crowd of people in or around

6 the village of Radisani on the 12th of August.

7 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.

8 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit 1D246.

9 MR. METTRAUX: And, Your Honour, there are simply two other

10 documents which we would at this stage as the Chamber marked for

11 identification, and those would the two transcript of the telephone

12 conversations which were played to Mr. Hutsch. They would be 1D319,

13 that's Rule 65 ter 1D319; and Rule 65 ter 1D318.

14 We understand there is a CD with the documents on it, if it -- it

15 has to be marked separately.

16 MR. SAXON: Your Honour.

17 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, Mr. Saxon.

18 MR. SAXON: The Prosecution does not object to having these

19 transcripts marked for identification at this time; however, I'm wondering

20 whether my colleague could tell us anything about where these recordings

21 were made, who recorded them, where they come from.

22 MR. METTRAUX: Your Honour, at this stage, the Defence will ask

23 not to disclose the identity of the person who provided us with those

24 documents. This is the reason why we do not seek to tender these

25 documents: We have been asked by the person, in the form of Rule 70, not

1 to disclose the origin of this particular document, so we used simply to

2 elicit evidence from Mr. Hutsch at this stage.

3 MR. SAXON: May I address the Chamber on this briefly, Your

4 Honour.

5 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Saxon?

6 It simply seems to me, Your Honour, that now the Prosecution is at

7 a disadvantage, because whether or not the transcripts or the recordings

8 of these intercepts are eventually admitted into evidence in the future of

9 this case, it is my understanding that they have become part of the record

10 of these proceedings. I think in fairness --

11 JUDGE PARKER: They do not stand as evidence. They're marked for

12 identification, held in the court record, so that if in future reference

13 is made to the document that was put to the witness, the document is

14 identified and can you produced. But they are not evidence.

15 MR. SAXON: Would that be true, Your Honour, in addition to the

16 interpretation of the recordings that were -- become part of the

17 transcript?

18 JUDGE PARKER: No, that's happened in court.

19 MR. SAXON: I'm not sure if we're like two ships passing in the

20 night.

21 JUDGE PARKER: No. I'm making it very clear to you what marking

22 the document does. It doesn't make it a exhibit. There has been

23 something played to the witness in court. We know nothing about that, its

24 source or its authenticity, except that which that which Mr. Hutsch has in

25 some way, expressly or impliedly, perhaps acknowledged.

1 MR. METTRAUX: Your Honour, I believe --

2 JUDGE PARKER: Tab 84 will be marked for identification, which I

3 think is the first of the two.

4 MR. METTRAUX: That's correct. 319, Your Honour, 1D319.

5 JUDGE PARKER: Yes.

6 THE REGISTRAR: It will become Exhibit 1D247, marked for

7 identification, Your Honours.

8 JUDGE PARKER: And then tab 86 will be -- 85, I beg your pardon.

9 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit 1D248, Your Honours, marked for

10 identification.

11 MR. METTRAUX: I'm grateful, Your Honour, I believe that is all

12 at this stage.

13 JUDGE PARKER: Could I continue, Mr. Mettraux, turning from

14 Mr. Mr. Saxon to you about those two document that have just been marked.

15 Your failure to indicate in any way their source, at the moment,

16 could well lead to some significant delay at a later stage in the trial,

17 because if you seek, in some way, to establish these documents, it is

18 quite probably that the Prosecution would want time to investigate.

19 MR. METTRAUX: We understand that, Your Honour. And we -- we will

20 discuss the matter further with the Prosecution with a view, perhaps, to

21 see whether there is a means to work things with Mr. Saxon that would not

22 put him at a disadvantage, should he think that is indeed a matter that

23 needs to be investigated, and we will also contact the source in question

24 that provided us with this material. We are grateful for your indication.

25 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.

1 THE WITNESS: [In English] Your Honour, may I?

2 [Interpretation] I would like to say something here. As we're

3 talking about evidence, I'd like to add something, if possible.

4 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, Mr. Hutsch. We're almost abandoning some of

5 our normal rules, so we might as well continue it.

6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The Defence mentioned an article

7 that I had brought, which were said to be originals the day before

8 yesterday. When I went out of the room, I happened to see on the table

9 there a -- the report, and I noticed there were some substantial

10 differences from the original. The original is here in my hand, and the

11 other one is different.

12 I saw on the screen that Mr. Mettraux had been using the online

13 versions of the Hamburger Adenblatt. And, of course, one would have to

14 see when these reports were put on line, because this involves the

15 conclusions that Mr. Mettraux made. So I have all the articles here in

16 the originals, and you will be able to see the difference.

17 And, I think, Mr. Mettraux, you will be able to realise that I

18 have worked on your behalf to get all these articles ready for you, so

19 that you can see the originals and can you compare them to the original

20 versions in the Hamburger Adenblatt and not use the on line versions.

21 MR. METTRAUX: Your Honours, simply for the record, perhaps the

22 version that we handed to the Chamber yesterday, whether the original in

23 the sense of the, I think, PDF copy that was provided to us from the

24 Hamburger Adenblatt, Mr.. Hutsch is correct that the version that was

25 shown to him was from the Internet; however, Your Honour in their

1 possession have the original, which we received from the newspaper in

2 question.

3 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you Mr. Mettraux. That may help, Mr. Hutsch,

4 a little. I would further observe, just to bring this back on to the

5 normal procedural lines, train lines, that is, that if Mr. Saxon seeks to

6 put in the original of the articles, they would be received by the

7 Chamber. If in the time which he will have between now and when he

8 completes his re-examination, he is able to see whether there are material

9 difference from what we have, which may, I suspect, be exactly what you

10 have there.

11 Thank you for bringing it to our attention.

12 Now, Mr. Apostolski, are there questions?

13 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Your Honour. I

14 do have questions for this witness; however, I will need some time to

15 prepare with consultation with Mr. Mettraux. Is it perhaps a good time

16 for a break or that I consult with him privately?

17 JUDGE PARKER: We will, I think, we can accommodate you,

18 Mr. Apostolski. If we have the second break now, resuming at 25 minutes

19 to 1.00, that will give you an hour and ten minutes after the break.

20 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.

21 JUDGE PARKER: Now the hour and ten minutes, we still have this

22 hope that we will be able to finish, Mr. Hutsch, today, bear in mind. But

23 I see, I expect that, even now, it may be beyond us now to finish,

24 Mr. Hutsch, by 1.45 today. But both you and Mr. Saxon, I'm sure will be

25 mindful of the time; and if it is possible, we'll finish.

1 But the cross-examination, so far, has gone on to a considerable

2 time and has involved many issues, and it may that be it is quite

3 impossible for Mr. Saxon to deal with what we wishes to deal with in the

4 time that now remains.

5 But, certainly, we are in a position now to feel that we can

6 conclude Mr. Hutsch's evidence by tomorrow when he needs to be away.

7 We resume at 25 minutes to 1.00.

8 --- Recess taken at 12.04 p.m.

9 --- On resuming at 12.37 p.m.

10 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Mettraux.

11 MR. METTRAUX: Your Honour, I apologise for taking more time, but

12 I have been asked to specify for the record the fact that MFI 1D247 and

13 MFI 1D248, which were the last two documents which were MFI'd, contained

14 both the transport and the audio which was played.

15 The second matter which we would like to bring to the attention of

16 the Chamber is a document, which is Exhibit 1D224. It is a document from

17 the Embassy of the Federal Republic of Germany which was shown to

18 Mr. Hutsch, and also I believe to at least one or two witnesses.

19 We have now received the official translation from CLSS of that

20 document, and the registry will take care of placing the right document on

21 the record, Your Honour.

22 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.

23 Now, Mr. Apostolski.

24 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.

25 Cross-examination by Mr. Apostolski:

1 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Witness Hutsch. My name is

2 Antonio Apostolski; and together with my colleague Jasmina Zivkovic, we're

3 the Defence counsel of Mr. Johan Tarculovski.

4 Witness, I have several questions to put to you today in

5 connection with the events in Ljuboten in the year 2001. Are you ready to

6 begin?

7 A. [Previous translation continues] ...

8 Q. Thank you.

9 You said that, when you entered the village of Ljuboten on the

10 12th of August, 2001, you recognised two persons: Johan Tarculovski and

11 Goran Stojkov. Is this correct?

12 A. [Interpretation] Yes.

13 Q. Is it correct that the Prosecution took two statements from you on

14 the 25th, 26th, and 27th of October, 2005, and the second statement on 3rd

15 and 4th July and 9th of December, 2006?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. Is it correct that, in giving the first statement, you were shown

18 a video-clip on which you recognised persons -- or rather, you recognised

19 Mr. Goran Stojkov?

20 A. Yes. Just a moment. I don't know if it was one complete

21 videotape.

22 Q. Yes. And, on this clip, you recognised Mr. Goran Stojkov. Is

23 this correct?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. Is it correct that, while giving the interviews to the

1 Prosecution, you did not carry out recognition of Mr. Johan Tarculovski?

2 A. What do you mean? Could you repeat that?

3 Q. Is it correct that you did not identify Mr. Johan Tarculovski

4 while giving the statement to the Prosecution with the pictures or the

5 video-clips?

6 A. Yes, that is true.

7 Q. Therefore, you will concur with me that, with the help of

8 photographs and video-clips, you did not identify Mr. Johan Tarculovski.

9 A. That is true.

10 Q. Thank you. You previously stated that you were acquainted with

11 Mr. Goran -- with Mr. Jaculovksi [as interpreted] -- with Goran -- by

12 Mr. Goran Zdravkovski during the fighting at the Cali in Tetovo. Is this

13 correct?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. You were introduced by Mr. Goran at the front line?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. On this occasion, you spoke with Mr. Tarculovski about the current

18 situation at the front line. Is this correct?

19 A. Yes, it was a short talk.

20 Q. Is it correct that this conversation was carried out directly with

21 Mr. Tarculovski without the help of an interpreter?

22 A. No.

23 Q. Therefore, you spoke with Mr. Johan through an interpreter in the

24 Macedonian language. Is this correct?

25 A. It is correct that Goran, who introduced us went and translated

1 the sentences briefly, and I read this recently in one of the articles,

2 the road in question was --

3 Q. Excuse me. I would like to hear your answer. Can you tell me,

4 please, whether you spoke with Mr. Johan through a interpreter, or, as you

5 would like to say now, that interpretation was done by Mr. Goran

6 Zdravkovski?

7 A. Yes, that's right, the latter.

8 Q. So it is correct that Mr. Goran Zdravkovski translated interpreted

9 for you. Let us clear this up. Is this correct?

10 A. [No interpretation]

11 Q. Mr. Hutsch, if I were to put it to you that Mr. Johan Tarculovski

12 knows English fluently, would you agree with me that you had no need to

13 use Mr. Goran Zdravkovski as an interpreter?

14 A. That is true. We -- I spoke German and English with Goran; and,

15 in general terms, we talked about the situation at that locality.

16 Q. Very well. It is not of interest what you spoke about, rather,

17 the language in which you spoke; therefore, you want to say that Goran

18 Zdravkovski speaks English and German. Is this correct?

19 A. A few words of German, and he spoke English.

20 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Can the witness please be shown

21 the first page of the statement of Mr. Goran Zdravkovski of the 24th of

22 October, 2005, given to the Prosecution, 2D00-175.

23 Q. Do you see on the screen the statement of Mr. Goran Zdravkovski in

24 the Macedonian and English language?

25 A. Yes.

1 Q. Do you see this is his information; and in line 7, I believe this

2 is where it's -- where it is written "spoken languages," but the only

3 language which is listed is the Macedonian language?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Can you then agree with me that Mr. Goran Zdravkovski did not

6 mention that he knows you the English or German languages? Can you give a

7 "yes" or "no" answer. You don't have to give a explanation.

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. If I were to tell you that Mr. Johan Tarculovski lived in Austria

10 for a period of three years with his former wife, and that he knows the

11 German language as well, he knows and uses the German language, would you

12 agree with me that would you have no need to use Goran Zdravkovski as a

13 interpreter, since we have a situation which is quite the contrary to what

14 you say, that Goran Zdravkovski does not know these languages, while

15 Johan Tarculovski does?

16 A. What do you want me to say? What do you want me to answer with a

17 "yes" or "no"?

18 Q. Can you agree with me that did you not have the need and you did

19 you not use, as you have stated in front of this Court, Mr. Goran

20 Zdravkovski as a interpreter?

21 A. No.

22 Q. This means that did you not meet with Mr. Johan Tarculovski in

23 Tetovo in March 2001 at all, as was also stated by Mr. Goran Zdravkovski

24 in his statement which my colleague Mr. Mettraux pointed out to you. Is

25 this correct? This was also said in his statements to the Office of the

1 Prosecutor.

2 A. No.

3 Q. Mr. Hutsch, I put it to you that you did not meet with Johan

4 Tarculovski in the March of 2001. Do you agree with me?

5 A. No.

6 Q. Just a while back, you said that you met with him in a cafe in

7 Tetovo, and that Mr. Tastanovski can confirm this, as well as the director

8 of the factory Teteks. Is this correct?

9 A. No.

10 Q. When you were speaking about the textile factory from Tetovo, that

11 you know its director, is it correct that you were talking about the

12 factory for textiles called "Teteks"?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. Can you tell us who the director of this factory is?

15 A. Oh, sorry. I must restrict my answers, too.

16 Yes.

17 Q. Is it correct that his name is Niko -- is it correct that his name

18 is "Gligorie Gogovsky"?

19 A. I don't know.

20 Q. Therefore, you do not know that Mr. Gligorie Gogovsky is the

21 director of the Teteks factory?

22 A. I can't remember. I could describe the person.

23 Q. Can you tell me what his height is?

24 A. One metre 80, to one metre 85.

25 Q. Can you tell me his age?

1 A. He would be in his mid 40s, early 50s.

2 Q. Can you tell me the colour of his hair?

3 A. A sort of grey mixture.

4 Q. Black and grey?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. Witness, if I were to tell you that this person is 65 years of age

7 and was a former prime minister of the Republic of Macedonia in the 1990s

8 and that his height is one metre 72 centimetres, would you concur with me

9 that you gave me wrong information about this person?

10 A. No.

11 Q. For you claim that your information is correct, the information

12 which you have just provided?

13 A. I can't give you the name, and here you're describing a person,

14 this person, the person I met.

15 Q. I'm giving a precise description of the person who is the director

16 of Teteks.

17 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] For the purpose of the record, he

18 said that you have met with him on page 3 of today's transcript, line 12.

19 This is for the purpose of the record. Thank you.

20 Q. I will continue with a different topic now.

21 MR. SAXON: I'm sorry, Your Honour.

22 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Saxon.

23 MR. SAXON: I'm very sorry to interrupt. Just one point of

24 clarification. The director that my colleague Mr. Apostolski is referring

25 to, he has been using the present tense, "is," "is the director." I'm

1 sorry. That is how it was interpreted to me. He is referring to the

2 person who was the director in 2001. Is that correct?

3 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] For clarification to my learned

4 colleague, my questions pertain to March 2001, and please be informed that

5 the director of this factory, starting from 1992 up until today, is the

6 director of this factory.

7 Q. You said that you saw Johan sitting in a white Cherokee Jeep in

8 Ljuboten on the 12th of August 2001?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. And that this Jeep was coming from the western part of Ljuboten

11 when you met?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. The Jeep was coming towards you?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. Your interpreter waved and the Jeep stopped, is this correct,

16 waved with his hand.

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. Johan was sitting in the co-pilot seat?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. The window of the Jeep was open, and your interpreter spoke in the

21 Macedonian language with Johan. Is this correct?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. You were sitting [as interpreted] one metre from the door. Is

24 this correct?

25 A. No.

1 Q. The transcript should read "standing."

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. Were you standing one metre from the door?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Were you seeing -- I will reformulate the question.

6 Did you stand one metre from Johan's side or the driver's side?

7 A. From the co-pilot's side.

8 Q. Is it correct that the -- Jeeps are taller than passenger

9 vehicles, especially this model of Jeep, Cherokee?

10 A. I couldn't tell you. I don't know. I didn't measure the

11 distance.

12 Q. Was -- is Cherokee Jeep higher than a normal passenger vehicle?

13 A. I couldn't tell you.

14 Q. Is it a terrain vehicle, a four-wheel vehicle?

15 A. I believe so, yes.

16 Q. And your interpreter spoke with Mr. Johan through the open window.

17 Is this correct?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. Can you tell me, is it correct that, when the Jeep stopped, Johan

20 opened the window, or was the window previously opened? Can you tell me

21 this?

22 A. [In English] The window was open.

23 Q. Does this mean that you could only see the head and the upper part

24 of the body of Mr. Johan Tarculovski?

25 A. [Interpretation] No.

1 Q. You could see the upper part of his uniform?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. And this was black in colour?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. And you saw that, on the bottom, he wore black trousers. Is this

6 correct?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. And, if any person claims before this Court that, on the day of

9 12th of August, 2001, Johan was dressed in camouflaged uniform, then this

10 witness would be giving false testimony.

11 A. I remember it as being black.

12 Q. Can you agree with me that if anyone were to say before this Court

13 that Johan was wearing a camouflage uniform, that this would not be the

14 truth?

15 A. I'm here to tell what you I saw, not to draw conclusions from what

16 you think I might have seen.

17 Q. You also stated before this Court, when you saw Johan in Ljuboten

18 in the Jeep, he was wearing a pistol, a revolver on his right leg. Is

19 this correct?

20 A. No.

21 Q. Therefore, can you tell me where Johan was wearing this gun?

22 A. I would have to consult with my interpreter.

23 Q. Did you see, and did you testify before this Court, that he was

24 wearing a gun? You told us the brand, Glock, an Austrian handgun.

25 A. Yes.

1 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] This is on page 2776.

2 Q. And can you now tell us whether Johan was wearing this gun?

3 A. As far as I was told, I think it was on his upper hip, on the

4 right side.

5 Q. On his right hip, is this correct, or on the upper part of his

6 leg, on his thigh?

7 A. The upper thigh.

8 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Can the witness --

9 Q. Let me just ask you this: Did the gun have a holster.

10 A. We would have to ask my interpreter at the time, but the weapon

11 must have been attached to his hip somehow.

12 Q. Therefore, you claim that your interpreter told you this, but you

13 did not see this. Is this correct?

14 A. That's true.

15 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Can the witness please be shown

16 his statement, 65 ter 2D00-76.126; page 17 in the English version and 19

17 in the Macedonian version.

18 Q. Do you see this on the screen? Do you see your statement on the

19 screen?

20 Can you read that it says here -- do you see it first? My

21 question: Do you see the statement on the screen? It is said -- this is

22 what you said to the Office of the Prosecutor when you gave your

23 statement, and it was also said in the transcript, page 2776, when you

24 testified before this Court: "I was immediately after -- behind the place

25 where he was sitting. I was looking at the vehicle. I saw that Johan

1 Tarculovski was wearing a holster on the right side. It was a pistol

2 holster for the upper part of his right leg. It was equipped with a

3 9-millimetre pistol Glock automatic pistol. This was clear to me. And

4 based on my military and professional experience, I'm 100 percent sure

5 that this was this type of weapon."

6 Witness, can you confer with me that just a while back, before

7 this Court, you stated that did you not see this, that it was your

8 interpreter that saw this. And before this Court, you have stated the

9 same as before the Office of the Prosecutor, when giving your statement,

10 something all together contrary to this, that you even recognised the

11 brand of the pistol.

12 Can you agree with me that these two -- that this is

13 contradictory?

14 A. No. It is not contradictory for the following reason: Because in

15 all this material, what the team saw -- well, for instance, I said that I

16 telephoned, and then it was found out later that that was not accurate,

17 that I had personally been telephoning, but we as a team had telephoned.

18 Q. Yes, by my colleague, Mettraux, that is to say, to your statement

19 of the 27th of June, 2007: [In English] "I think he was warning a leg

20 holster with a Glock pistol."

21 [Interpretation] This is what you stated before this Court on the

22 27th of June, 2007.

23 A. Could you show me where the contradiction lies?

24 Q. The contradiction is in the fact that, to this Court, you have

25 stated that your interpreter had seen this and told this about this, while

1 you here say that you have seen it. Is it correct that everything which

2 you have seen or what you're telling this Court is, in fact -- are, in

3 fact, things which you have not seen, and that these are events which were

4 retold to you by somebody else?

5 A. In line 8, what I see what you are reading as an apparent

6 quotation, in line 8, it is not true that I said I had seen that it was a

7 Glock pistol. On the contrary, it says, "I think." But you can correct

8 me if I'm wrong.

9 Q. Can you read paragraph 126 out loud, please - this is the

10 statement which is in front of you - so that there is no confusion?

11 A. [In English] "I was directly standing beside him, not more than

12 half a metre. I was standing slightly behind his seating position. I was

13 looking inside the car. I have seen that Johan Tarculovski was wearing a

14 holster on his right side. It was a pistol holster for the upper part of

15 his right leg. It was equipped with a 9-milimetre Glock automatic

16 pistol. This was clear to see. And based on my military and professional

17 experience, I'm 100 percent sure that it was this type of this weapon."

18 Q. So this would mean you're 100 percent sure that what you have

19 seen, it was really a Glock pistol?

20 A. [Interpretation] Yes. Well, I am certain, that is, with a

21 photograph, we were able to identify what a kind of pistol it was.

22 Q. I don't need a photograph to identify. You were the one who

23 identified in your statement. I don't have a clue about weapons. You

24 know about this stuff. You're a military expert, so that I don't need it.

25 I would like to ask you further --

1 A. I wasn't saying that were supposed to do that.

2 Q. Is it correct that you told this Court that you know

3 Mr. Tarculovski, and that you know that he was born in Ljubanci?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. You claim that Mr. Johan Tarculovski was born in Ljubanci. Is

6 that correct?

7 A. If I remember correctly, yes.

8 Q. And the house of his father, the father of Johan Tarculovski, is

9 at the entrance of the village of Ljubanci, on the right-hand side when

10 you go into the village from Radisani. Is this correct?

11 A. Yes, that is what we were told.

12 Q. And this was something that was told to you, or this is something

13 you know and you claim before this Court? How sure is this information?

14 A. This is a piece of information that I did not check.

15 Q. Can you confirm this statement and whether it is correct or not?

16 A. I do not have any confirmation that this house was there -- I was

17 actually there.

18 Q. So this is an untruthful information, the information you provided

19 in your statement to the investigators from the ICTY?

20 A. Could you please show me, again, the statement pertaining to this

21 particular item?

22 Q. Yes, I will show it to you now. I just wanted to ask you whether

23 you told the investigators that you are not quite sure about this.

24 A. Please, could you show me what I've asked for?

25 Q. I would kindly ask you to answer the question, first of all,

1 whether you told the investigators from the ICTY about the fact that you

2 knew where the -- Johan Tarculovski's father house is, and, actually, that

3 you are not quite sure about it?

4 A. I believe I used the German conjunctive form, the subjunctive.

5 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Could the witness be shown,

6 please, 65 ter 2D00-076, page 25. Page 25 in the Macedonian version; in

7 the English version, page 23, paragraph 162.

8 Q. Can you see the document, the statement in front of you?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. Can you please read out loud paragraph 162, please. This is your

11 statement that you provided to the ICTY investigators.

12 A. [In English] "I know Johan Tarculovski since the year of 2001.

13 The first time I met Johan Tarculovski at around 18, 19 March 2001 in

14 Tetovo. It was the time before the offensive on the Mount Kale. I know

15 that he was born in Ljubanci and that his father's house is in the

16 entrance of the village, right side, coming from Radisani."

17 Q. Would you agree with me that you gave wrong information to the

18 investigators in this particular paragraph?

19 A. [Interpretation] I should have made the statement in German. Yes,

20 it is correct.

21 Q. A little while ago, you said that you gave the statement in

22 German.

23 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Can you please close the

24 documents.

25 Q. Is it correct that a while ago you said that you provided the

1 statement in German language?

2 A. That is correct, yes.

3 Q. So your statement that you provided to Mr. Thomas Kuehnel, on the

4 25th, 26th, and the 27th of August, was given in German language.

5 A. We talked about -- we talked in German. Mr. Kuehnel then

6 translated it into English; and then, again, it was marked by a native

7 speaker, corrected.

8 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Could the witness be shown the

9 first page of his statement, 65 ter 2D00-676. This is the Macedonian

10 version. Could we see the English version, please, as well. Can we see

11 the bottom lines in the English version, please.

12 Q. Do you see, at the very bottom of the page, your signature on this

13 statement?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. Do you see in front of you which were the languages used during

16 the interview?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. Can you see what does say here? It says "English."

19 A. That's correct.

20 Q. So this is completely different and opposite to what you told me

21 earlier, that German was the language used?

22 A. I believe that we can get hold of Mr. Kuehnel, and he is going to

23 confirm my statement that we were speaking in German, then he translated

24 the statement into English, and then, again, this statement was translated

25 into English again.

1 Q. Do you see in front of you the wording where it says

2 "interpreter"?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Can you see it says "no interpreter," or "none."

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. Would you agree with me that there was no interpreter during the

7 time when you were giving your statement?

8 A. That's correct.

9 Q. Very well. Thank you.

10 So you would agree with me that the statement you gave, regarding

11 the fact that you knew where Johan Tarculovski's father house is, is a

12 incorrect statement, a statement that you provided to the ICTY

13 investigators?

14 A. No.

15 Q. Are you trying to say that the information you gave is correct

16 about the location of Mr. Johan's father's house in the village of

17 Ljubanci?

18 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Could the witness be shown again

19 his statement, page 23 in the English version and page 25 in the

20 Macedonian version, paragraph 162, please.

21 Q. Do you see the statement in front of you?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. So you're trying to say that what you stated in paragraph 162 is

24 true.

25 A. No. I don't know. I hadn't checked this, and I didn't research.

1 Again, I didn't do my own research where the house was located and

2 where --

3 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: The interpreter didn't

4 acoustically hear what he is saying.

5 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation]

6 Q. Does it mean that all the other information provided to the

7 Prosecution office, and information you gave before the Court, have not

8 been checked, like it is the case with this piece of information?

9 A. I think I already explained yesterday that the telephone

10 conversations that I had, and the statements of the people I talked to,

11 that I did not verify them.

12 Q. I'm just ask being this information and all the rest of the

13 information, so we are talking about unconfirmed information.

14 Does it mean that all other information that you provided before

15 this Court have not been properly checked, and this is information you

16 received over the phone?

17 A. That's not correct, because some information has been verified;

18 and, in some parts, it is hasn't been verified.

19 Q. So this means some of them have been verified, some of them not,

20 the information you provided before this Court. Is this correct?

21 A. That's correct.

22 Q. And you did not tell the investigators and this Court which of

23 this information has been verified and which have not been verified?

24 A. That's correct.

25 Q. Thank you. This is very honest on your part.

1 In the village of Ljuboten, on the 12th of August, you saw and

2 recognised a person Goran Stojkov. This is something you mentioned

3 earlier and you confirmed. You also confirmed that he was wearing a black

4 overall, the same type like Johan, and he also spoke with your interpreter

5 in Macedonian language. Is this correct?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. And you further claim that, on the 12th of August, you spoke to

8 Mr. Goran Stojkov through your interpreter in the village of Ljuboten. Is

9 this correct?

10 A. About a person called Goran and where I did not have any surname

11 at the time.

12 Q. Are you testifying here today that you saw a person named Goran

13 and that you are not sure; this is to say, it is not true that this was

14 the person called Goran Stojkov?

15 A. Could you please repeat the question?

16 Q. Can you please answer me: Is it true that you saw the person

17 Goran Stojkov in Ljuboten on the 12th of August, 2001, and can you be 100

18 percent sure about it?

19 A. You would have to show me a photograph.

20 Q. This is something you stated before this Honourable Court, and

21 this is something you stated before the investigators of the ICTY in your

22 statement. So this is something you said on the 27th of June, on page

23 2781, line 17.

24 A. Please, show me the statement.

25 Q. I would also like to ask you whether this is an information that

1 you corroborated, verified?

2 A. The person that I saw there was identical to a person who later on

3 was also known in the public under the name of Goran Stojkov.

4 Q. So now you claim that Goran Stojkov was in the village of Ljuboten

5 on the 12th of August, 2001. Is this what you testify?

6 Like I already mentioned, this is something you said on the 27th

7 of June, and also in your statement. A bit later, I will show your

8 statement provided to the ICTY investigators.

9 A. I think I remember very well this statement; and, in this

10 statement, I also said that we met a person who was called Goran and about

11 whom later on I learned that he was called Goran Stojkov. Also, this

12 person --

13 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Could the witness please be shown

14 paragraph 132, page 20 in the Macedonian version, and page 18 in the

15 English version.

16 Q. Do you see you in front of you, the statement?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. Is it correct that you have stated here that Goran Stojkov was

19 dressed in the same manner like Johan Tarculovski, and he had a black

20 overall with a regular police insignia and he didn't wear a helmet: "I

21 could only see that he a handgun in a holster. He did not have a

22 Kalashnikov. It was interesting to see that just Stojkov wore a black

23 uniform, and the other subordinate policemen were wearing a regular

24 camouflage uniform."

25 Is this something that you have stated and you have said before

1 the ICTY investigators?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. Is it true that, in this statement, you claim that only Stojkov

4 was wearing a black uniform, and this is different to your previous

5 statement when you said that Mr. Tarculovski was also wearing a black

6 uniform?

7 A. You're taking the statement apart, because it says in paragraph

8 131, it says -- it says that it was about asking whether, in the group

9 that he was part of, whether there were other people wearing a black

10 uniform.

11 Q. Very well. But would you agree with me that you saw Goran Stojkov

12 then and is this what you testify here today, or this is also an

13 information that you haven't verified and you're not quite sure about it?

14 A. The person, or the persons that I saw, I saw again under the name

15 of Goran Stojkov, who was then promoted to a police general, to be a

16 police general.

17 Q. So your testimony, before this Honourable Court, is that you have

18 seen Goran Stojkov? Please answer with "yes" or "no," the same way when

19 you are replying to the Prosecutor, in the same way as it is in your

20 statement.

21 A. The truth is in 131.

22 Q. I will ask you kindly to respond to my question, to give me a very

23 simple "yes" or "no" answer. Did you see the person Goran Stojkov on the

24 12th of August, 2001 in the village?

25 A. I cannot reply to that question by "yes" or "no," as it's implied

1 in the first two sentence under 131.

2 [Overlapping Speakers]

3 Q. [No interpretation]

4 A. [No interpretation]

5 Q. So what can be seen in paragraph 132 in your statement is

6 incorrect, and I kindly ask you to answer whether you have seen the person

7 Goran Stojkov in the village of Ljuboten.

8 On page 2782, you confirmed that you have seen him, then I won't

9 be bothering you any further with these questions.

10 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Can we please see the statement

11 provided by Nikovski Toni.

12 Q. Can you please answer this question: Whether the information was

13 verified, whether it was 100 percent correct and verified that you saw

14 Goran Stojkov in the village of Ljuboten. Please answer this question

15 with "yes" or "no"?

16 MR. SAXON: Your Honour.

17 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, Mr. Saxon.

18 MR. SAXON: That was a fairly long question by my learned

19 colleague. It started out with this: "So what can be seen in paragraph

20 132 in your statement is incorrect," then it went further and he asked Mr.

21 Hutsch to answer whether he had seen Mr. Stojkov, and then Mr. Apostolski

22 seems to be moving on to show a statement.

23 I think, to be fair to the witness, he should have a right to

24 respond to what Mr. Apostolski is arguing, for lack of a better word, that

25 is what is said in paragraph 132 of his statement is incorrect, rather

1 than stating his argument in the record.

2 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] I asked this witness on a number

3 of occasions --

4 JUDGE PARKER: You may proceed, Mr. Apostolski.

5 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Thank you.

6 Q. Can you please respond with a "yes" or a "no" whether your

7 information about the location of Goran Stojkov in Ljuboten on the 12th of

8 August, 2001 is 100 percent correct? Please respond with a "yes" or a

9 "no."

10 A. No.

11 Q. Therefore, there is information that was not verified. Thank you.

12 JUDGE PARKER: That is your conclusion, Mr. Apostolski.

13 THE WITNESS: Thank you, Your Honour.

14 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Your Honours, there's a mistake

15 in translation. It should read the question: "Whether your information

16 about the fact that you saw Mr. Goran Stojkov was verified, was checked."

17 Q. Was this information checked?

18 A. No.

19 Q. Yes. Thank you.

20 You visited Ljuboten and the place where Rami Jusufi was killed on

21 the 14th of August, 2001. Is this correct?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. You visited his house. Is this correct?

24 A. No.

25 Q. Therefore, on the 14th of August, 2001, you were in the village

1 but did not visit the house of Rami Jusufi?

2 A. No, only in the garden, in the yard.

3 Q. So it is correct that you visit the courtyard, his courtyard, on

4 the 14th of August, 2001?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. The body of Rami Jusufi was taken away and you did not see it. Is

7 this correct?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. You noticed, you marked this down, and you noted this in your

10 notes. Is this correct?

11 A. As far as I remember, yes.

12 Q. Thank you. You saw that the door from the courtyard was down, was

13 torn down?

14 A. What do you mean by "torn down"?

15 Q. The gate of the front yard was broken, blown up.

16 A. No. I did not have the impression that the gate was blown up.

17 Q. Was the gate in a normal position? The front -- the gate to the

18 yard, was it in a normal state?

19 A. The right door of the gate was open, and the left door was open

20 to, say, 30 degrees.

21 Q. Did you see the vehicle set on fire by the Macedonian security

22 forces?

23 A. No.

24 Q. So you answered inside, in the courtyard, and you did not see any

25 kind of vehicle?

1 A. Yes, I did.

2 Q. In the courtyard, you saw a passenger vehicle which was allegedly

3 set on fire by the Macedonian security forces. Is this correct?

4 A. No.

5 Q. Therefore, this vehicle was in a normal state.

6 A. No.

7 Q. Can you tell us the state of this vehicle?

8 A. It was burnt out.

9 Q. Thank you.

10 Is this a passenger vehicle, Zastava?

11 A. As far as I can remember, yes.

12 Q. These are vehicles which were produced in Yugoslavia. Do you know

13 about this?

14 A. No.

15 Q. Very well.

16 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Can the witness --

17 Q. Can you please tell me where Zastava was manufactured?

18 A. I don't know.

19 Q. Do you know the state in which Volkswagen is produced?

20 A. I believe in over 45 different countries on this planet.

21 Q. But you could agree with me that Zastava is not manufactured in

22 Volkswagen?

23 A. I don't know which licences have been given for the manufacturing

24 of vehicles.

25 Q. Do you know the vehicles Golf, of the brand Golf?

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. There is a Golf Model I?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Golf II, III, IV and V, do you know this?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. Do you know all types of Golf? Would you be able to recognise

7 Golf I as a mark?

8 A. No.

9 Q. What about Golf II?

10 A. No.

11 Q. Golf III?

12 A. No.

13 Q. Golf IV?

14 A. No.

15 Q. Golf V?

16 A. No.

17 Q. Previously, you said that you recognised the brand is Golf. Which

18 of these Golfs are you able to recognise?

19 A. At the moment, all I can say is that it was a Golf.

20 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Can the witness please be shown

21 1D2, 1D22 --

22 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction: 1D2.

23 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation]

24 Q. Is this the vehicle which you saw?

25 A. Yes.

1 Q. And the door which you saw?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. Can you claim that this is a vehicle of the Zastava brand. Is

4 this correct?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. Very well. Thank you.

7 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I believe that it

8 is time to adjourn today, and I would like to make mention to the Court

9 about the presence of Goran Stojkov in Ljuboten. The statement, 6281 and

10 6282 of the 16th of October, 2007 is the statement given by the witness.

11 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.

12 We adjourn then for the day, to resume at 9.00 in the morning to

13 conclude this witness and then to move on to the next witness.

14 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.45 p.m.,

15 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 18th day of

16 October, 2007, at 9.00 a.m.

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25