Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 10923

1 Tuesday, 18 March 2008

2 [Open session]

3 [The accused entered court]

4 [The witness entered court]

5 --- Upon commencing at 2.15 p.m.

6 JUDGE PARKER: Good afternoon.

7 Good afternoon, sir. Would you please stand and read aloud the

8 affirmation that is shown to you now.

9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will

10 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.


12 [Witness answered through interpreter]

13 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you. Please sit down.

14 Mr. Apostolski.

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

16 Examination by Mr. Apostolski:

17 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Witness Igor Dimovski.

18 A. Good afternoon.

19 Q. My name is Antonio Apostolski. Together with my colleague

20 Jasmina Zivkovic we are appear for the Defence of Mr. Johan Tarculovski.

21 We have met before, but I wish to introduce myself to you officially.

22 I wish to issue a caution to you. You and I both speak the same

23 language and we can understand one another easily. However, I would like

24 to ask you to wait for my questions and your answers to be interpreted

25 into several languages so that everybody in the courtroom is able to

Page 10924

1 follow what we're discussing.

2 Did you understand this?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Do you remember that you have given two statements to the Defence

5 team of Mr. Johan Tarculovski?

6 A. Yes.

7 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Could the witness please be

8 shown 2D698, 65 ter number 2D698, pages 4, 5, 6, and 7. The English

9 document is 2D07-0045.

10 Q. Is this your statement, the first one that you have given us?

11 A. Yes.

12 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Could the next page be shown to

13 the witness, please.

14 Could we move the Macedonian version a bit further up? And still

15 a bit further.

16 Q. Is this your signature here in the statement?

17 A. Yes.

18 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Could we show the next page now,

19 please. The English version is 2D07-0061.

20 Q. Is this the second statement you have given to the Defence team?

21 A. Yes.

22 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Could we show the next page now,

23 please.

24 Q. Is this the second statement that you gave us?

25 A. Yes.

Page 10925

1 Q. Thank you. Do you remember that the Court has sent an officer to

2 certify your statements?

3 A. Yes, I recall that.

4 Q. And these two statements were certified?

5 A. Yes, correctly.

6 Q. Thank you.

7 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I seek to tender

8 these two statements pursuant to Rule 92 bis in evidence.

9 JUDGE PARKER: The two statements will be received pursuant to

10 Rule 92 bis.

11 THE REGISTRAR: Rule 92 bis package with both statements will

12 become Exhibit 2D110, Your Honours.

13 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Could the witness please be

14 shown 65 ter 2D677. Could we please now show the next page.

15 Could we please now show the next page of this document.

16 Q. Is this a request that have you seen before?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. Have you responded to this RFI of the Defence?

19 A. Yes, this is the request to which we have provided an answer.

20 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Could we please show the witness

21 the next page now.

22 Q. Is this the document which is the response to the request for

23 assistance made by the Tarculovski's Defence?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. Was this document produced by you?

Page 10926

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. Thank you.

3 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I seek to tender

4 into evidence this document that the witness recognised.

5 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.

6 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit 2D111, Your Honours.

7 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation]

8 Q. Mr. Dimovski, I have just one further question for you, and it

9 is, do you remember that ten days ago the Defence of

10 Mr. Johan Tarculovski has already requested you to run a query on entry

11 and exit of the -- into the Republic of Macedonia on the person

12 Franz-Josef Hutsch for July 2001.

13 A. Yes, this is correct.

14 Q. Did you run this query and what were the results of it?

15 A. I ran this query and in July 2001 there were no results of that.

16 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I have no further

17 questions for this witness.

18 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you very much.

19 Ms. Residovic, is there any ...

20 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I have no questions

21 of this witness. Thank you.

22 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.

23 Ms. Regue.

24 Cross-examination by Ms. Regue:

25 MS. REGUE: Your Honours, I -- we have some binders for Your

Page 10927

1 Honours, the witness, and the Defence counsel.

2 Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Dimovski. My name is Meritxell Regue, and

3 I'm appearing on behalf of the Prosecution, and I will be asking some

4 questions this afternoon.

5 A. Good afternoon.

6 Q. Mr. Dimovski, according to your statement, you are actually

7 holding the position of chief of the department for systems and technical

8 support at the IT sector of the Ministry of Interior, right?

9 A. Yes, that is correct.

10 Q. You were actually redeployed or appointed to that specific post

11 in 2007. Correct?

12 A. No. It was not again. It was not that I was redeployed. I was

13 appointed of the head of that unit for the first time then. Before that,

14 I have never been the head to that unit. I was only an officer with that

15 unit.

16 Q. So in 2007 you were appointed the head of that unit.

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. What are the daily tasks that you perform as chief of your

19 department. Basically what do you do in a normal day of work?

20 A. That unit, as the name itself speaks, cares about the systemic

21 and technical support to all systems computer systems that are used in

22 the ministry, starting with maintenance of the network, maintenance of

23 servers and similar tasks. As a head, my task is to organise all those

24 things and coordinate them.

25 Q. So I take from your answer that have you never been working as an

Page 10928

1 officer at any of the border crossings in Macedonia or at the airport in

2 Skopje, right?

3 A. No, I have never worked there.

4 Q. Mr. Dimovski, you must be aware that the Blace border cross is

5 the border crossing that connects Kosovo with Macedonia, right?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. And you must be aware that nowadays but also back in 2001 there

8 is a KFOR by-pass just near to this border crossing and actually through

9 this check-point KFOR and NATO personnel are allowed to cross the border

10 freely without having to show the passport and have their data recorded.

11 Correct?

12 A. I have to say that I am not aware of this.

13 Q. And are you aware, perhaps, that sometimes together with these

14 KFOR or NATO personnel who are crossing this KFOR by-pass, diplomates or

15 journalists accompany them and of course their passports are not checked

16 or recorded either?

17 A. I am not aware of that.

18 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Apostolski.

19 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] I apologise for interrupting.

20 But I wish to mention that the witness has answered this question

21 already, so I believe that the second question was unnecessary. But the

22 witness answered it already so now my point is moot.

23 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.

24 Carry on, please, Ms. Regue.


Page 10929

1 Q. Mr. Dimovski, going back to your sector, in addition to compiling

2 data concerning the border crossing, meaning entries and departures, are

3 you also compiling date from other sectors? For example, immigration

4 matters or illegal trafficking?

5 A. We do not process them in our unit. They're processed -- my unit

6 specifically processes the queries related to border crossing points.

7 Within the sector, there is another unit which performs similar tasks for

8 other users.

9 Q. And, Mr. Dimovski, the computer system to record the entries into

10 Macedonia that you are using nowadays is basically the same that it was

11 used back in 2001, right?

12 A. Yes. For the most part, it is the same. In the last year, there

13 has been a new system introduced at several border crossing points.

14 Q. But basically the system, the computer system which the officers

15 who are working at the border crossings, introduce the data upon checking

16 the passport, this computer system is more or less the same, didn't

17 change?

18 A. With regards to the new system, I -- I can't tell you much

19 because it is outside of the competence of our unit and our sector. But

20 with regards to the other border crossing points where the old system, if

21 I may call it so, is used, the work is done in the same fashion as in

22 2001.

23 So just for your information, the new system is something I'm not

24 familiar with, and simply it is outside of our remit. It has started

25 operating a year or so ago at several of the border crossing points.

Page 10930

1 Q. And, Mr. Dimovski, a person enter Macedonia back in 1999 or in

2 2000 and we ask you to check the records with regards to the entry of

3 that person, would you be able still to pull out that information right

4 now in your records?

5 A. Yes. All data that have ever been recorded in the computer

6 system are still kept and simply you can pull out this information.

7 Q. So well, basically my question is how long do you keep the data

8 that you introduce into the system?

9 A. We keep them from ever since we have kept such records. We have

10 never felt any need to erase any data, if this is what you are referring

11 to. Our task is to keep this data and take care that nothing happens to

12 them that is correct no data is lost.

13 Q. Now let me see if I understand correctly how the system work back

14 in 2001 and works nowadays with regards to the border crossing.

15 If someone wants to enter Macedonia, for example through a border

16 crossing, the officer who is working at that check-point will ask the

17 passport of that person, and -- well, or in the airport they will ask the

18 passport for that person, and then the officer will stamp the passport

19 and will indicate basically the border crossing that that person is

20 actually crossing and also the date, right? Is there something else that

21 the officer will indicate in the stamp?

22 A. That is the procedure run by the border police. The stamping and

23 such things, I can't give you an answer about those specifically. But

24 what I can tell you is the -- about is the procedure after that, when the

25 data from the passport are entered into the computer system.

Page 10931

1 Q. Okay. So then the officer who is working at the border crossing

2 will take from the passport the name and will take also the passport

3 number and will either introduce it directly into the computer or will

4 write it down and later on introduce it into the computer system that

5 that border crossing has, right?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. And then all this information, meaning the name and the passport

8 number, will go into this general national-wide database that you are

9 actually managing. Correct?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. So if we want to know whether a person actually entered

12 Macedonia, like Mr. Apostolski asked you, whether Mr. Franz-Josef Hutsch

13 simply giving the name of this person enter Macedonia in this month, you

14 are able to go into your data system just type the name of that person

15 and you are able to provide a report, a record, about the entries of that

16 person, just knowing the name of that person, right?

17 A. Yes. Name, last name, passport number, you can run any of these

18 parameters, run a query according to any of these and then get a result.

19 Q. But even giving you only the name you were actually able to

20 locate the whereabouts of Mr. Hutsch, right?

21 A. Yes. It is sufficient in any database you can search by any of

22 the entities and you have the parameters, sometimes even the last name is

23 sufficient. The methods only what would the quality of data that you

24 then get as a result of that query.

25 Q. Mr. Dimovski, is it possible that back in 2001 or even nowadays

Page 10932

1 an officer at the border allows someone in without introducing the data

2 into the system, simply by stamping the passport but not introducing the

3 data into the system?

4 A. As far as I know, the officer can't work like that. But I can't

5 give you a precise answer. This is within the jurisdiction of the border

6 police, their principle of work and how these people at the border

7 crossing points should operate.

8 Q. But you wouldn't disregard this possibility, right, because you

9 have never been working there, right?

10 A. As far as I know, it is not possible for them to work like that

11 because the basis of the system is to check up the persons, check them

12 against so-called black lists. This is the first thing that happens

13 within the system, and then they are recorded into the entry and exit

14 records. The officer who would work like that would fail to run the

15 checkup, and I believe it is their duty to do it. It would be a sort of

16 a violation.

17 Q. But is it possible that this person who is trying to cross the

18 border doesn't have the passport with him or her, he or she only has the

19 national ID or a valid driving licence, would he or she still allowed to

20 cross the border? Of course without having the data entered into your

21 system?

22 A. I couldn't answer this. I don't know. I believe that it is

23 necessary to have a passport to enter or exit. But this is still within

24 the competence of the border police, those rules. How can someone cross

25 the border?

Page 10933

1 Q. But, Mr. Dimovski, would you agree with me that it is possible

2 that this officer who is working at the border crossing enters into the

3 computer a wrong name or he misses or he enters a wrong digit in the

4 passport number, right?

5 A. I believe that it is possible mistakes can be made by anyone.

6 Q. Is it possible that this information recorded once it is into the

7 system, gets somehow lost due to IT problems. Macedonia wouldn't be the

8 first country that has some sort of IT crash or problem, Mr. Dimovski.

9 Would that be a possibility?

10 A. It is not possible that something like this happens because our

11 task is to maintain the systems and to make them available 24/7. So this

12 is what we take care of, whatever problem occurs it is our duty to repair

13 it and to make it possible for the border police to use those systems.

14 Q. But imagine that some of these mistakes that I mention or some

15 omissions or even some IT problems occur, then when your department is

16 producing the report, would you agree with me that it may not be correct,

17 right, if mistakes have been done before by the border crossing officer?

18 A. I don't know what mistakes you're discussing.

19 Q. For example, if the person didn't enter the right name or the

20 right family name.

21 A. If an accidental mistake has been made when entering the data,

22 sometimes it is possible that a mistake is made, but specifically if I

23 may answer about this specific case, the results we received of the query

24 we did not run the full name and last name. We used the opportunity and

25 we ran a queries using several of the letters in the last name, in order

Page 10934

1 to receive better quality results having in mind the probability of such

2 problems occurring and avoiding some accidental mistakes that might have

3 happened in the system, because such mistakes can happen.

4 I specifically, when running the query related to this request, I

5 ran all possible combinations because it was not in indicated what was

6 the last name and what was the first name out of that string, so

7 specifically I'm speaking now about Franz-Josef Hutsch, in the request it

8 was indicated to run the query related to that person, and the query was

9 run with all possible combinations that might occur in this case,

10 since ...

11 Q. But, Mr. Dimovski, are you not telling me that your system is

12 basically perfect that you actually have in your computer database every

13 single person who entered and left Macedonia through all the border

14 crossings through the airport ever since you started implementing your

15 system. You're not telling me that, right?

16 A. I can tell you this, no system is ideal. What I can tell you is

17 that for all data that have ever been entered we have not had a single

18 problem, and it is our task to keep the data safe and this is what we do,

19 the data that have been entered at the actual border crossing points.

20 Otherwise I don't think that anyone can say that an ideal system exists.

21 Q. Mr. Dimovski, if you could please go to the tab 5 of your binder.

22 It will be 65 ter 1241.

23 What you are seeing --

24 MS. REGUE: And if we could go please to the second page.

25 Q. What you can seeing, Mr. Dimovski, is a passport from a person of

Page 10935

1 the United States of America. And if we could please focus a little bit

2 more on the passport.

3 This passport belongs to a gentleman named Daniel Saxon, who was

4 born on the 9th of November, 1958, and then if we look at the lower left

5 side of the screen you see his passport number.

6 Do you see that, Mr. Dimovski?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. His passport number starts with 712, just we can keep that in

9 mind.

10 MS. REGUE: And if we could go to page 8 of the binder.

11 Q. Mr. Dimovski, for you, you have to look for the page which has in

12 the upper right side the number N006-7955.

13 If you have any problem, we can ask the usher. Okay.

14 Mr. Dimovski, I would like you to focus on the stamp which is in

15 the centre a bit towards the left. Do you see a stamp which is dated the

16 13th of January, 2008. Actually just below it reads: "Dolna Blace," and

17 we see an arrow pointing towards the right side. Mr. Dimovski, this

18 stamp indicates that this person entered Macedonia through the Blace

19 border on the 13th of January, 2008, right?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. Do you know the number 51, what it stands for?

22 A. No.

23 Q. Now, Mr. Dimovski, if you could go do tab 11 of your binder, and

24 it will be 65 ter 1244.1.

25 And, Mr. Dimovski, if we ask to your department for a report

Page 10936

1 about the entries in Macedonia of this gentleman in January 2001 [sic] we

2 will indeed get a report indicating that Mr. Daniel Saxon entered the

3 13th of January 2008 through the Blace border, right?

4 A. I have to say that this border crossing at this time has this new

5 system, which I mentioned at the beginning, which is not under our

6 competency. Therefore, this information is not in this archive. The

7 situation at present is such that the border crossing Dolna Blace enters

8 the data into a different system.

9 Q. And who is managing this data?

10 A. This is a different sector in the ministry, part of the DBK.

11 Q. But would you agree with me that this sector still is trying to

12 keep the records as accurate as possible, right?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. So the normal -- the normal course of events it will be that if

15 we ask to this other sector to provide a report about the entries of

16 Mr. Saxon in Macedonia in January 2001 [sic], we will get a report

17 indicating that he indeed entered on the 13th of January, 2001 through

18 the Blace border, right?

19 A. Yes, this is how it should be.

20 Q. Mr. Dimovski, we ask to the department of --

21 MS. REGUE: I see my learned colleague on his feet.

22 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Apostolski.

23 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] My apologies for interrupting

24 Your Honours, but I see on the transcript that my learned colleague is

25 misleading the witness and is asking about Mr. Saxon and his entrance

Page 10937

1 into 2001. Previously I would like also to object to another matter.

2 The witness is here to testify about events in 2001 and not 2008, which

3 is outside the framework of the events. Therefore, I don't see the

4 relevance of these questions.

5 JUDGE PARKER: The relevance is self-evident. If the system

6 fails on one occasion it may have failed at another. So that part is not

7 a matter that needs to be pursued.

8 But you did or you are recorded as saying 2001.

9 MS. REGUE: That was my mistake, Your Honour. I meant 13

10 January 2008.

11 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you. Perhaps you might clarify with the

12 witness that he is dealing with 2008.

13 MS. REGUE: Thanks Your Honour.

14 Q. Mr. Dimovski, so basically if we ask to this other sector that

15 you have mentioned to provide a report about the entries of Mr. Dan Saxon

16 in January 2008 we will get a report indicating that this gentleman

17 entered on the 13th of January, 2008, through the Blace border. Correct?

18 A. Yes. But I would like to say once again that we're speaking

19 about 2008 when we have a new system at Dolno Blace. I would like to

20 emphasise this once again, a new system which is not under the competence

21 of our sector. I presume that if you were to submit a request to the

22 other sector which manages the system that you will also receive a

23 response from them.

24 Q. We did ask for such a request, Mr. Dimovski. On the 17th of

25 January we ask to the public safety bureau to provide us with a report

Page 10938

1 with the entries of Mr. Saxon for the past two weeks and he provided --

2 the department, excuse me, provided us with the report that you have in

3 tab 11. If you are so kind to look at the document. Maybe the hard copy

4 will be better because the computer screen is a bit fuzzy.

5 Do you see, Mr. Dimovski, that this report -- this report

6 indicates that the person Daniel Saxon with actually the same date of

7 birth that we saw in the passport, the 9th of November, 1958, and then we

8 actually see his passport number on the upper -- sorry in the lower left

9 side of the document. Do you see that, Mr. Dimovski?

10 A. Yes, I see a report. If you mean this one.

11 Q. Yes, I mean this one. And maybe you don't remember but the

12 passport, but the passport number we saw before it was exactly the same

13 passport that we can see displayed in the lower left side of the

14 document. Do you see that?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. And if we could -- if you could, please, go to the second page,

17 Mr. Dimovski. We see that indeed Mr. Daniel Saxon we see his date of

18 birth from the USA, and then we see that he arrived through the Blace

19 border, and then we can see under travel date on the right side that he

20 entered on the 13th of January, 2008.

21 Do you see that, Mr. Dimovski?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. So, Mr. Dimovski, if the system works correctly, that would be

24 the kind of report that we -- that you actually, your department or this

25 other department who deals with the same issues will produce, right?

Page 10939

1 A. I really could not say anything about the other system, any more

2 specific informations about this system. You're asking me about

3 something which I cannot respond about. This is a system which is, after

4 all, in a different sector, maintained by other people and so forth.

5 Q. But would you agree with me that in the passport we saw that this

6 person entered the country on the 13th of January and then we ask for a

7 report and then the report confirms that this person entered the country

8 on the 13th of January, 2008. Would you agree with that, that the data

9 in this report is accurate?

10 A. Yes, this is what I see in the binder.

11 Q. Okay. So basically this report is accurate, considering what we

12 saw in the passport, right?

13 A. As far as I can see, yes.

14 Q. Okay. Mr. Dimovski, if you could please go to tab 6, which is 65

15 ter 1242.

16 You see, Mr. Dimovski, another passport of another gentleman for

17 the Federal Republic of Germany. And if we could go to page 3 in the

18 e-court system.

19 Here -- and, yeah, if we could please focus in the lower part of

20 the passport.

21 Here, Mr. Dimovski, we see a passport of a gentleman named

22 Thomas Kuehnel and we see his date of birth, the 4th of June 1965 and

23 then also on the lower left side we see his passport which is 9235 -- the

24 first four digits will be 9235, just to remind us. You see that, right?

25 A. Yes.

Page 10940

1 Q. If you could go, please, to page 6 and, Mr. Dimovski, for you --

2 your page will have the ERN number N006-7944 in the upper right side.

3 And then if you focus, Mr. Dimovski, on the right side of the

4 passport, do you see exactly the same stamp that we saw in the previous

5 gentleman, we see a stamp indicating that this person entered on the 13th

6 of January, 2008 through the Blace border, from Kosovo, into Macedonia.

7 Correct?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. And -- so, Mr. Dimovski, could you please kindly turn to tab 12,

10 which is 65 ter 1244.2.

11 We also ask, Mr. Dimovski, for a report for a record about the

12 entry of this person. We ask for these report on the 17th of January,

13 2008, and we ask about the entries of this gentleman, Mr. Thomas Kuehnel,

14 in Macedonia for the last two weeks of January 2008. And we obtained

15 this report.

16 Would you agree with me that his name Kuehnel doesn't appear

17 under last name? We see here a gentleman named Thomas Kuehl.

18 A. Could you please refer me to the page that I should be looking

19 at?

20 Q. Yes, at the first page of the report. We asked for -- we ask,

21 Mr. Dimovski, a report about the entries of Mr. Thomas Kuehnel in

22 January 2008 into Macedonia, and we were provided with this report. We

23 particularly ask on the 17th of January for the entries of

24 Mr. Thomas Kuehnel for the previous two weeks of January 2008. And we

25 were provided, we were given with this report.

Page 10941

1 I'm asking you to look at the family name, at the last name of

2 the gentleman. Would you agree with me that this is not

3 Mr. Thomas Kuehnel. This is a gentleman named Kuehl?

4 A. I cannot see the difference in pronunciation, I can just tell you

5 the letters which I see in front of you. I presume you're trying to tell

6 me that they're different than in the passport?

7 Q. Well, if we saw that the date of birth of Mr. Thomas Kuehnel was

8 the 4th of June, 1965 and we see that this gentleman was born on another

9 date, do you see that?

10 A. Yes. If you mean 28 of January 1965, this is the dad which I'm

11 see.

12 Q. And then if we look at the passport number which is in the lower

13 part of the document, do you recall that we said that the first digits

14 were 9235? Do you see that this passport doesn't start with these

15 digits?

16 A. I see.

17 Q. And if we could please go to the following page. We see,

18 Mr. Dimovski, that this gentleman, Mr. Kuehl, actually cross the Blace

19 border and the Tabanov border in 2007, but there is no mention of arrival

20 on the 13th of January, 2008. Do you see that, Mr. Dimovski?

21 A. I see a report here. It doesn't have this data. I don't know

22 what to say this to question.

23 Q. But, Mr. Dimovski, just looking at the report, do you see that

24 the person enter or arrive through the Blace border crossing on the 13th

25 of January, 2008? Do you see it somewhere in this page?

Page 10942

1 A. On the page which you are referring me to, I cannot see this.

2 But once again I would like to say that these are reports obtained from

3 another sector. I don't know how this sector works. If you believe that

4 there are some mistakes here, I cannot tell you why such mistakes

5 occurred. How could I respond to this?

6 Q. But, Mr. Dimovski, would you agree with me that the Ministry of

7 Interior and all its sectors is trying to implement accurate and correct

8 systems, right, in order to record properly all the entries and

9 departures into and from Macedonia, right, regarding its your sector or

10 another sector?

11 A. I can only speak about the manner of work of my sector. I cannot

12 speak about anything else, also about why these mistakes have been made,

13 whether they're mistakes. I don't -- I don't understand what is here in

14 the reports, why there's a different passport number and so forth.

15 Q. Well, Mr. Dimovski, just for the sake of completeness, if you

16 could please go to tab 7, which will be 65 ter 1241.1. Tab 7. You see a

17 boarding pass, right, do you see that Mr. Daniel Saxon actually flew on

18 the 13th of January from Amsterdam to Vienna and if you could please just

19 go to the second page also in e-court, you see that he took a flight,

20 flight 777, to Pristina in January, you see that, right?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. And if you could move to tab 8 and the second page, please of

23 tab 8 and also in e-court it will be 1242.1. 65 ter 1242.1.

24 Do you see, Mr. Dimovski, that the other gentleman Mr. Kuehnel

25 the one that we saw in the passport took the same flight from Vienna to

Page 10943

1 Pristina, flight 777 on the 13th of January, 2008. Do you see that?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. And in could you please go to tab 9 which is 65 ter 1243.1. And

4 you will find a Macedonian version in the second page, because, first,

5 you will have the English and the Macedonian will be after. It's tab 9,

6 Mr. Dimovski, and the second page for you.

7 Do you see the Macedonian version? It is a hotel bill. Do you

8 see, Mr. Dimovski, that Mr. Dan Saxon check into a hotel in Skopje on the

9 13th of January, 2008, and he say there for nine nights. Do you see

10 that?

11 A. Yes, I see.

12 Q. And if we could go to tab 10 which is 65 ter 1243.2. And, again,

13 Mr. Dimovski, you have to look at the second page. You will find the

14 Macedonian version there. After the green -- exactly. After the green

15 page.

16 Do you see it is 65 ter 1243.2.

17 Well, we can work in the hard copy. Mr. Dimovski, that

18 Mr. Thomas Kuehnel actually checking into a hotel on the 13 of

19 January 2001 [sic] and stay also nine nights until the 22nd of January,

20 2008 -- I'm sorry, I meant from the 13th of January until the 22nd of

21 January, 2008 in Skopje?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. Mr. Dimovski, would you agree with me that these two gentlemen,

24 Mr. Saxon and Mr. Thomas Kuehnel, entered Macedonia together through the

25 Blace border crossing but the entry of the second person,

Page 10944

1 Mr. Thomas Kuehnel, did not make it into the computer system, into the

2 records?

3 A. I can confirm that I saw, from the stamps, that they entered

4 Macedonia. I don't know how to confirm what is not listed here in the

5 report.

6 Q. But you --

7 A. Perhaps --

8 Q. But you can confirm that you didn't see in the report that

9 Thomas Kuehnel entered Macedonia on the 13th of January?

10 A. I did not see specifically, but someone else made this report.

11 Maybe a mistake has been made other than what I'm able to see here, I'm

12 not able to add to this.

13 Q. Mr. Dimovski, I put to you that the computer system that the

14 Ministry of Interior had in place in 2001 to record the entries and

15 departures into and from Macedonia was not perfect and mistakes could

16 have happened and indeed still happen as we just saw.

17 MS. REGUE: Your Honours, I have no further questions.

18 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you Ms. Regue.

19 MS. REGUE: My apologies, I will seek to tender a couple of

20 documents. I keep forgetting about that.

21 If I could tender the passport of investigator Thomas Kuehnel

22 which is 65 ter 1242.

23 JUDGE PARKER: That's a photocopy or a photograph of it.

24 MS. REGUE: It is a photocopy of the whole passport with the

25 stamp of the entry.

Page 10945

1 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Apostolski.

2 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I would object to

3 having this written exhibit being tendered and received into evidence

4 because the witness did not confirm this. It is not prepared by his

5 unit. This written document does not state -- my apologies, Your

6 Honours.

7 Regarding the passport, I would like to object. It is

8 indisputable that this is the passport of Mr. Thomas Kuehnel but looking

9 through the passport we can note that he entered also into 2002 in the

10 Republic of Macedonia and therefore I feel that it would be more adequate

11 if a request be submitted for 2002, which is much closer to 2001.

12 Also I would like to point out that in the Republic of Macedonia

13 as of 2007 there is new law on recording entries in the Republic of

14 Macedonia, according to which not all persons entering Macedonia have to

15 be recorded.

16 MS. REGUE: [Previous translation continues] ...

17 JUDGE PARKER: We're dealing with a the question of the exhibit

18 that has been tendered at this point which is the photocopy of the

19 passport of Mr. Kuehnel; in particular, the record of what appears to be

20 an entry by him into Macedonia in 2008.

21 In that respect, we've heard your submissions, thank you,

22 Mr. Apostolski.

23 Ms. Residovic.

24 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I would also like

25 to object about the receipt of the exhibit referring to Mr. Kuehnel

Page 10946

1 having in mind that the report which our learned colleague has presented

2 does not pertain to this person at all and cannot be evidence about the

3 fact whether Mr. Kuehnel is entered into the records.

4 Therefore, the documents which were being offered, the name and

5 the last name and the number of the passport is different, and most

6 probably this unknown person did not enter Macedonia on the 13th of

7 January at all.

8 Due to these reasons, this document cannot serve as evidence

9 whether Mr. Kuehnel has been entered into the records or not.

10 JUDGE PARKER: Ms. Regue, on the point raised by Ms. Residovic.

11 MS. REGUE: Well, Your Honour, I think that this witness was

12 here -- well, I think there are two issues first the passport and then

13 the records of Thomas Kuehnel, and I'm seeking to tender both documents.

14 With regards to the records, Your Honour, here the point is

15 whether the Ministry of Interior and the department dealing with the

16 Ministry of Interior with the entries and departures is keeping accurate

17 records, and this witness has been called in order to testify about this

18 matter.

19 JUDGE PARKER: Well, this witness says he can't tell you anything

20 about a new system which he says now operates at this point of entry.

21 But, surely, the real point is, what is the evidence about the -- a

22 record of the entry of Mr. Kuehnel. Nothing that you have shown to the

23 witness deals with an entry of Mr. Kuehnel.

24 MS. REGUE: But, Your Honour, we actually request --

25 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, you're trying to give evidence now.

Page 10947

1 MS. REGUE: No, Your Honour. I'm not --

2 JUDGE PARKER: Where is the request?

3 MS. REGUE: I can actually --

4 JUDGE PARKER: You see the point?

5 MS. REGUE: Yes.

6 JUDGE PARKER: The only record here is dealing with another

7 gentleman on the face of it, a Mr. Kuehl.

8 MS. REGUE: Well, Your Honour, actually we do have the request

9 and maybe I fail to show it to the Trial Chamber, the request. If you

10 let me I will do it.

11 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, I think you better seek leave to put that to

12 the witness.

13 MS. REGUE: Yes, Your Honour.

14 JUDGE PARKER: And have it identified.

15 MS. REGUE: And if we could go, please, to --

16 Q. Mr. Dimovski, if we could go please to tab 4 of your binder,

17 which is 65 ter 1240.

18 This is an investigator's note produced by an investigator of

19 this Tribunal about a meeting between counsel for Prosecution and two

20 investigators, and the director of the bureau for public security of the

21 Ministry of Interior.

22 And if -- if we look at the second full paragraph, Mr. Dimovski,

23 and I'm going to read it to you. It says and I quote: "Ljupco

24 Todorovski was asked if the records about the investigator Thomas Kuehnel

25 and STA Daniel Saxon could be also found in the Macedonian border police

Page 10948

1 database and Ljupco Todorovski said that it should be possible. Dan

2 Saxon asked Ljupco Todorovski if it's possible to check the information

3 in the border police database about entry, exit of Thomas Kuehnel and

4 Daniel Saxon within the last two weeks. Ljupco Todorovski said that it

5 could be done straight away while the meeting was ongoing. And Ljupco

6 Todorovski gave an order over the phone to someone to conduct such check

7 on the names of Thomas Kuehnel and Daniel Saxon. 15 minutes later while

8 the meeting was still ongoing, Ljupco Todorovski received a phone call

9 from the person who had conducted the checks on the given names," and a

10 bit further down it says:

11 "Dan Saxon entered the Republic of Macedonia on 13 January 2008

12 at around 1700 hours via the Blace border crossing point and there were

13 no records about the person with the name, Thomas Kuehnel. There was a

14 person with a slightly different name who visited Republic of Macedonia

15 in August 2007."

16 And then the note simply goes on saying that we requested for a

17 printed copy of the records, Your Honour, and I apologise for not putting

18 that in front of the Chamber.

19 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Apostolski.

20 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I apologise for

21 interfering with my learned colleague from the Prosecution but we have

22 here about investigator notes about a person Ljupco Todorovski who has

23 which has neither testified nor been called to testify nor any kind of

24 statement under the 22 [as interpreted] bis rule has been taken from him.

25 Therefore, I object to this kind and line of questioning.

Page 10949

1 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.

2 MS. REGUE: Your Honour, I think the point is like the

3 Prosecution requested to this gentleman to produce a report and this

4 gentleman holds a position in the Ministry of Interior.

5 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.

6 Mr. Dimovski, can I ask you, do you know Mr. Todorovski?

7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

8 JUDGE PARKER: And what is his position?

9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] He is the head of public safety at

10 the Ministry of Interior.

11 JUDGE PARKER: And does that bureau have responsibility with

12 respect to recording any border crossings?

13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. He is the head of the bureau

14 for public security and I presume as a user, he requested from someone to

15 respond to the questions of the Prosecution. This is what I'm able to

16 see from this document that I'm looking at. He called someone by

17 telephone and requested from another person to carry out this request.

18 JUDGE PARKER: And you say that the crossing at Blace is now the

19 computer system there, is now managed by a section other than your own.

20 What is the section that looks after that crossing?

21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, this is correct. As far as I

22 know, perhaps I won't say the name correctly, but this is part of the

23 DBK.

24 JUDGE PARKER: And what is the DBK?

25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is the direction for security

Page 10950

1 and counter-intelligence. This is the abbreviation for this directorate.

2 Perhaps I'm not saying the name quite correctly, but this is not part of

3 the bureau for public security.

4 JUDGE PARKER: And is the DBK part of the Ministry of Interior?

5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

6 JUDGE PARKER: And your own section is part of the Ministry of

7 Interior.

8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

9 [Trial Chamber confers]

10 JUDGE PARKER: Did I see you on your feet, Ms. Residovic.

11 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, in addition to the

12 arguments which I previously presented about not receiving this document,

13 even the investigator notes that come from the director for public

14 security bureau is evident in the last paragraph that the director

15 Ljupco Todorovski requested that a written version be submitted. The

16 response about Mr. Thomas Kuehnel, the document, which our learned

17 colleague has submitted is not that version about Mr. Kuehnel.

18 JUDGE PARKER: The Chamber will receive the passport and the

19 investigator's notes and the record of computer return.

20 Now that will make it a bit of a challenge for the ...

21 THE REGISTRAR: 65 ter 1242 which is a copy of Mr. Kuehnel's

22 passport will become exhibit P612; investigator' notes 65 ter 1240 will

23 become Exhibit P613; and the report will become Exhibit P614, Your

24 Honours.

25 MS. REGUE: Your Honours, I apologise for taking your patience

Page 10951

1 but I just realised that when I put my last question to the witness I

2 didn't allow him to answer, and with Your Honours ...

3 JUDGE PARKER: I've forgotten what your last question was.

4 MS. REGUE: I was just putting to Mr. Dimovski that the computer

5 system in the Ministry of Interior back in 2001 to record the entries and

6 departures from Macedonia was not perfect and mistakes could indeed take

7 place --

8 JUDGE PARKER: I thought you had an answer to that much earlier.

9 MS. REGUE: Okay, I'm sorry, Your Honour, I thought that the last

10 one had not been answered.

11 JUDGE PARKER: Well, it may not have been, but the witness

12 frankly accepted that any system could be affected by error, as I think

13 even the Chamber would know.

14 MS. REGUE: Thank you, Your Honour.

15 JUDGE PARKER: I would make it clear that the admission of these

16 documents is not an indication by the Chamber of the weight it would

17 attach to them. Each in combination appears to have potential relevance

18 to issues in this case, in particular, whether the system now in

19 operation, which is a system that is replacing that in operation in 2001,

20 is always correct in what it achieves, and to the extent that that may

21 have some relevance, the Chamber is prepared to receive what is here.

22 Now, is there any --

23 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

24 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Apostolski, I'm not sure whether there was any

25 other matter you wanted to raise in re-examination. I suspect not, but I

Page 10952

1 don't want to overlook you.

2 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I only have one

3 short question for the witness. The witness mentioned that there is an

4 new record, system of record keeping on several border crossings, and I

5 would like to ask the witness.

6 Re-examination by Mr. Apostolski:

7 Q. [Interpretation] If he knows of some more recent regulations in

8 this account?

9 A. Do you mean about the manner in which records are kept? I know

10 from discussions with a colleague by the name of Stojce Coklevski [phoen]

11 from the border police that a new law was passed in 2007 and it is being

12 implemented which clearly defines the exceptions of someone being

13 recorded into the system, but I am -- I do not know the law well. This

14 is the only information about it which I can share.

15 Q. Thank you very much.

16 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I have no further

17 questions for this witness.

18 [Trial Chamber confers]

19 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you very much, Mr. Apostolski.

20 Mr. Dimovski, you will be pleased to learn that was the extent of

21 the questions that --

22 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreters kindly ask for the microphone.

23 JUDGE PARKER: We wish to thank you for your attendance, and you,

24 of course, are now able to return to your normal activities. The court

25 officer will show you out.

Page 10953

1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.

2 [The witness withdrew]

3 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Apostolski, is that the conclusion of the case

4 for your client, Mr. Tarculovski.

5 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I have some

6 additional questions that I would like to deal with, and this would be

7 the end of the case of Mr. Tarculovski. We have three 92 bis statements,

8 and I have obtained some documents that the Chamber has requested from

9 me. When the expert Markovski on page 10902 confirmed that some by-laws

10 regulated the work of the General Staff, I wish to remind the Chamber

11 about it and with regards to the redirect of the expert Blagoja

12 Markovski, the Chamber has requested, on page 10903, to submit the by-law

13 dealing with the work of the General Staff of the army of the Republic of

14 Macedonia until the adoption of the new Law on Defence of 2001.

15 The Defence has secured those documents which are strict state

16 secret, and I will seek to tender them into evidence under seal.

17 Could the usher please help me? I have prepared binders.

18 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

19 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] The documents bear the numbers

20 65 ter 2D737. That is a document, decision on the organisation formation

21 and development of the army of the Republic of Macedonia. Date is 10

22 April 1992, issued on -- or passed on the basis of Article 15, points 4

23 and 5; and Article 132 of the Law on Defence of the Republic of Macedonia

24 of 15th of February, 1992, passed by the president, Kiro Gligorov.

25 Your Honours, this is an 19-page document and the Defence has

Page 10954

1 provided a draft translation of four pages. The first pages of the

2 document and the final page of the document. And the document has been

3 submitted to CLSS for translation.

4 If the chamber believes that it is necessary to translate all

5 pages, I would kindly request that they request that translation from the

6 CLSS, considering that this is a voluminous document. And, at the same

7 time I seek to tender this document into evidence, Your Honours.

8 JUDGE PARKER: The translation which you have provided, the pages

9 you've selected, are they the only ones that you see to be related in any

10 way to the General Staff?

11 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honours. And we

12 believe that one additional page would be needed. It is the final page.

13 JUDGE PARKER: And you said that had been translated as well?

14 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] It has been translated. You

15 have it in the hard copy, but that has not been uploaded into the

16 e-court, Your Honours, because we have received the translation this

17 morning. The hard copy that you have has the translation of the final

18 page. And I think that there is no need to translate the other pages.

19 That is the opinion of the Defence.

20 JUDGE PARKER: And what is the reference on the last page that

21 you think is relevant?

22 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] What is relevant is the

23 signature of the president, Kiro Gligorov.

24 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you. At the moment, I would indicate,

25 Mr. Apostolski, that the Chamber, first of all, thanks you for providing

Page 10955

1 this; and secondly, that if there are no other references to the General

2 Staff, we would not see need for any or more extensive translation. And

3 unless counsel for either of the other parties feels that there is some

4 particular need to translate some other part, the Chamber would be

5 content with what has been done.

6 So, with those words, we would receive this document and the

7 limited translation that is provided.

8 THE REGISTRAR: The document will become Exhibit 2D112, Your

9 Honours.

10 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Your Honours, could the document

11 please be placed under seal, because this is a top state secret.

12 JUDGE PARKER: Yes. Although I thought it had been replaced.

13 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] It has been replaced, Your

14 Honours, but just to be on the safe side and with regards to the

15 responsibility and obligations I assumed when I and my investigators

16 obtained this document, I'm making this proposal to be on the safe side.

17 JUDGE PARKER: Under seal it will be, Mr. Apostolski. You can

18 rest in peace.

19 Now, the second document.

20 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Your Honours, the Defence has

21 also secured the document formation number 540.001 on the organisation of

22 the General Staff of the army of the Republic of Macedonia passed by the

23 president of the Republic of Macedonia, Kiro Gligorov, on the basis of

24 Article 15, paragraph 4 of the Law on Defence of 1992 which regulates in

25 detail the operation of the General Staff of the army of the Republic of

Page 10956

1 Macedonia. And this is a document, 65 ter 2D736, and what it is, is

2 again, highest level state secret. It has 33 pages. We have provided a

3 draft translation to eight of those, the first ones as well as the final

4 two pages.

5 And with regards to this document, Your Honours, considering that

6 this is, again, a voluminous document, the CLSS would translate it only

7 if the Chamber issues an order. But the Defence believes that these

8 pages that we have provided the draft translations of are sufficient.

9 And the organisational chart of the staff is enclosed within the

10 translated pages.

11 So I seek to tender this document into evidence, under seal, Your

12 Honours.

13 JUDGE PARKER: I can't quickly see the date on which this

14 document came into force. Are you able to give that date?

15 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] The first page, Your Honour, you

16 can see year 1993, and the date is on the following page, in the left

17 corner. That is in the upper left corner. There is written vojno poste

18 [phoen], military post, 283, and the record number 80/44, and the date is

19 16th of July, 1993. And on that same page, we have the signature of the

20 president of the Republic of Macedonia, Kiro Gligorov, and the seal of

21 the Ministry of Defence of the Republic of Macedonia, as well as the

22 signature of Colonel Spasa Kostadinovski, which certifies that the

23 document is reliable.

24 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, we can find that in the Macedonian language.

25 It is not in any of the English translated pages but we can follow from

Page 10957

1 what you have said that the date indicated is the effective date. So

2 thank you for that, Mr. Apostolski, and that document will be received

3 under seal on the same basis as the previous document was received. That

4 is, that no further translation will be needed, unless other counsel see

5 reason for it.

6 THE REGISTRAR: The document will be received as Exhibit 2D113,

7 under seal, Your Honours.

8 JUDGE PARKER: Now you mentioned also you had three Rule 92 bis

9 statements.

10 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Yes. Yes, Your Honours. I have

11 three 92 bis statements, and I would like to provide a brief summary of

12 those statement, but I see the time, Your Honours. Perhaps it should be

13 the convenient time, or should I start.

14 JUDGE PARKER: Perhaps we will adjourn now, have a break and

15 resume at a quarter past 4.00.

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

17 --- Recess taken at 3.43 p.m.

18 --- On resuming at 4.15 p.m.

19 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, Mr. Apostolski.

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

21 I would now like to read a short segment of the 92 bis

22 statements. I will start with the statement of Ms. Vilma Trajkovska. 65

23 ter 2D699.

24 Mrs. Vilma Trajkovska is otherwise the wife of the late president

25 of the Republic of Macedonia, Mr. Boris Trajkovski. She says in 2002 in

Page 10958

1 regards to her personal security and the security of her children was in

2 the care of Mr. Johan Tarculovski. In regards to him, she says that this

3 is a good and honest person, that he carried out his duties responsibly

4 and conscientiously and he was always present with them or was in their

5 vicinity. He was never absent, and he was always watchful of the

6 environment, and he was always controlling nearby movements.

7 Mr. Johan Tarculovski carried out his duty not only in Skopje but

8 also outside of the countries in places where they were attending

9 privately or in an official capacity. He carried out his work on the

10 order of his superior, as well as in line with their wishes and needs.

11 His -- her husband and she personally were satisfied with his

12 forthcomingness, correct behaviour and demeanour, and responsible

13 attitude which was fully up to standard.

14 Your Honours, I would now like formally to tender this statement

15 of Ms. Vilma Trajkovska into evidence.

16 JUDGE PARKER: It will be admitted.

17 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit 2D114, Your Honours.

18 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I would now like

19 to read a short segment of the statement made by Mr. Blagoja Stojanovski.

20 This is 65 ter 2D697.

21 Mr. Blagoja Stojanovski has given two statements, and as a

22 summary of these two statement, I can say the following: In his

23 statements, when asked about the person Fatmir Kamberi, he responded that

24 he knew this person because he worked in the post office in Cair where he

25 was caught in the act of theft, having embezzled a large amount of money

Page 10959

1 and was dismissed from his work. The witness Blagoja Stojanovski knows

2 Mr. Kamberi very little having worked in the same post office. Perhaps

3 they stat next to each other in the post office, but they never sat

4 together outside the workplace in a restaurant or a cafe.

5 Your Honours, I would seek to tender this statement into

6 evidence.

7 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.

8 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit 2D115, Your Honours.

9 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] I would now like to turn to the

10 statement given by Mr. Tadeus Jarcev. This is 65 ter 2D696.

11 In the period from 2000 to 2003, Mr. Tadeus Jarcev worked in the

12 security of president Boris Trajkovski and was charged for the security

13 of his family, his wife and his children. In that period working with

14 him was Mr. Johan Tarculovski.

15 During their joint time of service, he had gotten to know

16 Mr. Tarculovski well, and says, in regards to Mr. Tarculovski, that he is

17 a diligent, good and responsible person.

18 Mr. Johan Tarculovski was often commended by President

19 Boris Trajkovski, and the president had great confidence in

20 Mr. Tarculovski. They had no conflicts while working together.

21 Privately they were friends, so they were able to get to know each other

22 well. Further, he states that Mr. Johan Tarculovski is an exceptionally

23 and extraordinarily honest person, a good friend, respected by his

24 colleagues and friends.

25 Witness Jarcev and Mr. Tarculovski were in the detail of

Page 10960

1 Ms. Trajkovska when she have was travelling abroad in an official as well

2 as in private capacity. They cooperated well with foreign security

3 services when travelling abroad, and none of them ever issued any kind of

4 comments about the work of Mr. Jarcev and Tarculovski, or about their

5 demeanour.

6 Your Honours, I would now like to formally tender the statement

7 of Mr. Tadeus Jarcev into evidence.

8 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.

9 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit 2D116, Your Honours.

10 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Your Honours, with this, I'm

11 closing the case of Mr. Johan Tarculovski. Thank you for your patience,

12 yours as well as my colleagues from the Prosecution, and of the Defence

13 of Mr. Boskoski during the presentation of my Defence case.

14 JUDGE PARKER: We thank you, Mr. Apostolski, for the case you've

15 presented and the succinctness with which you have done so. And, of

16 course, you're closing of your case is subject to the decision by the

17 Tribunal of some outstanding motions.

18 I would mention that you have one motion dated the 11th of

19 March for the removal of two further witness names from the witness list.

20 The Chamber grants that motion today and will not publish a written

21 decision.

22 I would also mention that counsel for the other accused

23 Mr. Boskoski filed a motion on the 10th although it's actually received

24 in the registry on the 11th of March. It was a motion simply seeking

25 leave to replace translations of two present exhibits, 1D319 and 1D320,

Page 10961

1 with new agreed translations. That motion is granted today, and the

2 chamber will not publish written reasons.

3 There are two further motions. The motion of the Boskoski

4 Defence to amend its Rule 65 ter list and to admit exhibits from the bar

5 table which was filed on the 3rd of March. A decision will be delivered

6 in that in writing in the course of this week.

7 And there is also the question of the deferred decision in

8 respect of the admissibility of two recordings of intercepts. That

9 decision is expected to be delivered by the Chamber in writing in the

10 course of this week.

11 Is there any other outstanding issue which either Defence counsel

12 wishes to raise?

13 Mr. Apostolski.

14 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] Your Honours, today we made a

15 short brief submitted for -- short brief about bar table exhibits. A

16 very brief motion.

17 JUDGE PARKER: Well, I'm afraid I haven't seen that. I can't

18 promise you it will be delivered this week. It may be, but don't hold

19 your breath. It will be delivered as soon as possible.

20 Thank you for that.

21 Ms. Residovic.

22 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, on several

23 occasions in front of this Trial Chamber we raised the issue of

24 translation. From Thursday till today the Defence of Mr. Boskoski was in

25 communication with our colleagues from the Prosecution, and we're now in

Page 10962

1 a situation to propose to the Trial Chamber that both sides continue in

2 this period of time to turn attention to the material mistakes,

3 substantial mistakes which may appear in the draft translations offered

4 by either of the two sides, and that we try to coordinate the texts,

5 after which these and such documents would be submitted to the Trial

6 Chamber as a replacement for the existing translations together with the

7 relevant documents.

8 We talked about this, taking into account the instructions which

9 you gave to us regarding the replaced documents Exhibits 319 and 320 and

10 also taking into account the fact that CLSS overburdened with work that

11 our time is short, and that the best way to avoid material mistakes which

12 would be, of course, also of importance for the Trial Chamber, is by

13 coordination and agreement between the two sides that we have a correct

14 translation and that in this fashion we submit this to the Trial Chamber

15 to be replaced for the existing documents.

16 In the moment or at the time that we're unable to agree on the

17 point that there is an mistake in translation, as you suggested in the

18 case of 1D319 and 1D320, we shall request the translation of this

19 documents from CLSS, from this short comment, the Defence of

20 Ljube Boskoski, Exhibits 1D83 [as interpreted], the Trial Chamber takes

21 into account that we have come to an understanding that the existing

22 draft -- my apology, I have been warned that I should speak more slowly

23 for the accuracy of the interpretation. Therefore we're talking about

24 Exhibit 1D183, after the Prosecution noted certain incorrect elements in

25 the translation of this document, the draft of the translation was

Page 10963

1 proposed by the Defence, the parties have come to an agreement to replace

2 the current draft translation with another translation which, in the

3 course of this week, will be uploaded to e-court.

4 Therefore, we ask for the Trial Chamber to approve this

5 replacement.

6 Further, number 2, in regards to Exhibit P606.1, the Defence will

7 also, in regards to this document, continue our cooperation with the

8 Prosecution, and together we will look over the draft translation. In

9 the case of need of certain changes, such shall be up loaded in the

10 e-court system and we ask for the Trial Chamber to also approve this

11 replacement.

12 In regards to Exhibit 1D107, the Defence is still waiting on a

13 revised translation from the CLSS, and we therefore ask the Trial Chamber

14 to approve the replacement of this translation at the moment when we do

15 receive this translation.

16 As for Exhibit P94, and this is an instruction on the manner and

17 charging of official weapons and special means of communication, on the

18 22nd of February, 2008, on page of the transcript 9931, the Defence has

19 pointed out to an incorrect translation of certain provisions of this

20 document and requested from CLSS to carry out a review, a check of this

21 translation. The Defence expects to receive the official translation and

22 we therefore ask of the Trial Chamber to replace the existing text with

23 the translation that we will receive from CLSS. In view of the fact that

24 Defence believes it important to avoid mistakes in translation of

25 essential exhibits and evidence -- and elements in certain evidence, we

Page 10964

1 will continue our cooperation with the Prosecution, and if, in certain

2 draft documents or in official documents undergo changes, then the

3 Defence will submit a special request for the replacement of these

4 documents with the new translation from the Trial Chamber.

5 These are some of the issues which we deem important to point out

6 prior to ending the trial proceedings, since we believe the issues of

7 translation to be of significance and importance both for the two parties

8 and for the Trial Chamber as well.

9 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you Ms. Residovic.

10 Could I say that in respect of the agreed revised translation of

11 Exhibit 1D183, that will be substituted.

12 With respect to anticipated further revisions, the Chamber will

13 indicate that any translation which is revised and agreed by all three

14 parties will be substituted without need for a further formal motion from

15 the parties, as long as all three parties agree, and that is provided and

16 then there will then be a substitution ordered by the Chamber.

17 If there is a concern about a translation and no agreement is

18 reached, if the CLSS provides then a further revised translation at the

19 request of the party, that further revision by CLSS will be substituted

20 for the present one without a need for any further formal motion and an

21 order will be made by the Chamber for the substitution.

22 So agreement by all parties, or if there isn't agreement, a

23 further revision by CLSS. In either case, there will be a substitution

24 of the new translation.

25 If any other situation arises, it will need to be by way of a

Page 10965

1 formal motion and leave is granted to present such a formal motion as

2 long as it occurs before the final written briefs are filed.

3 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you very much, Your

4 Honours.

5 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.

6 Mr. Saxon.

7 MR. SAXON: Thank you, Your Honours.

8 Just following up on what my colleague Ms. Residovic just

9 explained to the Trial Chamber, you may recall, Your Honour Judge Parker

10 directed me to submit parts of what is Exhibit 1D00098 to CLSS for

11 revised translation. That is the so-called new Law on Defence from 2001.

12 And it's my understanding that CLSS has done part of the work

13 requested, and -- but still has a bit more left to do. We're hoping that

14 that work will be completed hopefully by Thursday, which is the last

15 official working day of this week, and if we do receive those revised

16 translations from CLSS, then with your leave, we will have the revised

17 Articles and chapters of that law uploaded into e-court.

18 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you. Leave is granted.

19 Is there any matter that the Prosecution seeks to raise,

20 Mr. Saxon?

21 MR. SAXON: I think, for the moment, I will defer to

22 Ms. Residovic, because I believe she has a matter that she wishes to

23 raise.

24 JUDGE PARKER: Oh. I thought she had completed.

25 MR. SAXON: Your Honour, I have been instructed by my colleagues

Page 10966

1 that, once again, I have forgotten a brief matter. It is administrative

2 but also related to translation.

3 We seek permission that a revised translation that was done for

4 Exhibit P00604 needs to be -- needs to replace the current translation.

5 So we would ask that the translation document with ID 2D08-1226 replace

6 what is now linked to that exhibit, which has ID 2D06-0503. And the

7 reason is because in the original English translation there was one page

8 that was uploaded twice so that needed to be corrected.

9 JUDGE PARKER: Very well. That will be substituted.

10 Ms. Residovic, I'm sorry, I thought had you finished.

11 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, perhaps my

12 colleague is right, but I thought prior to presenting our joint proposal

13 of the Prosecution and the two Defence teams, we should note whether

14 there are certain issues related to Rule 85(A)(iii) the reply of the

15 Prosecution, or any evidence of the Trial Chamber. After this, I will

16 present the proposals on the issue of submitting of the final briefs.

17 This is an issue we discussed with the Prosecution, and we have a

18 proposal which we wish to put forth before the Trial Chamber.

19 [Trial Chamber confers]

20 JUDGE PARKER: We had not overlooked those matters. I was trying

21 to get out of the way any outstanding motions or issues, to have them

22 completed.

23 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] At this moment, I have nothing to

24 add in regards to the issues which are ongoing. Thank you.

25 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.

Page 10967

1 Mr. Saxon, the issue now comes as to whether any further evidence

2 by way of rebuttal is being contemplated.

3 MR. SAXON: The answer to that question, Your Honour, is no.

4 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.

5 [Trial Chamber confers]

6 JUDGE PARKER: I can inform counsel that the Chamber does not

7 propose to call evidence, although the prospect is tempting.

8 Now that brings us to the question of final briefs and oral

9 submissions.

10 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, if I may on behalf

11 of the parties, the Defences of both Mr. Tarculovski and Mr. Boskoski, to

12 make a proposal to the Chamber.

13 The parties reviewed all questions that are necessary to be

14 processed in the final written briefs, and we had in mind at that, that

15 until the moment a large number of witnesses have been heard and that the

16 transcript itself amounts to some 11.000 pages, that 1084 exhibits have

17 been received and if one has in mind the distributed evidence of large

18 court documents or other documents, then we have, in total 2040 exhibits

19 that both the Defence and the Prosecution need to process from the

20 aspects of the Defence case and the Prosecution case respectively in the

21 final written briefs and the Defence and the Prosecution agree that they

22 have yet to deal with the segment of work dealing with the detailed

23 overview of the most important documents, the translation issue also that

24 we discussed a moment ago, and also the Defence of Mr. Boskoski filed

25 many motions for corrections of the transcript, and we were officially

Page 10968

1 informed that the official substitutions of the transcript pages will be

2 made available to us within the next three weeks. These are all elements

3 that the parties took into consideration in order to propose to the

4 Chamber the time that the parties would say need to write their final

5 briefs.

6 At the same time, we took care to select a time-period

7 sufficiently brief, in order to avoid further delay of this procedure.

8 Due to these reason, the Defence and the Prosecution propose that the

9 Chamber approves that the parties to the procedure have a period of six

10 weeks to produce their final briefs in writing. At the same time, the

11 Defence and the Prosecution state, in agreement, that they will not

12 request time for written response to the written motions made by the

13 other party, and that after filing the final briefs in writing, we seek

14 the Chamber to grant us leave to have ten days for [as interpreted] oral

15 presentation of our written arguments.

16 Your Honour, we also agreed that our colleague Mr. Saxon would

17 propose the way in which the oral presentation of written arguments of

18 both Prosecution and Defence will be made.

19 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Saxon.

20 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] I apologise there is a mistake.

21 Ten days until the oral presentation of our written arguments. This is

22 page 46, line 6.

23 JUDGE PARKER: Is that ten sitting days or ten days?

24 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Ten days -- no, I apologise. Ten

25 days between the filing of our final briefs and until the day when we

Page 10969

1 will begin the presentation of our oral arguments. It was a mistake in

2 the transcript.

3 [Trial Chamber confers]

4 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.

5 Mr. Saxon.

6 MR. SAXON: Thank you, Your Honour.

7 The Prosecution would support the proposal that has been

8 communicated to you by Ms. Residovic. We hope that this proposal, on one

9 level actually, will save sometime for the Chamber, given the fact that

10 the parties would not intend to file written responses to each other's

11 final trial brief.

12 JUDGE PARKER: We have not allowed that in previous trials, let

13 me say, Mr. Saxon.

14 MR. SAXON: Well, then, I take it --

15 JUDGE PARKER: Responses have been dealt with in the course of

16 oral submissions which has saved yet another week or more. Yes.

17 MR. SAXON: Very well, Your Honour. I was not aware of that last

18 point. We would ask, again, then, that that same procedure be applied in

19 the case of this trial.

20 If the Trial Chamber, because of the needs of scheduling and

21 calendaring the starts of other trials cannot give the parties six weeks

22 in which to produce its final trial brief, we would ask that, at a

23 minimum four to five weeks be given, so that the parties can produce

24 their very best possible work in this complex trial.

25 The parties would propose, with respect to oral argument, that

Page 10970

1 the Prosecution be given a full court day, standard three sessions to

2 make its oral closing argument; and then the Defence be provided with a

3 full court day to make its closing arguments; and then on a third day,

4 half a day, half a court day, be provided to the Prosecution in the form

5 of an oral rebuttal and half a court day be provided to the Defence in

6 the form of an oral rejoinder.

7 That would be the proposal of the parties, with respect to the

8 scheduling of final arguments, Your Honour.

9 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.

10 Mr. Apostolski, is there anything you wish to add?

11 MR. APOSTOLSKI: [Interpretation] No, I have nothing further to

12 add, Your Honours. My learned colleague Residovic made a presentation on

13 my behalf as well, and I fully agree with what she said, and I support

14 her.

15 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.

16 [Trial Chamber confers]

17 JUDGE PARKER: We thank the parties for their proposals and

18 considerations of the timetable for the final stages in court of this

19 trial. The trial has, of course, taken longer than originally

20 anticipated, and the Chamber is anxious, because of that, and because of

21 the desire to move on to other trials as quickly as possible, to keep to

22 the proper minimum, the time between now and the presentation of final

23 written briefs and the final oral arguments. Every week that is spent

24 while that process takes place is a week delay in the completion of this

25 trial.

Page 10971

1 We are also, though, very conscious of what counsel have put to

2 us, that if adequate time is left for this process of particularly

3 written submissions and then for the presentation of the final oral

4 arguments, that enables a more efficient final decision making process to

5 be undertaken by the Chamber, so that we can strike the right balance

6 between allowing adequate time and trying to finish the trial as quickly

7 as possible, we will be serving the interests of the accused men and the

8 interests of this Tribunal and those awaiting trial in enabling us to

9 work on -- move on to other work.

10 The Chamber, because of those reasons, is concerned that it will

11 be too long to allow what is proposed as a full six weeks for the

12 preparation of the final written briefs. In the view of the Chamber,

13 that work ought to be able to be accomplished in five weeks, and the

14 Chamber has that in mind.

15 Given the desirability of oral arguments being completed in --

16 within the one week and not with a weekend gap in the process, we

17 therefore have in mind ordering that the final written briefs of all

18 three parties should be filed in this Tribunal by Thursday, the 24th of

19 April, which is five weeks and two days from now, and that oral arguments

20 should commence on Tuesday, the 6th of May. We would propose that on

21 Tuesday, the 6th of May, the Prosecution should present its oral

22 argument. On Wednesday, the 7th of May, both Defences should present

23 their argument. Each Defence will be allowed a half of the sitting time,

24 unless by agreement between them, some other division of time is reached.

25 We will certainly fit in with any agreement between the two Defence teams

Page 10972

1 as to the division of time in final submissions. And then on Thursday,

2 the 8th of May, we would propose that half of the sitting time be allowed

3 for any rebuttal oral submissions of the Prosecution, and the other half

4 for any oral final rejoinder submissions of the Defence teams, once

5 again, either dividing that half day equally, or if they reach mutual

6 agreement according to that mutually agreed division.

7 Those arrangements go quite a long way to meeting what counsel

8 sought, and I hope it will be appreciated that the time we've allowed,

9 although less than is proposed, nevertheless ought to provide a

10 reasonable time for the work to be done adequately and properly so that

11 the cases of all three parties are properly presented in a way that

12 enables the Chamber to work efficiently towards its decision.

13 The Chamber would like to mention now as it is an appropriate

14 time, our appreciation of the of the efforts by counsel for all three

15 parties in the way they have been generally cooperative with each other

16 and with the chamber in the efficient presentation of their respective

17 cases and in dealing with the sorts of issues that arise from time to

18 time where opposing views have to be compromised and sensible

19 arrangements reached. The attitude generally displayed throughout the

20 trial to date has, we feel, assisted in the completion of the trial in

21 the time that it has, although longer than originally anticipated without

22 that spirit of sensible cooperation, it could have taken much longer than

23 we have managed. So the Chamber wishes to record and express its

24 appreciation for what has been done by the three counsel teams in this

25 regard.

Page 10973

1 We must now adjourn, and we do so with a view, then, to resuming

2 our deliberations on Tuesday, the 6th of May, when we commence final oral

3 arguments, and in the meantime we look forward to receiving, by Thursday,

4 the 24th of April, the written final briefs of all parties.

5 We now adjourn.

6 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 5.02 p.m.,

7 to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 6th day of May,

8 2008, at 9.00 a.m.