1 Thursday, 23 August 2007
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 2.20 p.m.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar, would you please call the case.
6 THE REGISTRAR: Good afternoon, Your Honours. This is case number
7 IT-04-84-T, the Prosecutor versus Ramush Haradinaj et al.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
9 Before the witness will be brought into the courtroom, I'd like to
10 say that yesterday, when I rendered the Chamber's decision on the exhibits
11 tendered through the witness after Avramovic, I mistakenly referred to
12 annexes 7 through 11 to Mr. Afterramvic Rule 92 ter statement as being
13 exhibits P130 through P134. This, you'll find, on page 7447.
14 The correct exhibit numbers for these annexes are P390 through
15 394. And they should be admitted under those numbers.
16 [The witness entered court]
17 JUDGE ORIE: Good afternoon, Mr. Fazliu. I'd like to remind you
18 that you're still bound by the solemn declaration that you gave at the
19 beginning of your testimony. I take it that that's clear to you. Today
20 you'll be cross-examined by counsel for the Defence of the accused, that
21 is, counsel for Mr. Haradinaj, counsel for Mr. Balaj, and counsel for
22 Mr. Brahimaj. Mr. Emmerson, as far as policy for private session is
23 concerned, the same applies as yesterday.
24 MR. EMMERSON: Yes. Given the approach that has been taken thus
25 far, I think it might be wise if we begin in private session.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then we move into private session.
2 [Private session - confidentiality lifted by later order of the Chamber]
19 Cross-examination by Mr. Emmerson:
20 Q. Mr. Fazliu, I'm going to show you some documents in this file and
21 then ask you some questions about them. But first of all, just so you
22 that you understand what is in the file, behind tab 1 is the Albanian
23 original, then an English translation of a newspaper article published in
24 Bota Sot newspaper on the 15th of March 2005, very shortly after the
25 indictment in this case was made public and, of course, mentioned your
1 name. Behind tab 2, you have first an Albanian and then an English
2 translation of a witness statement made and signed by yourself when
3 interviewed by investigators for the Defence on the 15th of June. Do you
4 see that?
5 A. Yes, I do.
6 Q. And just so that we are clear, when you were interviewed by the
7 Defence investigators, you were given your statement in the Albanian
8 original so that you could read for yourself without any risk of
9 translation errors what it was you had been recorded as saying; is that
11 A. Yes, but sometimes there may have been some minor mistakes but
12 generally it was okay, some minor mistakes, I'm saying, but generally, it
13 was good.
14 Q. And I think if we look, for example, on page 6 of the statement,
15 in the Albanian original, we can see some minor mistakes that you have
16 corrected as you went through it; is that right?
17 A. Yes, certainly.
18 Q. That's the sort of minor mistake that you're referring to where
19 you make a correction and then initial it?
20 A. Yes. Sometimes the word was not in the right place, but generally
21 the essence of the text was what I meant.
22 Q. If we look for example at page 10, again in the Albanian, there is
23 a sentence at the end which you have changed. You see that?
24 A. Yes. Yes. I deemed it reasonable to do that. That's why I did.
25 Q. Absolutely. No complaint. The short point, Mr. Fazliu, is that
1 you obviously read this statement with care and corrected anything in it
2 that you thought was inaccurate; is that correct?
3 A. Yes. Maybe not 100 per cent, but most of them I found out and
5 Q. Thank you. And was the information that you gave to the Defence
6 investigators on the 15th of June, was that truthful information, to the
7 best of your knowledge?
8 A. Yes, it is.
9 Q. And if you were asked the same questions here in court today as
10 the investigators asked you then, you would give the same answers, would
12 A. I believe so. Maybe I might not use the same wording, but, of
13 course, I would say the same crux of the sentence.
14 Q. Thank you. And then behind tab 3, just so that you can see it, we
15 may or may not need to refer to this, on the 11th of May of this year, you
16 were interviewed by Mr. Di Fazio via videolink in preparation for calling
17 you to give evidence. Do you remember giving an interview to
18 Mr. Di Fazio?
19 A. Yes, yes, I do.
20 THE INTERPRETER: Your Honours could the witness be asked to wait
21 for the translation of the question before starting the answer, please?
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Fazliu, before you answer, could you first wait
23 until Mr. Emmerson has finished because the interpreters, if you start
24 speaking already, they can't interpret the words spoken by two persons
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I apologise for that.
2 MR. EMMERSON:
3 Q. And what you have behind tab 3 is a transcript of that interview.
4 As I say we may or may not need to refer to that. If we can start,
5 please, with tab 1, and with the newspaper article that appears there, I
6 want just to understand the context in a little more detail, if I can,
7 please. Is it the position, Mr. Fazliu, that in March, you became aware
8 for the first time that your name had been included in the indictment in
9 this case?
10 A. I saw that my name was there, and considered that as deliberate
11 act committed by someone to my detriment or to the detriment of my family.
12 I leave this up to his or her conscience. If I made a statement before,
13 that might have been a momentary statement which shouldn't be taken as a
14 formal statement and not be included in the indictment against someone,
15 but I believe that my name was used deliberately by someone.
16 Q. Mr. Fazliu, can I stop you there for a moment? Try, if you can,
17 just to focus on the specific question that I'm asking you. I'm not
18 asking you at the moment who it was you think may have used your name, but
19 I think you've confirmed, have you not, that you saw that your name was
20 included within this indictment sometime during March; is that correct?
21 A. Yes, it's correct.
22 Q. And prior to that time, had you ever been interviewed by
23 representatives of the Prosecution and given a witness statement?
24 A. It is possible that I did, but not a statement whereby I accused
25 someone of doing something like this.
1 Q. You can see the text of the newspaper article that appears there
2 and it refers to the 34th point or count on the indictment as it then
5 threatened, and only released when members of your family intervened. Is
6 that correct? That was the allegation in the indictment you saw?
7 A. Yes. This is how it was in the indictment, and I read it through
8 the Koha Ditore article. It was accusation there, but after that, after
9 hearing a lot of rumours by various individuals, who are meant to utter
10 only bad words, I wanted to make a refutation of the statement and I did
11 that in two or three dailies, I think, Koha Ditore, and some two other
12 newspapers, and that is a text which was written by the office for
13 information in Kline. And I preferred to explain life here whatever I
14 have with respect to this allegation, because kidnap, that word, is not
15 what happened in reality. To be kidnapped is something completely
16 different of what the reality was.
17 And I think I have explained this fact, this action, the
18 kidnapping is like someone throws you a sack over your head, ties your
19 hand or pushes you to some car, it's different when you are just taken to
20 a place, and you just talk freely and are free to do what you -- to say
21 what you want.
22 Q. Pause there, Mr. Fazliu, because I'm going to take you through
23 what actually happened in some detail, so if you wait for the question,
24 you'll have an opportunity to explain. Now, the next question I want to
25 ask you is by the time of this newspaper article in March 2005, can I take
1 it by then you were very familiar with the appearance of Mr. Haradinaj?
2 You knew what he looked like by March 2005, presumably from media and
3 newspaper articles?
4 A. Yes, certainly, I did.
5 Q. And so, the passage I want to take you to in the English is just
6 below halfway down, which begins on the 24th of May, and in the Albanian
7 of the newspaper article, it is the 4th column, the first full sentence
8 beginning from there. The newspaper article records you as having said,
9 "On the 24th of May, KLA soldiers asked us to go to the headquarters in
10 order to discuss the reorganisation and the defence of the Grabanica
11 village in the municipality of Kline.
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. "Mr. Ramush Haradinaj was not present on that day in the
14 headquarters of Jabllanice, and I have never met him or talked to him."
15 Did you say that?
16 A. Yes, I did.
17 Q. And then leaving the next sentence out, it continues, "After the
18 discussions we had in the headquarters with Mr. Lahi Brahimaj, we agreed
19 that for the time being, with the few weapons we had, we could not defend
20 the village of Grabanica. After this conversation, I left the
21 headquarters without any problems or threats whatsoever, neither from
22 their side nor from my family against the Brahimajs." And again, is that
23 a fair and accurate summary of what you told the reporter?
24 A. Yes. It is fully accurate.
25 Q. Thank you. Now, just bear with me for a moment.
1 MR. EMMERSON: Your Honour, I don't propose, unless Your Honour
2 wishes me to, to go through and read into the record every passage of
3 relevance from the Defence witness statement. The answers that the
4 witness has already given would, on the face of it, meet the requirements
5 of Rule 92 ter, but I don't want to find myself so to speak in the
6 position where the admission of the witness statement is in any way in
7 doubt. So what I would propose to do is to ask the witness some general
8 questions but that on the assumption that the answers that he has already
9 given; namely, that the statement is true and accurate and that he would,
10 if asked the same questions, give the same answers, is sufficient to
11 amount to an adoption of the contents of the statement and to render it
12 admissible. But obviously if Your Honour wishes me to go through --
13 JUDGE ORIE: Of course, the statement is here. Tendering it as a
14 Rule 92 ter statement, we have not heard that yet, if you would do that.
15 Of course, when you asked the question on whether the witness would give
16 the same answers, I had at the back of my mind that I recognised those
17 words from Rule 92 ter, so if you want to tender this statement, then
18 we'll hear from --
19 MR. DI FAZIO: I had the same thoughts as Your Honours. I assumed
20 that this was coming.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So we are waiting for --
22 MR. DI FAZIO: The criteria is fulfilled--
23 JUDGE ORIE: -- application to apply under Rule 92 ter for
24 admission of this --
25 MR. EMMERSON: Then formally I do, as I understand Mr. Di Fazio to
1 indicate that the criteria are met, then there is no objection.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Di Fazio -- well, of course there are sometimes
3 other matters such as whether there is opinion in there, et cetera et
5 MR. DI FAZIO: I haven't looked at it from that perspective.
6 Could I -- as a general principle, yes, I don't have any objections to its
7 admission broadly speaking. There may be excerpts or points in it which I
8 would like to perhaps reserve my position on. Could I have a quick look
9 at it and perhaps let you know by say the second session today if there is
10 any concerns?
11 JUDGE ORIE: I think that's a good suggestion. It also allows the
12 Chamber to go through it.
13 MR. EMMERSON: And if there are any passages upon which it would
14 be necessary for me to further cross-examine on the record, then perhaps
15 Your Honour would be kind enough to give me that opportunity.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then please proceed taking as a starting point
17 that the statement has been tendered as a 92 ter statement and that no
18 objection as yet have been raised. Please proceed.
19 MR. EMMERSON:
20 Q. Mr. Fazliu, before I go to the contents of your statement and the
21 material that is recorded there, you were asked some questions yesterday
22 about why it was, after two days of fighting against the Serb forces in
23 Grabanice, you and your travelling companion did not go immediately that
24 night or in the next two days of your own volition, of your own choice, to
25 Jabllanice in order to discuss a reorganisation of the defences of the
1 village, and you gave certain answers about how late it was and the state
2 of your clothing and so forth. I just want to put those few days into
3 proper perspective for the Chamber.
4 The Serb offensive that you were caught up in on the 19th and 20th
5 of May 1998, how many of the villages in the area around Grabanice were
6 attacked during that period?
7 A. This offensive started on the 13th. The Serb forces attacked
8 Kepuz village from Dollove in the early morning hours. At 9.15, we
9 interrupted the lesson in Grabanica and taking the arms, the weapons we
10 had, we started to get ready to defend the village. We reinforced the
11 guards of the village, and part of the population, mainly women and
12 children, left the village, right since that day and found refuge in their
13 relatives in Lugu i Baranit and other villages. On the 16th, when the
14 burial ceremony of -- in Cescko of Caush Morina took place on the 13th,
15 the Serbs maltreated and beat some three, four citizens of Kline. Ahmet
16 Krasniqi, the late Ahmet Krasniqi was one of them. He was chairman of the
17 KLA -- LDK in Kline. And then the Serbs fired in the direction of
19 Q. When you say the Serbs fired, did they have heavy artillery,
20 tanks, and armoured weapons?
21 A. They had, but on the 16th, they used mortars, sorry, machine-guns,
22 automatic rifles, and shelled the village. They used shelling -- shells.
23 Until the 19th, when Caush got killed. On the 19, Grabanica was attacked
24 at around 6.00 in the afternoon and the attack lasted until 8.00 in the
25 evening, and these created a very bad atmosphere in the village.
1 On the next day, some forces from the KLA came to the village to
2 help us keep our positions, and we managed to keep our positions all day
3 despite the attacks. In the evening of the 20th, all were obliged to
4 withdraw because we ran out of ammunition. This happened after the
5 killing of Faruk Elezi and the wounding of some people who were at these
6 points, among them was also my brother, Aziri.
7 On the 21st, the Serbs entered the village and they set fire to
8 Grabanice and Bokshiq and it was impossible to feel safe and to go back to
9 the village. On the 21st, they killed Sacir Tahiri or Zecir from Bokshiq
10 and an old whose name at this moment, I don't remember. He was from
11 Bokshiq, and then Caush Fazliu was later killed in Bokshiq. So the
12 situation was very desperate. The Serb forces came from Dukagjin [phoen]
13 direction and entered the fields between Bokshiq and Gllogjan.
14 Q. Brief supplementary questions about this please. First of all,
15 during the attack on the 19th and the 20th, were the Serb forces then
16 using heavy artillery or did they have tanks that you saw?
17 A. I may say that -- I can't give you accurate numbers, but I can
18 tell you that they fired some 300 shells in the course of two hours on the
19 19th in Grabanice. During the day of the 20th, I couldn't count the
20 weapons they used, armoured cars, machine-guns, all kinds of weapons they
21 used, and a convoy of tanks and armoured cars came from the direction of
22 Peja, another from a direction of Kline, and they came up to the village
23 bridge which is across the first neighbourhood of Granice, which is called
24 Sejdina [phoen] neighbourhood.
25 Q. Thank you. The second supplementary question I wanted to ask you
1 is this: By this stage, as I understand your evidence, the women and
2 children had left the village and the men remained behind. Can you give
3 us some idea of the number of men, both villagers and KLA together, who
4 were defending the village against this attack?
5 A. I think that we all together defended the village because there
6 were no uniforms for each and every one, so we were together. We
7 cooperated to defend the village.
8 Q. My question was roughly how many men were involved in that process
9 of defending the village.
10 A. I believe there must have been over 60.
11 Q. And were they all armed or did you have less weapons than men?
12 A. Unfortunately, 21 or 22 had weapons and two or three had hunting
13 guns. Mainly they had 15 or 17 of them had automatic rifles and three or
14 four had hunting guns. So altogether there were 21 or 22 armed people.
15 There was also a machine-gun station where Faruk Elezi was killed.
16 Q. And just so that we are clear, how could the unarmed men come to
17 make a contribution then to defending the village? What was the
18 expectation then in relation to the men without weapons?
19 A. They were ready and standing by in case someone got killed who had
20 a weapon, they should take that weapon and use it.
21 Q. And so when the Serbs managed to overrun the village, and you ran
22 out of ammunition, did the men disperse in different directions?
23 A. On the 20th, the Serbs didn't enter the village. This means that
24 they didn't feel safe. They didn't -- they weren't sure that we had left
25 the village. So we didn't withdraw that day. Maybe some did. In the
1 evening of -- in the evening of that day, we withdrew. So the Serbs came
2 into the village on the next day, which is on the 21st.
3 Q. Yes. And again, so that we are clear because Mr. Di Fazio asked
4 you why you didn't immediately try to organise the village defence on the
5 21st, did you know where all the other men were?
6 A. I think I also said it yesterday in my answer to a question, that
7 personally I had no idea where my wife and my kids were, let alone my
8 brothers, my -- their family members. I only knew that we were at that
9 point. We were six people there. One got wounded. One was in Germany
10 for something, for an affair of his. One went to Jabllanice. So there
11 were only six of us distributed into various points in the village.
12 Q. In the witness statement that I've shown you in tab 2, you don't
13 need to turn it up, but you say that it was on the evening of the next
14 day, the 22nd, that KLA men including "Ujku" or "Wolf" and Nazmi Brahimaj
15 came to the house where you were sheltering, that is Tal Zeka house in
16 Zhabel. So would it be the position that it was within 48 hours of you
17 leaving the village that you had the first discussion with Nazmi Brahimaj
18 about trying to reorganise the village defences?
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson, could you kindly lead to the page where
20 the -- [overlapping speakers]
21 MR. EMMERSON: Where in the English translation is page 4 in the
22 final paragraph. And in the Albanian original, it is page 5, the second
24 Q. If you look at page 5, the second paragraph, you indicate that it
25 was the 22nd of May when you met Ujku with KLA soldiers who entered the
1 house of Tal Zeka and then at the bottom of that page, you describe the
2 conversation that took place with Nazmi Brahimaj about attempts to
3 reorganise the village defences. Do you see that?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. So can we take it that it was in fact only 48 hours after you
6 left, evacuated Grabanice after two days of fighting, that you had that
7 first conversation with Nazmi Brahimaj at the house of Tal Zeka?
8 A. There may be some minor mistake here with respect to the date. It
9 might have been 23rd, I think, on the first time, and 24th on the second
10 time but I'm repeating it. Everything I had taken down, the notes, but
11 they were destroyed, so. The text is okay. This is the only minor
12 mistake that there is.
13 Q. The first conversation certainly took place within two or three
14 days; is that right?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Now, I'm going to take this part of the evidence reasonably
17 shortly, but you describe in the statement how Ujku or "Wolf" was
18 insulting on that first night, but you say that he was the only one in the
19 group who was making offensive remarks. And you indicate that the
20 commander from Zhabel, who was there as well, was reprimanding him; is
21 that correct?
22 A. Yes. That's right. The commander and Nazmi reprimanded him, and
23 then he stopped saying those words because he used these unpleasant words
24 with me and with my companion.
25 Q. So obviously, his behaviour was offensive, but is it right, and I
1 think you used this word when you were interviewed by Mr. Di Fazio earlier
2 on on the videolink, that the others behaved like proper military men?
3 A. That's correct.
4 Q. Thank you.
5 A. There were soldiers there who didn't utter a word, whereas this
6 person, as I said, was very offensive. Nothing to do with the proper
7 conduct of a military man.
8 Q. Thank you. In particular, the two commanders, that is Tahir from
9 Zhabel and Nazmi from Jabllanice were, in your view, behaving like proper
10 military men; is that correct?
11 A. Yes, yes.
12 Q. And you describe a little further on in the statement a visit that
13 took place the following day, and you've told us about that, in your
14 evidence already, when a group of men came back, including Ujku and Tahir,
15 the commander from Zhabel; is that right?
16 A. Yes, that's right.
17 Q. And is it right that again on that occasion, Ujku was offensive
18 but Tahir was not only polite but reprimanded him? Is that correct?
19 A. That's correct.
20 Q. And another of those present on that second day was a man called
21 and Arbnori Zeneli who you describe as a very polite man; is that right?
22 A. For as long as I saw him, during those two contacts in Zhabel and
23 when he took us in his car, I could say that.
24 Q. Thank you. And when you left Tal Zeka's house in Zhabel that day,
25 I think you told us yesterday, and you say so in your statement here as
1 well, that Ujku left the house by vehicle and did not accompany you to
2 Jabllanice; is that correct?
3 A. That is correct. I didn't see him after that.
4 Q. And you didn't see him either when you got to Jabllanice; is that
6 A. No, no, I didn't.
7 Q. And I don't know if you can help us with this, but do you know the
8 real name of Ujku is Pjeter Sala [phoen], or is that something that you're
9 not aware of?
10 A. I don't know. I only know that people addressed him by the name
11 of Ujku and that he had a small beard.
12 Q. Thank you. Just to be absolutely clear, as far as you are
13 concerned, is it correct that you went voluntarily to Jabllanice, having
14 been asked to come together to discuss the reorganisation of the village
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. And nobody forced either you or your travelling companion to go;
18 is that right?
19 A. I already started to explain to you earlier on the difference
20 between the word kidnapping and going somewhere on your own free will.
21 Personally speaking, I went there because I wanted to. Nobody forced me
22 to go. We were accompanied by Tahir all the time, and I said it even
23 yesterday, and all along the way, we engaged in private conversations.
24 Q. Yes. Thank you. If we look in the Albanian at the last paragraph
25 on page 6, and in the English at the second paragraph on page 6, I want to
1 just look at the second sentence with you. You're recorded there as
2 saying this: "We left the village with the group of KLA soldiers, walking
3 to Jabllanice. We did this voluntarily. We were not forced or kidnapped.
4 And there were no acts of violence towards either me or Naser Lika. We
5 all walked together. I walked arm in arm with Tahir from Zhabel, and we
6 had a normal conversation. We discussed my profession and other general
7 things about what we should do about the conflict." Again is that an
8 accurate statement of what took place?
9 A. Yes, that's accurate. Maybe I haven't been able to put more
10 detail, but they were conversation about the same and the statement would
11 have become longer. But the gist of what happened on the way is correctly
12 reflected on the statement.
13 Q. Now, you describe in the next paragraph how you arrived at
14 Jabllanice, that you went into the HQ building, into a large open, green
15 area at the rear, that you were offered and took some food, that the mood
16 was normal, and that there were some soldiers eating in a big room. You
17 say a few paragraphs further down that there was then a discussion in the
18 room about reorganising village defences, and you say this: "There was no
19 yelling in the room, just a group of men trying to decide what to do and
20 how to do it." Again, is that a fair summary of what took place there?
21 A. Yes. I never heard any screams or shouts apart from the
22 discussions that were taking place or soldiers asking for more tea.
23 That's the only thing which was made -- a request made at a higher tone,
24 but otherwise the rest was normal conversation.
25 Q. And did the discussion end with an agreement that there was
1 insufficient weaponry available to reorganise the defence?
2 A. I think I said yesterday in my answers there were three reasons,
3 but one of them was more significant than the other two. There was the
4 lack of weaponry, which is the key thing needed for the defence of a
5 village in a wartime. The other thing was -- which was significant, very
6 significant, was that Grabenice and Bokshiq, the two villages, were like
7 an island exposed from three directions to dangers. They were threatened
8 by Serb forces on the eastern side, from Dollova. There was a large
9 number of Serb forces deployed on the side of the main road which was 200,
10 300 metres from Grabenice, and from another side where the forces were
11 still threatening.
12 Q. I wasn't going to -- I appreciate that you gave that explanation
13 yesterday. I wasn't specifically going to ask to you repeat it. Is there
14 anything you want to add to what you told us yesterday about the reasons
15 or not?
16 A. I said yesterday that if we were to find out where the rest of the
17 family, we had to find that out first, and then we had to keep in touch
18 regarding the remobilisation, when that was required.
19 Q. Thank you. Now, if you would just like, please, to look at the
20 last paragraph on page 8, if you find page 8 and look at the last
21 paragraph, which for those following the English translation is the first
22 paragraph on page 8. You say there, that during all the time that this
23 was going on, it was daylight. You say you don't know how long you were
24 at the HQ but had arrived in the afternoon and that you knew it was still
25 daylight when you and your travelling companion eventually left.
1 And then you say this: "I think we were the first to leave."
2 Is it your recollection now that you and your travelling companion were
3 the first of the men to leave the discussion?
4 A. In this last paragraph, I hadn't noticed. Something needs to be
5 improved. During all the time it was daylight, I don't know how long we
6 stayed in the village because we arrived afternoon, in the afternoon, and
7 this needs some improvement. I don't know whether anybody else left
8 before, but I think it was me and Naser who were the first, and then we
9 were followed by other people from Grabanice and Bokshiq. Unlike them, we
10 were taken by car to the place we wanted to go to.
11 Q. Yes. I was going to ask you about that in a moment. You go on to
12 say, "There was no problem with leaving. The discussions were ending and
13 agreements had been made, so my travelling companion and I left." I just
14 want to be absolutely clear, you left the building in company with your
15 travelling companion; is that correct?
16 A. Yes. Absolutely right.
17 Q. And then is it right that Arbnori Zeleni, the man you earlier
18 described as having been polite, offered to drive you both wherever you
19 wanted to go?
20 A. That's correct.
21 Q. And did your travelling companion wish to go to the house of
22 Haxhi Bajrami on the outskirts of Jabllanice?
23 A. At that time there was no choice. I think he knew them before I
24 did. He knew their family before I did.
25 Q. And were there other refugees staying at Haxhi Bajrami's house as
1 far as you could see when you got there?
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson, could you please elicit an answer to
3 the previous question from the witness?
4 MR. EMMERSON:
5 Q. I'm sorry, let me just take this in stages. First of all, did
6 Arbnori Zeleni drive you and your travelling companion to the house of
7 Haxhi Bajrami?
8 A. Yes, he drove us right up to the door step of Haxhi Bajrami's
10 Q. Thank you. And is Haxhi Bajrami's house on the outskirts of
11 Jabllanice or was it at the time?
12 A. It's at the entrance of Jabllanice when you come from Gllogjan,
13 and he had houses on both sides of the road.
14 Q. Thank you. Whose idea was it to go to Haxhi Bajrami's house? Was
15 that your idea or was it your travelling companion's idea to go to that
17 A. If I'm not mistaken, it was and Arbnori who suggested that there
18 was someone from my family who was staying at Haxhi Bajrami's house and
19 that's how it turned out to be. And that's how we decided to go there.
20 Q. When you got there, were there other refugees staying there in the
22 A. Yes. There were other refugees, mainly relatives of the Bajrami
24 Q. Thank you. And did you then leave Haxhi Bajrami's house that same
1 A. In the evening of that day, I left and went to Maznik, to the
2 family of Abdisula [phoen].
3 Q. And did your travelling companion remain behind at Haxhi Bajrami's
5 A. I think he stayed there, but I don't know where he went on from
7 Q. Was he still there when you left?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Can you give us some indication or estimate of what time it was by
10 the time you left or is that not possible?
11 A. As I've said I did not have a watch on me, so it's just a guess.
12 It's going to be a guess.
13 Q. Very well. Now, I wonder if I may, please, to ask you to go to
14 back to page 8 of your witness statement and to look at the second full
15 paragraph, that is the large paragraph in the centre of the page, and in
16 the English translation that is the last paragraph on page 7.
20 remained together during all of the events I have described above. He
21 stayed with me as we walked, ate, and discussed things."
22 The question I want to ask you is this: Was your travelling
23 companion in your company, that is to say with you, from the time that you
24 arrived in the village of Jabllanice that day until the time you left him
25 at Haxhi Bajrami's house? Were you together throughout that time?
1 A. There has been some confusion here. We were not together in the
2 house of Haxhi Bajrami. We were together up until the moment that we got
4 Q. Let me put the question to you again then. Were you together with
5 your travelling companion between the time you arrived in the village of
6 Jabllanice that day and the time when you arrived at the house of
7 Haxhi Bajrami? Were you together throughout the events of that afternoon
8 and evening?
9 A. Yes. Absolutely so. We were together all the time.
10 Q. Thank you. So I have two further questions, then, if I may,
11 please. Just bear with me for one second.
12 If you could look at page 9 in the Albanian version of the
13 statement, and at the second-to-last paragraph on that page, which in the
14 English translation is page 8, in the penultimate paragraph, it reads as
15 follows: "I have been asked if I saw any rough or ill treatment of people
16 whilst I was at Jabllanice HQ, and I have been asked if I saw a young boy
17 having his ear cut off. Neither of these incidents happened whilst I was
18 at the Jabllanice HQ with my travelling companion. I never saw anyone
19 touched or beaten, and I never heard anything like that occurring." Is
20 that the truth, Mr. Fazliu?
21 A. That's very accurate.
22 JUDGE ORIE: May I ask one additional question. If you say, "I
23 never heard," that goes until when? Did you up until today never hear
24 about such things or --
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm talking about the text, and I am
1 saying about whilst I was there, I never heard anything of what is
2 described in the text. So nobody being beaten or no one being having his
3 ear chopped on and so on.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So that's what you heard at that time. Thank
5 you. Please proceed.
6 MR. EMMERSON: Yes.
11 Pages 7474-7475 redacted.
5 [Open session]
6 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we are back in open session.
7 MR. EMMERSON:
8 Q. The very last question that I want to ask you, Mr. Fazliu, relates
9 to page 8 of your statement, and to the second paragraph, which on the
10 English translation is the second paragraph on page 7, which reads, "I do
11 know 100 per cent that Ramush Haradinaj was not present on that day. I
12 must add that I would not have recognised him on that day as I did not
13 know him then but I have seen him since on the TV, and I do know that he
14 was not present on that day in the Jabllanice HQ." Is that true?
15 A. This is more than accurate, and I'm fully convinced that he wasn't
17 Q. Yes. Thank you. Those are my questions.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Emmerson.
19 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please just for the assistance of
20 Defence counsel, can I just indicate that I've got no objection to the
21 statement going fully into evidence in its entirely under the provisions
22 of Rule 93 ter.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That is on the record. The Chamber will decide
24 on the matter but of course, since we have not studied this document
25 before, we'll need a bit of time as well to read it.
1 Mr. Guy-Smith, any questions in cross-examination?
2 MR. GUY-SMITH: I maintain the position that I took yesterday,
3 Your Honour.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Thank you. Now, Mr. Harvey, I take it that you
5 would like to cross-examine the witness. Mr. Fazliu, Mr. Harvey is
6 counsel for Mr. Brahimaj. Please proceed.
7 Cross-examination by Mr. Harvey:
8 Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Fazliu. I'd like to ask you a few questions
9 first in relation --
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Harvey, just, you are aware that we returned into
11 open session. You're also aware of the public-private policy in this case
12 developed by the Chamber.
13 MR. HARVEY: Yes.
14 JUDGE ORIE: I take it you'll keep that in mind.
15 MR. HARVEY: Very much so. I know it's been a while since I've
16 been on my feet, but I haven't completely forgot.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
18 MR. HARVEY:
19 Q. I'd like to ask you a few questions in relation to Jabllanice. I
20 think you've indicated before that Jabllanice was even as early as 1992,
21 1993, under fairly constant surveillance by the Serb authorities and that
22 people of Jabllanice were under constant risk of attack at that time. Is
23 that your statement, sir?
24 A. Yes. As far as the surveillance is concerned, it may not be
25 compliant with the reality, but it was their intention to find an excuse
1 to get into Jabllanice but they did not achieve this until the middle of
2 the war because the inhabitants of Jabllanice managed to disarm some
3 policemen, Serb policemen, and they never managed to get into Jabllanice.
4 For them, Jabllanice; for the Serbs, Jabllanice, was something which they
5 couldn't occupy for about six years, as it were.
6 Q. And when you refer to the middle of the war, you're talking about
7 1998. Do you recall when the Serbs first attacked Jabllanice in 1998?
8 A. I may say that on several occasions, they shelled Jabllanice but
9 the first offensive, it was at the beginning of July, if I'm not mistaken,
10 and that is in 1998.
11 Q. You had discussions earlier in 1998, you went, I believe, with
12 Enver Berisha, to meet with some of the KLA in Jabllanice and you met then
13 with Myrte Zeneli; is that correct?
14 A. Yes. It was Myrte. There was a man by the name of Rexhep, but
15 there were some others whose names I have forgotten. It was planned for
16 Lahi to be present at that meeting, but we were told that he had an
17 important mission to attend to and he couldn't be present. We stayed
18 there very late after midnight, it was 1.00 or 2.00 after midnight but
19 it's a long --
20 Q. Do you recall in which month that meeting occurred?
21 A. I think it was at the beginning of March, sometime around about
22 that time, which is after the attacks on the family of Adem Jashari in
23 Prekaz and after the attacks in Cheraz [phoen] and Liksen [phoen]. It was
24 between the 5th and the 10th, but it was the beginning of March.
25 Q. And at that time, was there great concern in your village and in
1 Jabllanice that you too might come under attack from the Serbs?
2 A. Yes. There was no village who was not concerned about a possible
3 attack by the Serb forces because during the day, the Serb forces were
4 patrolling the area, although during the night, the patrols were less
6 Q. At that stage, if I understand your evidence correctly, sir, there
7 was no KLA organisation in your village, as such, you just had a number of
8 members of the LDK who had formed a defence group to protect your village;
9 is that correct?
10 A. Yes. At the time, that's how it was.
11 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, I'm not objecting, but I
12 take that answer to mean at that stage, when my learned colleague asked at
13 that stage, he was talking about March I assume?
14 MR. HARVEY: Yes, and now I'm going to move forward.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Harvey.
16 MR. DI FAZIO: Well, I'm not suggesting that we leave the topic,
17 all I wanted to be clear was -- [Speakers overlapping]
18 JUDGE ORIE: You want to be clear what at that stage meant.
19 MR. HARVEY:
20 Q. Yes, let me just make clear, at that stage we are talking about
21 March through April of 1998, again there was no KLA organisation as such
22 in your village, was there?
23 A. During March, I may say that there was no, or at least I wasn't
24 aware, of any KLA presence, and it may be said of April I cannot say the
25 same thing.
1 Q. When did Sadri Berisha first become a member of the KLA in your
2 village, as far as you're aware, sir?
3 A. I Can't remember the date. I can't remember the date. But I -- I
4 recall that it -- 13th of May 1998. After the first attacks by the Serb
5 forces in the villages including Qeskove.
6 Q. When your village defence, when your village needed defending
7 after the 13th of May, you had assistance from the villagers in
8 Jabllanice, I think you've said.
9 A. Yes. They were KLA soldiers also from Jabllanice. There were
10 some two or three from Mitrovica who came to help in Grabanice.
11 Q. Can you help the Tribunal with how this happened. I can put two
12 alternatives to you, and maybe there is a third, but perhaps you would
13 just like to help us with how this came about. Was it that there was a
14 KLA command telling you: This is what you've got to do, we're going to
15 take charge here, all of you do as we say? Or was it you in Grabanice
16 putting out a call, anyone who has got a gun, please come and help us?
17 Can you give the Tribunal a sense of how organised this was or whether it
18 was just really a question of people getting together to try and help each
19 other out?
20 A. I must take more time to explain this.
21 Starting from 1991, since 1991, my elder brother managed to secure
22 some 12 automatic weapons and they were bought between 2.800 to 3.500
23 deutschmarks, and they were distributed among members of families which
24 were more secure, from our point of view, to look after these weapons.
25 And from then onwards, we organised our village defences up until
1 1998, and from 1998, as I said yesterday, there were two groups within a
2 period of 10 days or two weeks, they went from -- left Grabanice to go to
3 Albania to bring weapons back and that was done in coordination with the
4 KLA headquarters in Jabllanice. Part of those weapons were given out to
5 soldiers of -- KLA soldiers in Kepuz, in Cermjan, and that was used for
6 reinforcing those points, and that happened just before and up until the
7 moment that the front was opened in Grabanice too.
8 Q. My question, sir, was more along the lines of did you consider
9 yourselves under orders from the KLA or just working in cooperation with
10 other members of the KLA who were in Jabllanice?
11 A. I must explain that. Those six soldiers who stayed with us for
12 three, four days, and they stayed in my house, in the oda of men, it was
13 me personally who sewed the KLA emblems on their caps. And if the
14 otherwise was true, I don't know how I would have said that, but for me
15 there was no problem in doing that.
16 Q. Maybe I'm not making myself clear, but let's put it this way: Was
17 there any tension between LDK and KLA or did you all get along fine
19 A. Everything was coordinated between the two sides.
20 Q. There was no hostility between the people of Grabanice and the
21 people of Jabllanice between LDK and KLA?
22 A. There may have been people like Ujku, for example, but otherwise,
23 on the whole, it was okay.
24 Q. Thank you. Also we know at some point that the -- there were
25 Serbs in Grabanice who chose to leave the village. Was pressure put on
1 them to leave, or did they leave of their own free will?
2 A. I must explain here that from Grabanice, no one pushed the Serbs
3 out of the village. One single family, the Rajlovic family, they lived in
4 Bokshiq, they left voluntarily, and they passed through Grabanice. Nobody
5 caused any problems to them. In fact, the KLA soldiers accompanied,
6 escorted them, and they did not create any problems for them.
7 They had one or two children with them. They had a family member
8 who was a policeman. And no problems were created for them. They were
9 escorted through the village, out of the village, without any problems.
10 Q. Thank you, sir.
11 MR. HARVEY: Your Honours, I note the time. I don't know when you
12 want to take the break. This would be a --
13 JUDGE ORIE: It's usually after one hour and a half, but we
14 started a little bit over quarter past 2. If this is a suitable moment
15 for you, it's fine as far as the Chamber is concerned.
16 MR. HARVEY: Fine.
17 JUDGE ORIE: We'll have a break and we'll resume at five minutes
18 past 4.00.
19 --- Recess taken at 3.42 p.m.
20 --- On resuming at 4.11 p.m.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Harvey, you may proceed.
22 MR. HARVEY:
23 Q. Mr. Fazliu, there was a mill in Grabanice, wasn't there?
24 A. Yes. It is even now there.
25 Q. And that mill back in 1998 serviced a lot of villages in the
1 surrounding area, people came from different villages to have their corn
2 ground up at the mill in Grabanice; is that correct?
3 A. Yes. It's been offering its services until the outbreak of the
4 war in Grabanice. Then it was -- it didn't operate during the wartime and
5 then after the war, it was reconstructed.
6 Q. So the mill shut down. Was that because the electricity supply
7 was cut off or because it was just not safe to go there?
8 A. Both, but mostly because of lack of electricity. We didn't a
9 power generator at that time, so we had to interrupt work.
10 Q. Was there just the one mill or more than one mill?
11 A. Some other family had its own mill, but this mill we had serviced
12 many other people. The entire locality, I would say. Whoever wanted to
13 have its corn ground brought it there or to turn the corn into fodder for
14 the animals.
15 Q. When you say the mill shut down at the outbreak of the war, can
16 you put an approximate date on that? Was that as early as the attack on
17 Kapuz on the 13th of May or later or before then, if you recall?
18 A. If I am not mistaken, upon the attack against Kapuz and Ceskove
19 the mill shut down.
20 Q. Again, you put that at the 13th of May; is that correct?
21 A. Yes. I think so, around that date
22 Q. Thank you. I now want to come to the time when you were walking
23 together with your travelling companion from Grabanice and you met
24 Mr. Lahi Brahimaj?
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Harvey, we have dealt with those portions of
1 the -- I would say the journey in private session until now.
2 MR. HARVEY: Yes, and I'm about to ask that we should go into
3 private session.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I anticipated that you would like to ask that.
5 MR. HARVEY: Thank you.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Could we go into private session?
7 [Private session - confidentiality lifted by later order of the Chamber]
8 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we are in private session.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar. Please proceed,
10 Mr. Harvey.
11 MR. HARVEY:
12 Q. You I think told us that your brother had been wounded on the 21st
13 of May. Is that your brother Hazir?
14 A. He was wounded on the 20th of May.
15 Q. I beg your pardon. He was taken after he was wounded to
16 Jabllanice; is that correct?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. And he was taken to the clinic or ambulance that was in the house
19 of Myftari Brahimaj; is that correct?
20 A. I don't know to whose house he was taken. I only know that it was
21 a make-shift hospital in Jabllanice where all wounded were treated.
22 Q. Also, there was a man called Vesel Berisha, who was very badly
23 wounded in Grabanice; isn't that correct?
24 A. Yes. He was wounded too but he was wounded as a result of a shell
25 in the street, a little far away from our home.
1 Q. And do you recall that he was taken initially to Jabllanice but
2 that his injuries were so serious that he had to be transported to Irzniq
3 to the hospital there?
4 A. I heard that. I heard that his life was this in peril because he
5 was gravely wounded. To this day he's suffering from that wound as a
6 result of that shell.
7 Q. It's in connection that I want to ask you -- in connection with
8 that that I want to ask you about your meeting with Lahi Brahimaj on the
9 road. You've told us that Lahi was leaving Jabllanice and driving in the
10 direction of Gllogjan and Peja; is that correct?
11 A. I haven't said that he was -- he set out in the direction of
12 Gllogjan. I only said that he was in a car, in a vehicle, together with
13 another soldier, and that he stopped the car and he greeted us quite
14 normally, and sincerely, and that he asked us where we were going and that
15 we told him, and that he asked us if we could hand over the weapon because
16 he said, "We are short of weapons in the front line."
17 So he kindly asked us to surrender the automatic rifle, which I
18 did, and then I asked him, that when I needed the weapon he should bring
19 it back to me, and this is what happened. My companion also handed over
20 two hand grenades he had on him. I didn't know he had them in his
22 Q. What I wanted to ask you about, let's see if you remember this or
23 not, do you recall that there were two vehicles; that Lahi was in a jeep
24 and that in fact, Vesel Berisha was being carried in the vehicle in front?
25 Do you recall that?
1 A. As far as I know, I saw that he was in one car, and I saw only one
2 car. He was with another friend. I didn't see any other vehicle, at
3 least not at the moment that we had that conversation with him and then we
4 went on our way.
23 Q. You, in Tal's house, you were staying in his oda with the rest of
24 the men, correct?
25 A. Yes, we were staying in the men's oda.
1 Q. And you were there for a total of three days approximately; is
2 that right, two to three days?
3 A. Yes, that's right.
4 Q. And during that time did you simply stay in that one room the
5 whole time, or did you mover around Tal's farm and premises?
6 A. We stayed in the oda, in the room, during all the time, even
7 though I had offered my services to the owner. I had offered to help him
8 if he needed us because it was a spring time and he might need our help,
9 but he insisted that we stay in that room all the time, and this is what
10 we did, myself, my travelling companion, and some other persons who were
11 sheltering there.
12 Q. And when the soldiers, the KLA soldiers, came from Jabllanice and
13 from Zhabel, they talked to all of you men who were there, who had been
14 involved in the defence of Grabanice, right?
15 A. They didn't talk with all of them. Because the first time they
16 stayed very briefly, a total of ten minutes. I don't think it was longer
17 than that, and it was some brief conversations that took place during
18 those ten minutes.
19 Q. And the second time, did they talk with more of the men who were
21 A. The second time when Ujku came to the antechamber of that room, it
22 was only myself and my travelling companion present in the room. Some
23 others were downstairs.
16 Q. Coming back to your travelling companion, you recall that you were
17 asked -- you had a conversation by videolink with Mr. Di Fazio from the
18 Office of the Prosecutor on the 11th of May this year?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. And do you recall telling him that the last time you had seen your
21 travelling companion was about two years ago or something like that?
22 A. I may say now that maybe it was three years ago when I saw him
23 last. Even the first time I said around two years, but now I may say that
24 it was three years ago that I saw him for the first time, and I have no
25 clue as to where he is. Before he left the village, he used to say that I
1 will go to America. This is something that I remember.
2 Q. Yes. I'm looking at page, for those who are following the
3 transcript, that we have at page 37, at the answers that you gave to
4 Mr. Di Fazio there, and it's at the bottom two-thirds of the way down, and
5 Mr. Di Fazio was asking you about the big lie that Naser -- that your
6 travelling companion had been telling. You recall him asking you about
7 the big lie?
8 A. I wouldn't wish to speculate. I don't want to insult anyone. I
9 never heard of anyone else, but based on the question posed of me by
10 Mr. Di Fazio, I came to the conclusion that when I was asked, the moment
11 that I personally left the headquarters of KLA in Jabllanice, whether
12 Naser was left behind, I thought that this was a big lie because both of
13 us left at the same time and that Naser didn't remain behind, and I still
14 abide by this. It's not true that Naser remained behind. Both of us left
15 at the same time and got into Arbnori's car.
16 Q. The part of the conversation with Mr. Di Fazio that I wanted to
17 draw to your attention was where you told him this: "The main thing he
18 was talking about was how to get abroad, how to get documents, and things
19 about that nature." Was that something that Naser seemed -- sorry, your
20 travelling companion seemed to be very concerned about, he wanted to find
21 some way to get documents so that he could travel abroad?
22 A. After the war, with his first wife, he had an opportunity, because
23 I had some connections with some relief organisations, contributing to the
24 reconstruction of schools, and I contacted a person called Paula [phoen].
25 She managed to send his first wife to Italy for treatment, but she died,
1 unfortunately, his first wife. He remarried and then he worked for a
2 while in Peja. I'm not sure whether he worked for KFOR or I don't know.
3 And then all the time he kept saying that I'm trying to get my papers in
4 order to go somewhere abroad, in America or elsewhere. That was what I
5 heard from him until the last moment that I saw him.
6 MR. HARVEY: Thank you very much, Mr. Fazliu.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Harvey. Before I give you an
8 opportunity, Mr. Di Fazio, to re-examine the witness, I would like to ask
9 two additional questions.
10 Questioned by the Court:
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Fazliu, earlier today you said, and I'll just try
12 to find that, you said in relation to the comments you made in the
13 dailies, you said, "If I made a statement before, that might have been a
14 momentary statement which shouldn't be taken as a formal statement and not
15 be included in the indictment against someone." Now, did you give any
16 statement to anyone prior to the learning about the indictment in this
18 A. I already said that if I have given a statement, because to tell
19 you the truth --
20 JUDGE ORIE: My question is: Did you give a statement, not
21 commenting on if you would have given a statement, but I'd like to know
22 whether you gave a statement before March 2005. And if so, to whom.
23 A. I didn't have anyone to give a statement to other than the people
24 I gave the statement in Vienna [as interpreted].
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Tell us. I've got no idea about any statement
1 earlier to March 2005. Could you please tell us to whom did you give a
2 statement? And as you said, in Vienna? The Chamber is not aware of any
3 earlier statement than October 2005.
4 A. I'm repeating it. I don't remember. That's why I allowed for
5 this if I -- I said if I gave a statement, I did not intend to accuse
6 anyone by that.
7 JUDGE ORIE: That's not my question. My question is, and since
8 you just referred apparently to a place even where you would have given a
9 statement, if I understood you well, you said "other than the people I
10 gave the statement in Vienna." Did you give a statement, whether in
11 Vienna or elsewhere, before the -- before March 2005?
12 A. I don't know in Vienna.
13 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction: He said a word in
14 Albanian meaning later which sounds like Vienna.
15 A. So I didn't given any statement in Vienna.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That now has been corrected. The interpreters
17 had heard a word and -- but forget about Vienna. Did you give to anyone a
18 statement in relation to what you, in March 2005, considered to be wrong
19 in the indictment? Did you give a statement to anyone? Whether
20 humanitarian organisation, whether investigators, whether whomever, so
21 before you learned about the indictment to which you commented, did you
22 give a statement to anyone?
23 A. I remember that after explaining the situation in the media, then
24 I gave statements, but not before. I don't remember to have given any
25 statements before the explanation I gave to the media.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Nevertheless, you said, "If I made a statement
2 before, that might have been a momentary statement which shouldn't be
3 taken as a formal statement and not be included in the indictment against
4 someone," which at least suggests that you considered it a possibility
5 that you had given a statement which was then abused for purposes of
6 drafting an indictment.
7 A. Yes. This is what I thought. If I gave a statement.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Emmerson?
9 MR. EMMERSON: Just crossed my mind as the interchange between
10 Your Honour and the witness was taking place that the word "statement" is
11 capable potentially of two meanings, a written document or --
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I'm aware of that and therefore I used the same
13 word for the witness. That's -- otherwise I would have asked him whether
14 he ever signed a written statement.
15 But that answer is --
16 Now, another matter, Mr. Fazliu, I'd like to ask you a question
17 about. You said you were willing to help when you were in the village
18 of -- let me just find it -- when you were in the house of Tal Zeka at
19 Zhabel. You said you were quite willing to give him a hand, to help him,
20 but he insisted on you staying in the men's oda all the time.
21 A. Yes.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Why was that? I mean, it was May. Staying for a
23 couple of days in exactly that same place, not leaving it.
24 A. Probably he didn't want me to help him because that was the first
25 time I was visiting him and that I was, as I said, wearing just an old
1 T-shirt, and that there were other people there that he allowed to help
2 him in his field work, but he didn't want a guest like me staying with him
3 for two, three days to go out and help him work in the fields.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Now even -- it's not only that he did not, as you
5 told us, that he didn't want you to help him, but also that he insisted
6 that you should stay in the oda. Of course you could leave that for other
7 purposes than just to help Mr. Tal Zeka. Did he allow you to leave the
9 A. If we wanted we could have left, but as my personal situation is
10 dressed as I was, I wouldn't venture to leave the house.
11 JUDGE ORIE: All the others could freely leave the oda or those
12 who were with you at the time?
13 A. There were two or three neighbours of ours who are related to Tal.
14 They were -- they left. Bajram Lika was his name and his sons, they left
15 the house freely and came back. He could come and go like he was in his
16 own house; whereas myself, and my companion, we remained during all the
17 time in the oda, in the room, for two days because I'm not counting the
18 nights because, as you know, during the night one rests.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And you were the only two who stayed in the
20 room, is that correctly understood, for these days?
21 A. There were two other persons -- two or three other persons from
22 Turjake who met with some acquaintance of theirs, Dzevad was there with a
23 brother of his. They met and talked together. They stayed for half an
24 hour or one hour, and then they went back. Then there was Bajram and his
25 sons who could leave and come, and a relative of his who, as I said, were
1 free to move about Tal's family.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But my question here, in your response you more
3 or less tell who visited others who were in the room. My question was
4 whether you and your travelling companion were the only ones who stayed as
5 long as you were in this house in this room for all the time or whether
6 there were others as well who stayed for these two or three days inside
7 the men's oda, inside that room.
8 A. Only me, myself, and my companion, remained in the room all the
9 time, with exception of some personal needs, you know.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I understand that. Earlier today, you
11 testified "he," and you were referring to the owner of the house, "he
12 insisted that we stay in that room all the time and this is what we did,
13 myself, my travelling companion, and some other persons who were
14 sheltering there." So earlier today you said that not just you and your
15 travelling companion but others stayed in the room for all this time as
17 A. It's not that he insisted, but he said, "You don't need to work,
18 because you are guests here." As to the presence of other people, there
19 were other people who stayed two, three hours, then they left and went to
20 visit Tal's brothers or to other families in the village. But it was only
21 myself and my companion who remained there all the time, without moving,
22 without leaving the room for a long -- for long stretches of time.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. My next question is about Ujku. I think it was
24 Defence counsel who asked you whether you knew the name of the person
25 called Ujku. Did you have no knowledge of either first name or family
1 name at the time when he -- when you met him in -- I always forget this --
2 in Zhabel, did you have any knowledge of his first name or family name
3 apart from that he was called Ujku.
4 A. Then I didn't know his name. I only knew him by the pseudonym
5 Ujku. But later on, through the media and the writings, I may have heard,
6 and I think I've seen a name which coincides with the name given to him,
7 but at the time I did not know who that person's real name was.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Do you remember what media? Was that television,
9 newspapers? Was that --
10 A. It was in the press. I cannot say precisely now which of the
11 newspapers, whether it was Bota Sot or Koha Ditore. In one of these
12 newspapers, there was a name which could be the real name of the person
13 that was also known as Ujku.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Do you remember what name was published then?
15 A. I think it was Pjeter, but again I'm saying I'm not 100 per cent
17 JUDGE ORIE: And when did you learn this from the press?
18 A. I think it was after the indictment was issued against the former
19 Prime Minister.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. Mr. Di Fazio? Is there any need to
21 re-examine the witness?
22 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes, I've still got some questions I'd like to put
23 to the witness.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
25 Re-examination by Mr. Di Fazio:
1 Q. Just on the question of work for the man, Tal Zeka, the work that
2 you had in mind when you offered to help him out, was that properly
3 described as heavy work, perhaps work in the fields, with the crops, that
4 sort of work? Is that the work you had in mind?
5 A. No, no. I told him that if you need any help, we can help you
6 rather than sit idle. It could be something -- some work in agriculture
7 like planting peppers and so on.
8 Q. That's what I thought you meant. Thank you for that
9 clarification. I appreciate it.
10 And did you offer that when you arrived at the house or at least
11 the next morning?
12 A. No. When we arrived it was night-time. I cannot exactly say what
13 time it was, but it was the following day after we arrived.
14 Q. Yes. Thank you. So you felt quite able to, notwithstanding the
15 states of your clothes, to go out into the fields and do some agricultural
16 work? Would that be right?
17 A. Well, with those clothes that we had on, we could use them because
18 they were suitable for doing work, and obviously they were good for doing
19 some work, but if I was to go in those clothes for a visit to somebody, I
20 would like ridiculous.
21 Q. Thank you. But you were -- it was fine for the agricultural work
22 around the oda and in the presence of all the others people who were
23 gathered in the oda or the other families, it was okay for those purposes,
24 your clothing, do I understand you correctly?
25 A. In the oda they were not quite appropriate, but they did not have
1 other options, and I didn't have other options, and in the circumstances I
2 had to do with what I had.
3 Q. We'll perhaps move on. You have revealed to us today, you have a
4 statement you provided in June of 2006, and I'd like you to just ask you a
5 few questions about that. You say in that statement that you've had the
6 opportunity of having your ICTY statement read over to you, and you wanted
7 to make some comments in relation to the content. Now, do you recall
8 saying that in your statement?
9 A. Which statement are you talking about? Can you please repeat that
11 Q. Sure. Sure. I'll be clear. I just wanted to remind you that in
12 your statement that you gave, not entirely clear to me at this stage who
13 to, but in any event the statement that you gave on the 15th of June 2006,
14 and which you signed and which Mr. Emmerson showed you earlier today, in
15 that statement, I think you've got it right in front of you there, yes, in
16 that statement you say that you had your ICTY statement read over to you
17 in your native language, and you then go on to make some comments, some
18 clarifications. Do you see that in your statement?
19 If I may help you, it's the fourth paragraph of your statement
20 shown to you by Mr. Emmerson today, the one dated 15 June 2006 that you
21 have right in front of you.
22 A. Can you please give me details on which pages that they are on and
23 which paragraph.
24 Q. I don't want to spend too much time on this. It's the fourth
25 paragraph of your statement dated 15 June 2006. It was shown to you a
1 matter of an hour and a half or so ago?
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Di Fazio it seems to be the first paragraph on
3 page 2 in the language --
4 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes, probably page 2, sorry. Unfortunately they
5 haven't got numbers.
6 Q. I just wanted to remind you, Mr. Fazliu, that you said that you
7 had your -- the ICTY statement that you gave read over to you and that you
8 then go on to say that you want to make some comments and clarifications
9 or comments. Do you see that?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Good. Thank you. And you remember, don't you, the statement
12 being shown to you and read over to you by the person who took this
13 statement from you?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Thank you. And I just want to be absolutely clear that you were
16 talking about the same statement. So could the witness be shown 65 ter
17 1919, and I'd like him to be shown the English version, please.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Just for our information, is that the 11th of
19 October, 2005 statement?
20 MR. DI FAZIO: That's correct.
21 JUDGE ORIE: I think it's not in the binder. Is it on the screen?
22 MR. DI FAZIO: It's on the screen both English and Albanian
23 available on the screen, and could I ask that we scroll down to the bottom
24 of that page, please?
25 Q. Is that your signature that appears at the bottom of your page --
1 that page, Mr. Fazliu? I'll repeat my question. Is that your signature
2 that appears at the bottom of that page, Mr. Fazliu?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Thank you. And could I ask the Court, please, to go through to
5 the very last page of the statement. And does your signature appear
6 again on this last page of the statement?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. And that is the statement that you're referring to when you say
9 that you provide some clarifications in your statement that you gave in
10 June of 2006, correct? That's the ICTY statement?
11 A. Yes.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Di Fazio, listening at the line of questioning, I
13 don't know whether this also should be in private session because we still
14 are. Whenever we were talking about journey, companion, et cetera, but
15 unless what you are aiming at comes down to the same episode.
16 MR. DI FAZIO: I don't intend to show content of the statement on
17 the screens if Your Honours --
18 JUDGE ORIE: It's not just a matter of the screen. That's not
19 what I'm concerned about, but whether this portion of the evidence should
20 be in private session at all because we limit private session more or less
21 to --
22 MR. DI FAZIO: Oh, I see. Yes -- no, no. I think we can go out
23 of private session. I'm sorry, Your Honour.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We then turn into open session.
25 [Open session]
1 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we are back in open session.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar. Please proceed, Mr. Di
4 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you. I'm grateful to Your Honours for
5 pointing that out.
6 Q. Okay. You've very helpfully provided some clarifications in your
7 statement of June of 2006, but the ICTY statement that we have up on the
8 screen here, and if we just scroll down on that last page, please, or,
9 rather, scroll up slightly, it's in English, but that's an acknowledgement
10 that the apparently signed by you, that the statement was read over to you
11 in the Albanian language and was true to the best of your knowledge and
12 recollection and that you gave it voluntarily. Can you tell us if, when
13 you gave your ICTY statement, if it was read over to you by an interpreter
14 in the Albanian language? Can you recall that happening at the time that
15 you put your signature on it?
16 A. I remember that the interpreter said that we will bring you a copy
17 in the Albanian language. I can't remember whether it was read out to me
18 in Albanian. I have said it in the statement that I've given to you, that
19 some interpreters, they come from Albania, and they have difficulties in
20 understanding some of the expressions that we use and there have been --
21 there has been confusion over certain sentences or ideas that have been
22 said in interviews.
23 Q. Okay. So I just want to be clear about that. Are you saying that
24 you can't remember if your ICTY statement was interpreted to you? You
25 can't recall if that happened or not, when you signed it, when you put
1 your signature on it?
2 A. When I signed it, I signed it in [indiscernible] language. And if
3 it was translated to me, there have been mistakes made in that
4 translation, when the translation of certain words and expressions. And I
5 have also made some corrections in the statement given to Defence. I have
6 made certain corrections, but there haven't been as many.
7 Q. Yes. Thank you.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Di Fazio, I'd like to have matters clear. Was,
9 when you signed this statement, was it translated to you, yes or no?
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] When I have not seen a copy of the
11 statement translated into Albanian, I have not considered it as
12 translated, but probably it was my fault.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Fazliu, I'm not asking what you considered or
14 what your interpretation of the situation was. I simply asked you when
15 you signed this statement, English statement, was it read to you through
16 translation in your language?
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As I said earlier, I cannot remember
18 that such a thing happened, whether such a thing happened.
19 JUDGE ORIE: And would you have considered it a possibility that
20 you would sign a statement in a foreign language without knowing what it
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. As I said, we trust people and
23 sometimes if you -- if you trust people, then sometimes it gets you on the
24 wrong path. And I would normally trust people there. But now I notice
25 that there are certain mistakes in that statement which do not coincide
1 with the reality.
2 JUDGE ORIE: How do you know, Mr. Fazliu?
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Because on the basis of the
4 questions that I received via the videolink, I noticed.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Di Fazio.
6 MR. DI FAZIO:
7 Q. And was that the videolink that you had with me earlier this year?
8 My question was: You noticed --
9 MR. EMMERSON: I apologise for rising. I wonder if the witness
10 might remove his ear phones.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Could you please remove your ear phones for a second,
12 Mr. Fazliu?
13 MR. EMMERSON: I'm slightly anxious that there is a risk that the
14 way in which the witness is being questioned about this has the potential
15 for confusing him, because Mr. Di Fazio began his re-examination by
16 directing the witness's attention to the passage in his Defence statement
17 in which he says in terms and which he confirmed, that whilst the Defence
18 statement was being taken, the ICTY statement was read over to him in
19 Albanian so that he was then able to identify errors that had taken place.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Although -- yes. That's.
21 MR. EMMERSON: Your Honour asked him the question: "How do you
22 know, Mr. Fazliu?" He's already answered the question in the sense that
23 he began in answering to Mr. Di Fazio.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Sometimes he asked the same thing in two different
25 ways in order to --
1 MR. EMMERSON: My concern is that the way in which this is being
2 done has the potential to confuse the witness when he's already answered
3 the question.
4 JUDGE ORIE: We'll keep a close eye on that. Mr. Di Fazio, could
5 you please proceed? Could you --
6 MR. DI FAZIO:
7 Q. I'll ask it in the most direct fashion. When did you first become
8 aware of your ICTY statement requiring clarifications?
9 A. I think it was when Defence approached me and through the
10 interview that we had together later.
11 Q. I see. And could you tell the Trial Chamber how it was that
12 these -- this requirement for clarifications was -- how you became aware
13 of this requirement for clarifications when defence approached you, what
14 precisely happened, how it happened when you became aware?
15 MR. GUY-SMITH: Excuse me. I believe that the manner of the
16 question as posed has a sufficient line of ambiguity that the translation
17 is --
18 JUDGE ORIE: The objection is granted. Could you -- "How you
19 become aware of this requirement" is rather vague and could easily create
20 confusion, Mr. Di Fazio.
21 MR. DI FAZIO: Very well. Let me --
22 JUDGE ORIE: If you reformulate it.
23 MR. DI FAZIO:
24 Q. Were you approached by some individual on behalf of the Defence
25 and questioned about your ICTY statement?
1 A. What time are we talking about?
2 Q. Any time. I don't know when this happened. If it happened. I'm
3 just asking you this: Were you approached by some individual on behalf of
4 the Defence and questioned about the content of your ICTY statement?
5 A. The only statement is the one that is in front of me and that's
6 the only statement I've given to Defence.
7 Q. All right. Okay. Well, I'd like to ask you some questions about
8 the content of your ICTY statement because you go into it in some detail
9 in your statement that you gave to Defence. You said that the quote from
10 your ICTY statement; namely, "If Ramush Haradinaj or his people came to
11 know of my statements to The Hague Tribunal I will fall from grace in the
12 eyes of the public and they will start treating me as a traitor, I have
13 never met nor spoken with Ramush Haradinaj, I have only heard of him
14 through Radio and news coverage of his actions, it would be totally
15 illogical for me to be afraid of him.
16 "I wish to say that I never said these things. I have never had
17 any problems with either Ramush Haradinaj or any of his supporters. I am
18 not in fear of him."
19 So you -- can I ask you this: When you spoke to the people from
20 the ICTY and you provided that ICTY statement, did you even go to the
21 topic of whether or not -- of the attitude that Ramush Haradinaj might
22 have to your provision of a statement, to your giving a statement? Did
23 you even discuss that with them?
24 A. I considered that.
25 Q. No. My question is this: Did you ever discuss the topic at all,
1 even discuss it, with investigators from the OTP, namely, the topic of
2 Ramush Haradinaj or his people coming to know of your statement and you
3 falling from grace in the eyes of the public? Did that topic ever arise
4 in the course of your dealings with OTP investigators?
5 A. I have to clarify once again that during the translation of the
6 statement, there may have been mistakes made.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Fazliu, I'm going to stop you there. I'd like
8 you to answer the question of Mr. Di Fazio. The question simply was
9 whether, during the interview, the matter of how your statement would
10 appreciated by Mr. Haradinaj or his people was raised at all, yes or no.
11 That's the question.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. I haven't talked about this.
13 This was -- this was a conversation which has come out through the
14 clarification that I issued through the statement as well as through the
15 article published in Bota Sot. Up until the end of the war, I had never
16 met or known or spoken to him.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Fazliu, again you seem to misunderstand my
18 question. You can form an opinion on how your statement will be
19 appreciated by Mr. X, Y or Z, without knowing that person. I'm not asking
20 for logic. Simply, was the matter, whether people would dislike your
21 statement or even the fact that you gave a statement, if they would become
22 aware, was -- has that been part of your conversation with the
23 investigator of the ICTY?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Now, look, you can never stop people
25 from speculating and making rumours, but when the name -- my name --
1 JUDGE ORIE: I'm not talking about speculations, I'm not talking
2 about rumours. I would like to have a clear answer to the question
3 whether this matter, that is how people might appreciate your statement,
4 was part of the conversation you had with the investigators, which means
5 whether you spoke about this subject when interviewed with the
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't remember having discussed
8 this with them, but it may have been probably a question put, and --
9 [No interpretation]
10 JUDGE ORIE: We have translated where you said, "I don't remember
11 having discussed this with them, but it may have been probably a question
12 put" and then the translation stops for us. Could you therefore resume
13 your answer from, "But I may have -- it may have been probably a question
14 put". Could you please repeat your answer?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I said it may have been a question
16 put to me by the people who were asking me to give a statement. It may
17 have been an interpreter or an investigator. And it may have been
18 interpreted as if I said it. But I don't remember saying it.
19 JUDGE ORIE: So do I understand your answer well that it is that
20 others would perhaps have said that your statement or the content of it
21 would not be positively appreciated, but where these words in the report
22 are yours, that, as a matter of fact, the interpreters or the interviewers
23 might have said it but not you? Is that a correct understanding of your
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As the statement [No interpretation]
1 I cannot conclude that it was put by them.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Di Fazio you may proceed.
3 MR. DI FAZIO:
4 Q. Well, when you learnt from the Defence representative that these
5 words, "If Ramush Haradinaj or his people come to know of my statement to
6 The Hague Tribunal, I will fall from grace in the eyes of the public and
7 they will start treating me as a traitor," when you learned that those
8 words had been attributed to you in your ICTY statement, what was your
9 reaction? Did you -- how did you feel about that?
10 A. I made that clarification in the statement given to Defence, and
11 this is included here.
12 Q. I know and I'm very grateful to you for explaining that to us, but
13 what I'm asking you is how did you feel about that? Were you annoyed or
14 upset about these words that had been incorrectly attributed to you?
15 That's what I'd like to know.
16 A. These people here, Mr. Emmerson and the interpreter, Isak by name,
17 they know very well whether I was concerned, really worried about this.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Fazliu, again, would you please answer the
19 questions? The question is not what others think your mood was at the
20 time, but the question was whether you -- how you felt about it, whether
21 you were annoyed or upset. Would you please answer the question?
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] For something I do not have, of
23 course I have to be -- to feel annoyed or upset.
24 MR. DI FAZIO:
25 Q. Thank you. Did you consider doing anything about that? For
1 example, speaking to the investigators who had attributed, falsely or
2 incorrectly at least, attributed these words to you?
3 A. After the statement I gave to the Defence, you think?
4 Q. Again, a very simple question. When you found out, when you found
5 out that these words had been attributed to you concerning
6 Ramush Haradinaj and his people --
7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Fazliu, I think the witness sought confirmation
8 of that moment to be after he gave the statement to the Defence, and I
9 think he earlier said that at that moment he became aware of the incorrect
10 content of the statement.
11 So therefore, yes, Mr. Fazliu, I think that's what Mr. Di Fazio
12 meant, whether -- whether you considered doing anything about it, about
13 this, after you had learned about the incorrectness of the statement as it
14 was put on paper. For example, addressing the investigators.
15 MR. GUY-SMITH: If I might, and could the witness take off his ear
17 JUDGE ORIE: Is there any reason why he could not first answer
18 this question.
19 MR. GUY-SMITH: I'm objecting to the relevance of the question and
20 I think the --
21 JUDGE ORIE: If it's relevance then it's -- then it doesn't -- the
22 worst that it could happen is that it doesn't harm. Five seconds. It
23 won't take more time.
24 Would you please answer the question, whether you considered to do
25 anything about it, to address the investigators who did write down your
1 statement so incorrectly on paper?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Through the statement I gave to the
3 Defence, I did this. So I did declare what I feel and think and that is
4 the reality. It's quoted well here.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Di Fazio.
6 MR. DI FAZIO: All right.
7 Q. I just want to ask you about another paragraph in your statement,
8 and in fact, it's -- I just want to focus on paragraph 17 of the -- of
9 your -- of the statement that you gave to the ICTY, and which you've today
10 provided clarification about, and that's the statement -- if we could just
11 look at that particular --
12 MR. DI FAZIO: Your Honours I think we might need to go into
13 private session here because it might be shown on the screen.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Then we'll move into private session.
15 [Private session - confidentiality lifted by later order of the Chamber]
16 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we are in private session.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar. Please proceed,
18 Mr. Di Fazio.
19 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you.
20 Q. If we could go to paragraph 17 of the statement, yes, if the
21 witness could have the Albanian, that would be -- the Albanian version I
22 understand that we can --
23 MR. DI FAZIO: -- the Court can have the English as well.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I have the English in front of me. I would
25 very much like to see the Albanian as a matter of fact, whether it's
1 signed or not, because you earlier showed him the English one.
2 MR. DI FAZIO: Well, I believe it -- can we scroll down to the
3 bottom, please? No. It's just a straight translation, if Your Honours
5 JUDGE ORIE: Without any -- yes.
6 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you.
7 Q. Now, there is paragraph 17 of the ICTY statement. And today you
8 have provided some clarification about that statement that you gave in the
9 past. And today you have said that you saw this paragraph in which you
10 say -- which you alleged to have said that you saw Lahi Brahimaj in
11 Gllogjan and that he instructed the villagers not to assist villagers from
12 Grabanice as he considered you traitors, and today you've clarified that
13 you didn't make this comment, it's not true, you didn't see or talk to him
14 in Gllogjan. There's just one extra question I want to ask you about.
15 Did Lahi Brahimaj ever exhort or encourage villagers from anywhere not to
16 assist you?
17 A. No, he did not encourage them not to help us.
18 Q. Thank you.
19 A. If he did not want to, he would not be sending him -- my brother--
20 to be cured --
21 THE INTERPRETER: [Interpretation] His brother, sorry, to be cured.
22 MR. DI FAZIO:
23 Q. Thank you. And I just want to ask you a similar question as I
24 asked you in relation to the other matter in your statement. When you
25 found out that this had been included in your statement, your ICTY
1 statement, the one that you signed --
2 Let me withdraw that.
3 Did you ever discuss with --
4 MR. HARVEY: I apologise for interrupting, as there was just a
5 pause there, there appeared to be a little confusion about what was meant
6 by "otherwise he would not have sent my brother to be cured, his brother
7 to be cured." Perhaps that could be clarified.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Well, I did read your mind earlier, you read my mind
9 at this moment.
10 MR. DI FAZIO: I understand.
11 Q. Do I take it --
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. You explained, Mr. Fazliu, you said, and you
13 were talking about Lahi Brahimaj, "He did not encourage them not to help
14 us." And then you explained that, and it had got something to do with a
15 brother being cured. But that is perhaps due to a translation error but
16 that's not entirely clear. Could you please explain again why you thought
17 that he would not encourage them not to help you?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm saying again, maybe it's not
19 good to confuse things with a statement of someone else maybe. Lahi has
20 helped both the villagers and that's why I said that the brother was sent
21 to be cured and Sadri Berisha and all the others who were there were sent
22 to Irzniq hospital, and I said this was to prove that he did not stop or
23 prevent anyone else from helping us. Otherwise, if something like that
24 were to occur, I -- there -- I would not give him my machine-gun and then
25 ask it to be brought back to me.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. When you say, "why I said that the brother was
2 sent to be cured," whose brother were you referring to?
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] My brother who was wounded in
4 Grabanice. He was sent to be cured and he was treated in Jabllanice.
5 JUDGE ORIE: That clarifies the matter. Please proceed,
6 Mr. Di Fazio.
7 MR. DI FAZIO:
8 Q. Was the topic of Lahi Brahimaj instructing villagers not to assist
9 you because you were traitors ever discussed with OTP investigators? I'm
10 not asking you if it's true or not. I'm not asking you that. I'm just
11 asking you was the topic ever discussed with OTP investigators?
12 A. I don't recall that it was discussed. And I have clarified this
13 in the statement that I gave to you, Mr. Di Fazio.
14 Q. Yes. Thank you very much. And again, when the Defence
15 representatives pointed this out to you, that these words had been
16 attributed to you in your ICTY statement, how did you feel about that?
17 What was your reaction? Did you feel that you had been tricked or were
18 you angry or upset?
19 A. I didn't feel that was honest.
20 Q. Thank you. All right. Well, I want to leave the topic of your
21 statement. You've given evidence today about a number of matters. I just
22 want to remind you very briefly about them. You agree?
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Di Fazio, leaving the statement, are we entering
24 into the journey or -- I'm just cautious about that.
25 MR. DI FAZIO: I think we can go back into open session. I'm not
1 going to go into the journey or the individual that we are all concerned
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Please proceed. Oh, no, first let's turn into
4 open session.
5 [Open session]
6 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we are back in open session.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar. Please proceed.
8 MR. DI FAZIO: Thanks.
9 Q. You've said you provided us with clarifications about a number of
10 issues today in your evidence, Mr. Fazliu. You told us that Jabllanice
11 was an area that Serbs couldn't go to for a period of six years and that
12 was still the case, wasn't it, in May of 1998?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. And not only that, but you had received assistance from people in
15 Jabllanice in your resistance to the Serbs prior to going to Zhabel?
16 A. Yes. There were Agim Zeneli and some people who knew Agim, I knew
17 Agim personally.
18 Q. And you said today that there was, as far as you could detect, no
19 hostility between people from Grabanica and the KLA. I think you
20 described your relationships as "okay." That's your position?
21 A. Yes. Grabanice did send help in foods and in fuel to Jabllanice.
22 Q. And your brother was wounded and taken to Jablanica for medical
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. And this was before you started out on your trip to Zhabel?
1 A. The day of 20th of May, he was wounded, and during the day, he was
2 sent, and then we went late in the evening to Zhabel.
3 Q. And when you set out for Zhabel you knew your brother had been
4 taken to Jablanica?
5 A. I learned later that my brother is being treated because of the
6 wounds he has -- he had taken in the Jablanica HQ.
7 Q. Okay. Thank you. I'm looking at the map. I don't need to show
8 it to you, I don't think, unless you wish to see it, you please let me
9 know if you wish. But if you travel from Grabanica in the direction of
10 Zhabel, you first -- you would go through Bokshiq, wouldn't you?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. And then you would go through Glodjane and Peja, wouldn't you?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. And then you'd go through Jablanica, wouldn't you?
15 A. Jabllanice, yes.
16 Q. And then in order to get to Zhabel, you'd have to travel on from
17 Jablanica down to Zhabel, wouldn't you?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Could you tell the Trial Chamber, given the state of your
20 relations with Jablanica and in the light of your evidence, what it was
21 precisely that caused you to keep moving and not stop in Jablanica?
22 A. I know well that Jabllanice was overburdened with villagers from
23 Grabanice and Bokshiq, because everyone believed it's an area that has
24 been for six years safe because Serbs haven't been there for six years,
25 and I'm not going to call them refugees, but that's why most of people
1 decided to go to a less-burdened village, and in the Beranj area villages
2 it was not very safe because the military forces, Serbian military forces,
3 could have gone any time to beat up the people and even kill them.
12 [Private session - confidentiality lifted by later order of the Chamber]
13 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we are in private session.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
15 MR. DI FAZIO:
16 Q. As you travelled and walked along and your journey towards Zhabel
17 with your travelling companion, did you consider or discuss between the
18 two of you taking refuge in Jablanica?
19 A. From Grabanice, when we set off, and passed through Bokshiq, we
20 saw people walking on the streets, and he said, "I have a relative in
21 Zhabel and we can go there." I did not know at that time who it was, but
22 after we went I learned this was Tal. And then I had known him earlier a
24 Q. All right. So then your travelling companion, then, he was clear
25 that he wanted to go to Zhabel? Do I understand your evidence correct?
1 A. Yes. It was clear to him where he was going. If it were earlier,
2 maybe I would go to Dasinovac where I have my relatives, and would have
3 been maybe freer.
4 Q. Okay. As you went through Jablanica with your travelling
5 companion, you say there were other villagers from Grabanica there. About
6 how many would you say were there, as you walked through Jablanica or
7 passed through it?
8 A. I never thought of counting them. There were tens of the people.
9 Someone in tractors, someone else walking, some people even with their
10 cars, et cetera.
11 Q. Okay. But the topic of perhaps abandoning Zhabel and staying in
12 Jablanica never arose between you and your travelling companion? Do I
13 understand you correctly?
14 A. I do not really get the question, please. Can you clarify it?
15 Q. You've told us a lot of details about your trip with your
16 travelling companion from Grabanica to Zhabel and reasons why you went
17 there. You've told us a lot about your relations with people in Jablanica
18 and the situation in Jablanica today. All I want to know is this: Did
19 the topic of taking refuge in Jablanica, as you passed through Jablanica,
20 arise between you and your travelling companion? Did you discuss it,
21 something along the lines, for instance, of, "Let's stay here in
23 A. Primary aim of my companion was to learn first where his wife and
24 children are. I believe this is -- was -- this was his primary cause,
25 because he exchanged a couple of words with Ujku related to this issue,
1 and this, I believe, was his primary aim, to learn where his family had
2 sought refuge.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Di Fazio, I'm looking at the clock and I wonder
4 whether you'll finish in one or two minutes. If not then we'll have to
5 take a break now.
6 MR. DI FAZIO: I can finish this now. I think it's probably a
7 good idea if we just continue.
8 MR. EMMERSON: I'd be happy to continue, but could I indicate that
9 I have one or two questions arising.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I might have one or two questions as well. So
11 therefore, how much time would that approximately take?
12 MR. EMMERSON: I would have thought between five and ten minutes.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, then perhaps it's better to have a break now.
14 Mr. Fazliu, we are almost finished but not completely. Therefore,
15 we have a break and we'll finish after the break. We resume at 6.00.
16 --- Recess taken at 5.38 p.m.
17 --- On resuming at 6.10 p.m.
18 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber apologises to the parties and to you,
19 Mr. Fazliu, but we had urgent matters to discuss which took us ten minutes
20 more than we expected. We are in private session, Mr. Emmerson, do we
21 have to remain in private session for your questions?
22 MR. EMMERSON: [Microphone not activated]
23 MR. DI FAZIO: I have just got one. I just wanted to get an
24 answer to the second to last question. It won't take a moment if, Your
25 Honours please.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
2 MR. DI FAZIO:
3 Q. Mr. Fazliu, I just wanted to ask you this question or rather get
4 an answer to it, because I don't think you actually addressed your mind to
5 the question I was asking, it was a very simple one. All I was asking
6 you is this: As you and your travelling companion were passing through
7 Jablanica, did the question arise as between you of possibly staying,
8 taking refuge, in Jablanica? That's all. Did it come up as a topic?
9 A. We didn't discuss this because he had already made up his mind as
10 to where he wanted to go. So I didn't intervene to say anything.
11 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you very much. I have no further questions.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson?
13 Further cross-examination by Mr. Emmerson:
14 Q. Mr. Fazliu, I just want to clarify one or two matters you've been
15 asked about both by Judge Orie and by Mr. Di Fazio. First of all, first
16 topic I want to return to, is Judge Orie asked you about an answer that
17 you had given where you said that, in essence, you had offered to do some
18 work around the house of Tal Zeka, but Tal Zeka insisted that you remain
19 in the oda. Now, you told us, in answer to Judge Orie's question that it
20 wasn't that he was insisting that you remain in the oda but that he was
21 telling you, in effect, as a guest, it was not necessary for you to work.
22 You remember giving that answer?
23 A. Yes, I do.
24 Q. Just to clarify, first of all, Tal Zeka's house was chosen as your
25 destination not by you but by your travelling companion; is that correct?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Tal Zeka was your travelling companion's relative; is that
4 A. He's a friend of the cousin of my travelling companion.
5 Q. And you told us that Tal Zeka had said to you that as your -- as
6 his guests, it wasn't necessary for you to work. Is it customary in
7 Kosovar Albanian society for guests to remain in the oda?
8 A. It is.
9 Q. And again just so it's absolutely clear, were you being detained
10 in the oda? Or were you free to leave, if you wished to go somewhere
12 A. I was free, if I wanted to go somewhere, nobody prevented me. The
13 owner just put up that reception for us as a sign of generosity. You
14 know, he didn't -- he regretted it [as interpreted] to make me go out and
15 work in the field.
16 Q. Secondly, Mr. Di Fazio asked you about a passage in the witness
17 statement that you gave to the ICTY investigators in October 2005
18 referring to concerns that if people knew you'd made a statement, you
19 would fall from grace, and he took you to a passage in the statement that
20 you made to the Defence investigators in which you indicated that that was
21 not a concern and had not been said by you. I just want to be clear about
22 one matter, because just over six months before the Prosecution
23 investigators spoke to you, you had given this interview or series of
24 interviews you tell us to the media on about the 15th of March; is that
1 A. I gave one interview only, but it was relayed by three different
3 Q. I see. So one interview published in three different places. And
4 if you look in the file again, at tab 1, that interview is recorded as
5 having been given on the 14th of March and published on the 15th of March
6 of 2005. Do you see that?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. And in the last sentence --
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson, I take it if that's the case, the
10 translation tells us that it's, what's the date of publication?
11 Unfortunately, the original either it's hidden behind the numbering or but
12 there is no date on the original.
13 MR. EMMERSON: Your Honour is quite right.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
15 MR. EMMERSON: I think there is the date.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But not the year. Yes.
17 MR. EMMERSON: Exactly.
18 Q. But I think you can confirm, can you, Mr. Fazliu, that this
19 interview was given just after the indictment was made public, the same
21 A. I remember that. I wouldn't have had to make such an explanation
22 had I not been obliged to shut the mouth of those gossip mongers who
23 spread these rumours, that's why I had to make this explanation to the
25 Q. What's important for us to be clear about is to make sure that we
1 have the right date for it. It's recorded in the original as an interview
2 that took place during March, but in the original publication, it
3 doesn't-- we can't see from our copy of it which year it was. Now, we
4 know the indictment in this case was made public in March 2005 --
5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson, I just mentioned it because there is no
6 problem with it, I would say, because he couldn't comment on an indictment
7 which doesn't exist, and then of course, in October he was interviewed and
8 it was only later that he gave the interview to the Defence. So as far as
9 the year is concerned, I just put it in for the record.
10 MR. EMMERSON: What I'm concerned about is that this statement had
11 been made six months before the OTP investigator spoke to him. As long as
12 that's clear.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
14 MR. EMMERSON:
15 Q. And in the last sentence of the article which we didn't deal with
16 before, you are recorded as having said this: It says, "According to
17 Mr. Fazliu, he has given these clarifications not because he was scared or
18 under pressure but in order for the truth to come out in this case." Did
19 you say that when you were interviewed and is that the truth?
20 A. Yes. I said this.
21 Q. Thank you.
22 A. At the office in Kline at the office for information, 14th of
24 Q. Thank you. Now, when we come to the witness statement that you
25 made in October 2005, when you were interviewed by the Prosecution
1 investigators, I'm not going to ask for it to be brought up unless it
2 becomes necessary, but in that witness statement, you give the names of
3 certain people who you saw at Jabllanice. For example, you name Lahi and
4 Nazmi Brahimaj as people who were at Jabllanice, but there is no
5 suggestion in your witness statement to the Prosecution that you saw
6 Ramush Haradinaj at Jabllanice. Now, obviously we know that in March of
7 2005, you had told the press that Ramush Haradinaj was not at Jabllanice.
8 The question I want to ask you is can you remember now whether the
9 investigators from the Prosecution asked you one way or the other if
10 Ramush Haradinaj was there?
11 A. They asked me, and I always gave the same answer, namely that he
12 was not there and I'm certain of this.
13 Q. And that is something which they then must have failed to record
14 in your witness statement; is that correct? Because there is nothing in
15 your witness statement on the subject one way or the other, the
16 Prosecution statement, that is.
17 A. That's not my fault if they didn't write down what I said.
18 Q. No, it wasn't your fault.
19 Next, did they tell you that your travelling companion had made an
20 allegation that whilst you were there, a 15 year old boy had had his ear
21 cut off? Did they tell you that, the Prosecution investigators, because
22 there is no mention of that in your Prosecution witness statement either.
23 A. This question too was asked of me, but my answer is not there, and
24 it is the same answer that I gave through the statement I gave to the
25 Defence and which I confirmed here as well.
1 Q. Thank you. And finally this: When you were then later
2 interviewed by investigators for the Defence in June 2006 I just wanted to
3 clarify one matter. You mentioned my name in connection with that
4 statement. You were in fact I think interviewed, were you not, by a
5 British female police officer together with a Kosovar Albanian called
6 Isak Faro [phoen]; is that correct?
7 A. Yes, that's correct. I thought that before the talk, they
8 mentioned your name. I thought that they had come on your behalf.
9 Q. Yes, well they may well have said that to you. But just to be
10 absolutely clear, Mr. Fazliu, before you came to court yesterday, you and
11 I had never met, had we?
12 A. No, we hadn't.
13 Q. Yes. Thank you. Those are my questions?
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Emmerson, just one matter for clarification. In
15 your question at least you made an observation about interview by a police
16 officer. I take it not a British police officer functioning as such, or a
17 former police officer working as an investigator for the --
18 MR. EMMERSON: Exactly.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Then I understood it well. Yes.
20 MR. EMMERSON: Thank you.
21 MR. HARVEY: No additional questions arising.
22 JUDGE ORIE: No additional questions for you, Mr. Guy-Smith? Yes,
23 Judge Hoepfel has a question for you.
24 Questioned by the Court:
25 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Let me go back to that walk from Zhabel to
1 Jablanica. What is the distance about between the two places?
2 A. I think that it takes you one hour, if you walk on foot. I never
3 measured the time or the distance, but you have to walk rather fast. If
4 you walk slowly, it may take you longer than one hour.
5 JUDGE HOEPFEL: And did I understand you correctly, you walked
7 A. We walked very slow, as if we have -- we have a saying which says
8 as if you count your own steps. And all along the way we talked. We
9 talked as if we were going on a picnic. It was a rather very slow walk.
10 JUDGE HOEPFEL: You said something like that yesterday also, and I
11 didn't really understand because of these motivations you mentioned
12 yesterday to get to Jablanica. You said two things which were urgent
13 reasons for you to get to Jablanica. One was your brother in the hospital
14 and the other one was the mobilisation issue. Do I remember correctly?
15 A. Yes.
16 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Today you said you learned only later that your
17 brother was in the hospital. When did you learn that actually?
18 A. We were talking about the date, the 20th, which was not clear to
19 me before I arrived to Zhabel late in the evening. During the day of the
20 20th, I had no information on my brother's being wounded, but in the
21 evening of the day, of the same day, when I arrived there at 11.00 at
22 night, I heard from people who came there that he was wounded and was
23 being treated in Jabllanice at the headquarters. And this is my
25 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Who told you that, please?
1 A. There were people from the village who came there after us and
2 during the day, they moved about, and that was -- there was also
3 Sadri Berisha, and the leader of the village, who lived in another house
4 in Zhabel, and it was through him that I got this information. If I'm not
6 JUDGE HOEPFEL: So forgive me for asking, but I don't really
7 understand why you then took such a slow pace on your walk from one place
8 to the other, from Zhabel to Jablanica.
9 A. Why should we hurry up? Didn't have any motive to do that.
10 Nobody forced us to move faster.
11 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Okay. And what did you mean with saying you
12 walked arms in arms? With whom did you walk arms in arms?
13 A. With commander of Zhabel village, Tahir, that's his name.
14 JUDGE HOEPFEL: What was the reason for that?
15 A. Whereas my companion, we talked all along the way. I stated this
16 earlier. He asked me what my profession was, what I was doing, and then I
17 asked him to --
18 JUDGE HOEPFEL: The question was why you walked hand in hand or
19 arm in arm, as you said. Is that --
20 A. I don't see any reason why not. We got to know each other there.
21 We were introduced there. And it was quite natural to us to learn
22 something more about the private life of each other. Whereas my companion
23 walked ahead of us with Ali and Fadil. They too were talking as they
25 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Were they also arms in arms?
1 A. They were side by side, like in a line, and this is how they
2 walked, besides each other.
3 JUDGE HOEPFEL: So your companion was not arms in arms with
5 A. With Fadil, Selmani and Ali Berisha.
6 JUDGE HOEPFEL: What, pardon? What do you mean?
7 A. My companion walked alongside Fadil Berisha and -- Selmani and
8 Ali Berisha.
9 JUDGE HOEPFEL: That was not my question. Pardon, Mr. Emmerson.
10 MR. EMMERSON: I wonder if the witness might remove his headphones
11 for a moment?
12 JUDGE ORIE: You should take off your headphones for a second,
13 Mr. Fazliu.
14 MR. EMMERSON: I think it may be that the words "arm in arm" are a
15 colloquial Kosovo Albanian expression. I don't know if you would wish to
16 explore whether he means literally "arm in arm" or whether that is an
17 expression intended to mean walking side by side. I'm not certain what
18 the answer is, but I understand that it is a colloquial expression.
19 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Yes. Mr. Fazliu -- thank you. Please maybe for
20 clarification once more, what do you mean by you having walked arm in arm
21 with Mr. Tahir, and the other group was walking side by side? Is that a
22 difference or what do you want to express by that?
23 A. The expression "arm by arm", the way I understand it is if you are
24 in good company and you feel comfortable, you can walk freely and hold all
25 sorts of conversations. This is how I understand this expression, in good
1 company, without any kind of hesitation.
2 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Thank you.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Fazliu, I would have a few questions for you.
4 First of all you said that you learned from the press about the name of
5 Ujku perhaps being Pjeter. What did they write about him in the press?
6 What was the reason that his name appeared in the press?
7 A. If I'm not mistaken, it appeared that he raised an accusation
8 against Mr. Haradinaj, the former Prime Minister of Kosovo. It was
9 something along those lines. I cannot be more accurate, but I think that
10 was the basis.
11 JUDGE ORIE: My next question is, from what I understand you
12 stayed for a couple of weeks, four weeks, in Maznik, after you had
13 returned from Jablanica. Now, what did you do after those four weeks?
14 Did you return to your village or --
15 A. Yes. Every third -- second or third day, I went back to the
16 village, and I stayed there for the whole day sometimes, and then went
17 back to Maznik in the evening.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but did I understand you well that you stayed
19 for four weeks in Maznik? Do you mean that you returned to Grabanica
20 during those four weeks or that you extended your presence in Maznik even
21 after that, although, going to Grabanica for perhaps two days a week?
22 A. No, I'm saying that we stayed and slept in Maznik, and we helped
23 out in that family where we stayed, but during the day, on certain days,
24 we went with the son of Avdiv [phoen] even to Maliseva [phoen], and we
25 also went to Grabanice because some families of Grabanice stayed there all
1 the time. And after spending a few hours there, we went back to Maznik.
2 And after four weeks in Maznik, then we moved to Kosuric.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Now, did you ever participate after those four weeks
4 or even within those four weeks, did you ever participate in any
5 military-like or operation? I mean did you ever carry an arm during that
6 period? Were you ever involved in operations for whatever organisation,
7 KLA, any other organisation?
8 A. During our stay in Kosuric, we had guard duties with the KLA
9 soldiers in the village, not only me but my other three, four brothers,
10 and that was whenever we were given a timetable for doing this guard
11 duties, and I was doing the guard duties in the area round Kosuric and
12 that happened up until the moment when Kosuric was attacked, when we then
13 withdrew from there.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Fazliu, you answered my question. Then once
15 you had left Jabllanice when, for the first time after you had come to
16 Maznik did you meet Mr. Brahimaj, Mr. Lahi Brahimaj again?
17 A. After I went to Maznik, I met him because I went on several
18 occasions to Jabllanice, and I met him two, three times, but it was after
19 several -- several weeks, then I asked him to give me back my weapon and
20 that's how I got it back.
21 JUDGE ORIE: You say after several weeks. Is that the weapon you
22 used when you were performing your guard duties, later, as you just
23 explained to us?
24 A. It was a Hungarian automatic rifle, Kalashnikov. It was that one.
25 It was my weapon and it was returned to me as we had agreed.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Now, yes. You said that was after a couple of weeks.
2 My question was whether that was the weapon you used when standing guard,
3 not what the weapon was, because that was an AK-47, as far as I
4 understand, but did you use that weapon when standing guard after leaving
6 A. Yes. Yes. I have used the same weapon to perform my guard
8 JUDGE ORIE: Now, in the statement which was read to you, the
9 statement given to the ICTY investigator, you said that the weapon was
10 returned five or six months later. Have you corrected that when you spoke
11 to the Defence where -- I'm just.
12 MR. EMMERSON: Your Honour it's -- again, it might be wiser if the
13 witness removed his ear phones.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, if there is anything of the kind, then please,
15 if you give me a number, then I can check that.
16 MR. EMMERSON: Yes. If Your Honour would just give me a moment.
17 He corrected it both in his Defence statement and in his interview --
18 JUDGE ORIE: Then I overlooked that.
19 MR. EMMERSON: And in his interview with Mr. Di Fazio where he
20 said the six months should have read six weeks.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Then I overlooked that and we can proceed.
22 Then I do understand that you corrected that although I -- now, I
23 do understand that you corrected that in your statement. I have one final
24 question for you. You told in the statement you gave to the Defence that
25 you learned that -- and let me take it literally. You said about your
1 travel companion, "I heard he had gone to the USA." Could you tell us
2 when did you hear that? Apparently prior to giving this statement in June
3 2006. Do you remember when you heard that and how you heard that?
4 A. The son of one of his brothers in the village, that's how we heard
5 about it, before he left for America he had said that he wanted to go
6 there. But later on, when the son of his brother, Jefer [phoen], he told
7 us he was somewhere in America.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Was that before or after you gave the interview to
9 the press, you remember that we -- that was March 2005. Was it prior to
10 that that you heard that he had gone to the United States or was it after
12 A. It's possible that I heard about it after that date. I'm not
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. You're not sure about it. Thank you very much
15 for that answer. Did the questions trigger any further need?
16 MR. EMMERSON: Nothing arising, save to indicate to Your Honours'
17 the answer to Your Honour's question. A correction will be found in the
18 penultimate line of the second full paragraph on page 4 of the statement,
19 and during the proofing session with Mr. Di Fazio, on page 22, when that
20 paragraph was put to him, the witness is recorded as saying, "You are
21 mistaken that I said months. It was weeks because five or six months
22 would have been a very long time."
23 JUDGE ORIE: I would have checked that Mr. Emmerson. First of all
24 if you say that as a solid response then I. [Speakers overlapping].
25 JUDGE ORIE: I start from the points of view that you've checked
1 that carefully.
2 MR. EMMERSON: Secondly, I wonder whether tabs 1 and 2 could
3 please be marked for identification.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar, tab 1 would be the newspaper article
5 dated the 15th of March with on top of it Kline 14th of March 2005.
6 MR. EMMERSON: I'm being reminded that we should perhaps for this
7 purpose go into open session.
8 JUDGE ORIE: We could go to open session.
9 [Open session]
10 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we are back in open session.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar, the newspaper article under tab 1,
12 is it uploaded already? It's uploaded already in e-court. Would have
13 what number?
14 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours this will be Exhibit number D154
15 marked for identification.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, thank you. Then under tab 2, the statement of
17 the witness dated the 15th of June 2006 would be number?
18 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours this will be Exhibit number D155
19 marked for identification.
20 MR. EMMERSON: I don't ask for tab 3 to be marked for
21 identification because I don't seek to tender it.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Then, as far as the status of tab 2 is concerned, we
23 earlier discussed it to be perhaps an answer to your statement. Of
24 course, 92 ter, there is one respect it starts from the assumption that
25 the witness is called by the party who presents the statement as a 92 ter
1 statement and that the witness is available for cross-examination. Here,
2 however, the situation is slightly different, but I think on the basis of
3 the ratio of Article 92 ter, that the Article would not oppose against
4 admitting a statement under 92 ter where the witness is available for
5 examination-in-chief. If that would be -- if the parties take any
6 different view, then the Chamber would like to hear that later.
7 Mr. Fazliu, first of all perhaps we directly deal with the
8 exhibits. Mr. Di Fazio, I think we have dealt with all the P exhibits,
9 that was only the marked map from what I remember.
10 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Then we have two Defence exhibits any objections
12 either the newspaper article --
13 MR. DI FAZIO: No, there is none. And I have no objection to them
14 going into evidence at all.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then exhibits D154 and D155 are admitted into
16 evidence. The P exhibit was already admitted at an earlier stage.
17 MR. EMMERSON: Just before Your Honour addresses the witness, I
18 wonder if we might go very briefly into private session?
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We turn into private session.
20 [Private session]
11 [Open session]
12 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're back in open session.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
14 Mr. Fazliu, this concludes your evidence in this Court. You've
15 been here for two days, many questions were put to you, they have been
16 long sessions. I'd like to thank you for coming to The Hague and to
17 answer questions of both parties and the Bench and I'd like to wish you a
18 safe trip home again.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Usher would you please escort the witness out
21 of the courtroom?
22 [The witness withdrew]
23 JUDGE ORIE: I would like to see how far we come with shortening
24 our list of exhibits on which no decisions have yet been taken.
25 First of all, is there any new information the Chamber should hear
1 about the five exhibits that were -- remained undetermined as far as
2 Professor Dunjic is concerned, that's 746, 763, 774, 779 and 815.
3 MR. GUY-SMITH: Mr. Dutertre and I are still in the process of
4 dealing with that issue, Your Honour.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Then we will hear about that at a later stage.
6 The parties have received this rather long list. As far as
7 Witness 6 is concerned, I do understand that D114 was not dealt with out
8 of oversight. Any objections?
9 MR. DI FAZIO: No objection.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Admitted into evidence.
11 MR. HARVEY: No objection.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Yes, no objection but, no, but D114 is a
13 Defence Exhibit. Of course, you could -- we do not make any distinction
14 between which Defence counsel, although I would invite Defence counsel, if
15 one Defence counsel tenders any documents where other Defence counsel
16 would object, I'd like to know that immediately and not wait until a
17 couple of weeks after that.
18 Then P335 was a matter of translation. Is the translation
19 meanwhile completed?
20 MR. DI FAZIO: They were redone by the official translation body,
21 and I believe they are uploaded into e-court and are they now ready to be
22 fully admitted as far as the Prosecution is concerned.
23 MR. HARVEY: No objection.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Is that true for the other counsel as well? Then
25 P335 is admitted into evidence.
1 We now come to a couple of exhibits tendered through witness
2 Bajcetic, that is D130 through D -- at this moment, D136. I know that
3 there are three more on the list, but I would first limit it to these
4 Defence exhibits. That's D130 through D136. Any objections.
5 MR. RE: Not to D130, 131, 132, 133 and 134 and 136. However,
6 there is an objection to D135, which purports to be or is an extract from
7 the Milutinovic pre-trial brief and the Prosecution is at a loss to see
8 how it is relevant to these proceedings and awaits to hear the Defence's
9 submissions on relevance so we can respond.
10 MR. EMMERSON: Well, it's relevant because it deals with the
11 Prosecution's position that General Colonel Vlastimir Djurdjevic was an
12 architect of a plan to conceal evidence by moving bodies to frustrate the
13 investigations of the Tribunal which in itself is relevant given the
14 upcoming testimony of a witness whose protected status is yet to be
15 determined, that General Colonel Vlastimir Djordjevic was involved in the
16 canal investigation and was one of the first at the scene.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Whether he was or not, of course, we do not know yet,
18 but we'll consider this -- you would like to hear the relevance and then
19 take a position, Mr. Re.
20 MR. RE: I'm not quite sure we have heard the relevance. The
21 Prosecution in my general response at the moment is that it's -- for a
22 start Mr. Emmerson hasn't pointed to the relevant passage, even a relevant
23 footnote. It's a pre-trial brief, a position in relation to another case
24 at a different time period involving different parties in a different
25 area. It appears on its face.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
2 MR. RE: It certainly isn't evidence.
3 JUDGE ORIE: It raised an interesting question, whether any
4 perception expressed by any member of the Office of the Prosecution in
5 another case emphasising a perception of what might be the truth, or to
6 what extent that -- because that's just presenting on what they think they
7 could prove.
8 MR. EMMERSON: Well, it may --
9 JUDGE ORIE: And in that context being relevant.
10 MR. EMMERSON: It raises an interesting question. The short
11 response is that the Office of the Prosecutor being indivisible, the
12 Prosecution's position is not one of perception but one in which it makes
13 allegations and accusations. And it's not in our submission open to the
14 Prosecution to take a different position in two different cases.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. We'll consider that and see whether we ask
16 further submissions on whether consistency in all cases under all
17 circumstances is required from the Prosecution. But let's leave it at
18 this moment. We are trying at this moment to cut short our list. Then
19 D130 through D134 are admitted into evidence. D135 is pending. D136
20 is -- Mr. Re I think you said something about D135. I asked comments
21 until D136.
22 MR. RE: D135 was the one was the one I was objecting to which was
23 the pre-trial brief.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but I'm now talking about D136. That's okay.
25 MR. RE: I don't object to that.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Then D136 is admitted into evidence. As far as D137
2 through D139 is concerned, these are statements on which the Chamber would
3 like to -- the Defence to reconsider whether it wants to tender it in
4 light of the recent decisions on admission into evidence of statements
5 which were obtained specifically for the purpose of information, witness
6 information, for these proceedings. So the Chamber would very much like
7 the Defence to see whether it still tenders it and is not satisfied with
8 just the quotes used in court.
9 Then we move to the next witness, a similar reconsideration will
10 be required from the Defence as far as D91 is concerned.
11 The Chamber would like to hear from that from the Defence.
12 Then the next one is P376, Pekka Haverinen being the witness.
13 Redactions had to be made, redactions have been made meanwhile, I think
14 that apart from these redactions to be made there were no objections.
15 Then P376 is admitted into evidence.
16 We move on to the next one, that's P367.
17 Yes, Mr. Emmerson?
18 MR. EMMERSON: There is a pending issue in respect of that
19 statement. I raised at the conclusion of the witness's testimony. Your
20 Honour will recall that that witness gave evidence at a time prior to the
21 current procedure having been established in respect of 92 ter witness
22 statements that objections be exchanged and then rulings sought. And I
23 had indicated that there was a passage in the witness's consolidated
24 witness statement to which I took objection but which was not elicited
25 from the witness in evidence-in-chief. And now is not the time to deal
1 with the matter. It will take a little while. But it relates to the
2 extent of the witness's --
3 JUDGE ORIE: That was not the redaction required? Because I
4 remember that the redaction required had something to do with that as
5 well. I mean the redaction was not protection but was a portion
6 inappropriate to be introduced through 92 ter.
7 MR. EMMERSON: I think it was not but may we check the position?
8 JUDGE ORIE: Okay.
9 MR. EMMERSON: It relates essentially to the witness's ability to
10 describe the age of a tree.
11 JUDGE ORIE: I'll then perhaps -- let's not at this moment lose
12 time on this in court. The Chamber would like to be informed about the
13 redacted 92 ter statement of Pekka Haverinen and to see whether the
14 objection you just raised still stands.
15 MR. EMMERSON: It's my fault. If I've misled Your Honour, I was
16 referring to 367 which I thought Your Honour had moved on to.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Not yet. Not yet.
18 MR. EMMERSON: I thought you had. Number 16.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. It's almost the same number. That's 3 --
20 perhaps I misspoke.
21 MR. EMMERSON: I think Your Honour may have misspoken. That's why
22 I was on my feet.
23 JUDGE ORIE: I think you went too fast. I was starting P367 not
24 saying anything about it yet, and then you started already because for
25 367, I would have referred to some confusion as far as the admission of
1 this statement is concerned. I think it is page -- I think it's page 5992
2 in which, by the way also there is a mistake, because it says something
3 about 73 ter rather than 93 ter. Where Mr. Dutertre -- but even there I
4 could not exclude for the possibility of a translation error. I'm always
5 surprised that there is so little, as a matter of fact, where he said
6 there he said, "because we have admitted this statement under Article 73
7 ter," might have been that it is submitted.
8 There seems to be some unclarity as to whether the 92 ter
9 statement was admitted because there is no formal admission there and
10 since I do understand that there still is an objection in relation to
11 that, the Chamber would like to hear, as soon as possible, about 367 and
12 just to put things right on the record, where we admitted P376, that's the
13 Pekka Haverinen statement, that admission is final.
14 So then we move on to D41, in relation to Rrustem Tetaj, where the
15 OTP reserved its right to object but we have heard of no objection since.
16 It's the videoclip.
17 MR. RE: There is no objection to that.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Now, I have a question before giving a decision on
19 that. It's described as a videoclip showing the swearing-in ceremony in
20 Beranj dated the 20th of July, and then who they swore in, a large number
21 of volunteers. That's a nice description of part of the video.
22 The video as it was delivered and as it was uploaded as far as I
23 understand contains far more. It contains meetings, training sessions,
24 all kind of other things apart from the swearing in ceremony with a large
25 number of people present, a lot of signing, et cetera. But there is
1 certainly on that video, as we have it, there is far more on it. So
2 therefore I'd like to, before we admit it into evidence, we'd like the
3 Defence to check whether this exhibit is really limited to this and then
4 provide a new copy.
5 MR. EMMERSON: Yes.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Or to explain why all the other parts are in it as
8 MR. EMMERSON: Yes. The short answer is that that was the form in
9 which the videotape was disclosed to the Defence by the Prosecution. But
10 the only passage that was played and relied upon in evidence and upon
11 which the witness was questioned is the passage that was described in the
12 descriptive paragraph and therefore, we will ask the audiovisual unit to
13 cut the video to that passage and have that substituted for the video
14 that's on the exhibit at the moment.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Because the page in e-court describes it in
16 this way, and we have to be sure that the video which finally is handed
17 over to the registrar is the video containing only that portion.
18 MR. EMMERSON: We will make arrangements for it to be edited in
19 that way.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then I see that as far as Bogdan, Tomas is
21 concerned, we still have an objection by the OTP of which I don't have the
22 details at this moment, so I'd rather leave that for a moment. Otherwise
23 there would be no list left at all.
24 Next one Radovan Zlatkovic, I do understand that there is an issue
25 raised in respect not of the 92 statement itself but only in relation to
1 annex 10 to that. That would be P864. Is that correctly understood?
2 There is an issue taken on that?
3 MR. GUY-SMITH: I believe that there have been appropriate
4 redactions made to the 92 ter statement, so with that in mind there is no
5 objection with regard to the 92 ter statement.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
7 MR. GUY-SMITH: With regard to, I believe that there were
8 objections both to annex 10 and with regard to annex 11, it was agreed
9 that annex 11 would not be part of this particular 92 ter statement and
10 was taken out in toto is my understanding.
11 JUDGE ORIE: The problem is here that the annexes received
12 separate numbers. And so therefore, 865, Mr. Re, if it's not clear to you
13 that's no problem, then we have identified where the problems are, they
14 remain on the list, all the others are removed from the list. May I then
15 take it that P864, being annex 10 to the 92 ter statement, and P865, which
16 is annex 11 to the 92 ter statements, that we'll further hear from whether
17 they are withdrawn, whether they are still objections pending?
18 MR. RE: I believe Mr. Dutertre and Mr. Guy-Smith can maybe work
19 something out on that one.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. So P864 and P865 are still on the list. There
21 are, from what I understand, there are no objections raised against P854
22 which is the 92 ter statement through P863 which is the annexes up to and
23 including annex 9 to the 92 ter statement.
24 No objections, admitted into evidence.
25 Then we have P866 through P883, all annexes to the -- all annexes
1 to the 92 ter statement of Radovan Zlatkovic. Any objections? Then P866
2 through P883 are admitted into evidence.
3 Finally in relation to Witness Zlatkovic, on the list D153 which
4 is an RDB official note, perhaps should have been on the list, admission
5 not being determined yet. If the Prosecution would like to take its time
6 to see what it is, fine. Otherwise, we'll decide on the admission.
7 I think we look at the clock. D153 still is on the list.
8 All the other items on the list are not to be discussed at this
9 very moment. We will -- I think the interpreters and technicians and
10 transcribers, but also security for these additional minutes not requested
11 but implicitly granted. I feel a bit guilty.
12 We will adjourn. We are not sitting on Monday. We will adjourn
13 until Tuesday, the 28th of August, at 9.00 in the morning in this same
14 courtroom but not until I've announced to the parties that the
15 representative of the Registry, who has assisted us so splendidly in this
16 case until now, is going to leave us, which the Chamber regrets.
17 MR. EMMERSON: On behalf of all parties, Defence and Prosecution,
18 we would wish to express our thanks for the efficient and courteous manner
19 in which she has performed her functions to all of us.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Then we stand adjourned until Tuesday, the 28th of
21 August, 9.00 in the morning.
22 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.07 p.m.,
23 to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 28th day of
24 August, 2007, at 9.00 a.m.