Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 3121

1 Tuesday, 8 February 2005

2 [Open session]

3 [The accused entered court]

4 --- Upon commencing at 2.22 p.m.

5 JUDGE PARKER: Good afternoon. We adjourned last night at the

6 point considering an interesting question. Some written submissions have

7 been received from the Office of the Prosecutor. And there has been a

8 suggestion that you might have some different position, Mr. Khan.

9 MR. KHAN: Yes, Your Honour. I did inform the Prosecution early

10 this morning that in fact I was not maintaining the objection. I don't

11 think there's going to be a dispute between the parties, in fact, as to

12 where the Prosecution is going in relation to what he said in the

13 statement on that issue. And so, I withdraw the objection and I have no

14 objection for the statement to be put to the witness in a bid to refresh

15 his memory. Accordingly, Your Honour, I don't think there needs to be

16 any more argument on that issue, if that's where --

17 JUDGE PARKER: The Chamber is grateful, Mr. Khan. I think it

18 would be helpful if we said a word or two to guide the conduct of the

19 trial as it progresses, as this issue may not have passed altogether from

20 us. I know when we closed yesterday as I was handed a copy of

21 Hadzihasanovic at the end, as I glanced through it I missed the

22 significance of the second half of one sentence. I saw a reference to

23 Simic, which was cross-examination, but of course the Appeals Chamber in

24 that decision, which was last year, expressly appears to have held that

25 the position during evidence in chief should be the same as that in-

Page 3122

1 cross-examination. That being the position, although any of this is

2 perhaps still subject to discretion, there being no unusual or particular

3 circumstances relevant to the matter of discretion, the normal course

4 that counsel may expect this Chamber to follow -- whether there be a

5 similar situation whether in the course of the Prosecution case or the

6 case of any one of the accused, it can be expected that this Chamber will

7 follow the position indicated by the Appeals Chamber in that decision.

8 MR. KHAN: Your Honour, I'm most grateful for that, and I'm sure

9 it provides huge assistance to the parties. I didn't want to get

10 embroiled in what the Appeals Chamber decision says. It is perhaps not

11 the most detailed of decisions from the Appeals Chamber. It's difficult

12 to discern any attempt to distil a general principle of law after seeing

13 a comparative analysis of different common-law systems. It is a decision

14 of the Appeals Chamber, and until such time it is revisited or refined,

15 it is not worth seeking to relitigate it. Your Honour, there may be --

16 JUDGE PARKER: I would only observe there, Mr. Khan, that you may

17 have limited the field a little, if you look at the composition of the

18 Chamber, in your use of the word "common law."

19 MR. KHAN: Well --

20 JUDGE PARKER: It is I think a further indication that the wiser

21 influences of the civil law are taking an increasing role in the

22 procedure of this Tribunal.

23 MR. KHAN: Yes, Your Honour, and of course it hasn't escaped our

24 attention and my attention that of course we are fortunate in having one

25 of the pre-eminent experts in comparative criminal procedure that is

Page 3123

1 adjudicating on this case. But, Your Honour, the point may be reached in

2 which, notwithstanding the rather bare-bones approach of the Appeals

3 Chamber, Your Honours may think it appropriate to give some guidance as

4 to the modalities. But, Your Honour, perhaps that's for another

5 occasion.

6 JUDGE PARKER: I don't think we will spend more time on it now.

7 You only need to see, for instance, where the sands have shifted

8 statutorily in your country in the last two years, with the Criminal

9 Procedure Act of 2003, which I read for the first time overnight. That,

10 too, was quite a move. So --

11 MR. KHAN: Yes, in which direction, of course --

12 JUDGE PARKER: Wherever we go it's heading in the direction of

13 letting the court see in what the judges in -- particularly in Belgium

14 and other civil law countries would automatically see, and in which prior

15 statements would almost automatically be put to a witness if there was a

16 different or an inability to remember some aspect of the evidence. But I

17 think enough; we're --

18 MR. KHAN: Indeed. I am most grateful to Your Honours.

19 JUDGE PARKER: -- you might expect to find the Chamber on this

20 matter if it should arise again. That is not to try to say that you

21 might not try to move us if you think that's necessary. But I think an

22 indication of our present position is worthwhile in view of what was said

23 yesterday. That being so, we might now move to have the witness back and

24 continue.

25 MR. KHAN: I'm most grateful.

Page 3124

1 [The witness entered court]

2 JUDGE PARKER: Good afternoon, Mr. Karpuzi. If --

3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Honourable

4 Gentlemen.

5 JUDGE PARKER: If we could remind you of the affirmation you took

6 at the beginning of your evidence that still applies. Mr. Nicholls has

7 some further questions for you.

8 MR. NICHOLLS: Thank you, Your Honours.


10 [Witness answered through interpreter]

11 Examined by Mr. Nicholls: [Continued]

12 Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Karpuzi.

13 A. Good afternoon.

14 MR. NICHOLLS: I now ask if we can provide the witness with a

15 copy of his statement in the Albanian language, which we have available.



18 Q. Sir, do you have a copy of your statement to the ICTY from July

19 2003 in front of you in your language?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. I'd like to direct your attention to paragraph 11 of the

22 statement. Please read that paragraph. And the section of the paragraph

23 I'm interested in - it's a long paragraph - is about the oath ceremony

24 that we were talking about yesterday. If you look about two-thirds of

25 the way down you'll see the following:

Page 3125

1 "The things that he spoke about made us respect him as a leader

2 and we wanted him to be in charge. Celiku said that if we respect what

3 he said in his speech, he would be prepared to be our leader."

4 So please read that and find the words in your statement.

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. Have you read all of paragraph 11?

7 A. Not all of it, but the part that you mentioned.

8 Q. Please read the whole paragraph, focusing on that section.

9 MR. GUY-SMITH: For the Court's edification it is a rather long

10 paragraph.

11 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.

12 MR. NICHOLLS: But in fairness, Your Honour, it concerns the

13 whole topic, so I think he should read the whole paragraph.

14 Q. Have you finished, sir?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. All right. You can put the statement away now. Now don't need

17 to have that in front of you anymore. I'll ask you the same question I

18 asked you at the end yesterday. And just to be very clear, between the

19 date of the oath ceremony and the 26th of July, did Celiku ever agree to

20 be a leader? Now --

21 MR. GUY-SMITH: Well, excuse me, I would object to that question

22 being asked at this time. As I understand it, the document was shown to

23 the witness for the purpose of determining whether or not his memory was

24 refreshed with regard to a previous statement made. If that is what is

25 occurring, the appropriate thing at this point would be to ask the

Page 3126

1 witness whether or not at this time, having reviewed that language, his

2 memory is refreshed with regard to what was said.

3 MR. NICHOLLS: That's what the rest of my statement would have

4 been after posing the question, if his memory had been refreshed for the

5 purpose it was asked to refresh and regarding that question.

6 Q. So I'll ask you now, sir --

7 JUDGE PARKER: I am not clear what your present form of question

8 will be. Perhaps it could be put again and we'll see whether it --

9 MR. NICHOLLS: I was going to start over, Your Honour.

10 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.


12 Q. I've just read out the question from yesterday. On that topic,

13 has reviewing your statement helped you to remember what was said and

14 what happened at the oath ceremony?

15 A. The same as yesterday. It's the same words that are in the text

16 there in paragraph 11. And I gave the same answers yesterday, as far as

17 I can remember.

18 Q. Okay. Well, there may be some confusion here, which I will try

19 to clear up. The text in paragraph 11 which you have just read states

20 that Celiku stated that he was prepared to be the leader of the soldiers.

21 That's what it says in your statement. In your answers to questions

22 yesterday you stated several times that he refused to be a leader of the

23 soldiers at the oath ceremony. So I'm confused --

24 MR. GUY-SMITH: Excuse me. As a matter of fact, once again Mr.

25 Nicholls is being incomplete with regard to what the translation of the

Page 3127

1 Albanian says. The translation says "Celiku said that if we respect what

2 he said in his speech, he would be prepared to be our leader."

3 And I think that by virtue of some of the previous answers of

4 this particular witness, the entirety of that sentence is critical to a

5 proper understanding of what the witness not only remembers but is

6 testifying to in these proceedings.

7 JUDGE PARKER: That appears to be the core of this point of the

8 question, Mr. Nicholls. Perhaps you might have the witness focus on that

9 passage, if I understand your intention correctly, and then ask

10 specifically about that.

11 MR. NICHOLLS: Yes, Your Honour.

12 Q. Witness, the sentence in paragraph 11: "Celiku said that if we

13 respect what he said in his speech, he would be prepared to be our

14 leader."

15 That's what it says in your statement and you've said that your

16 statement from 2003 was the same as your testimony yesterday. Yesterday

17 I asked you a question: At any point during the oath ceremony did Celiku

18 state that he would be prepared to be a leader, that he would accept to

19 be a leader, and you stated no. That's at page 56, lines 20 to 23.

20 Could you explain what you mean when you say that these statements are

21 the same, are consistent.

22 A. Honourable Judges, can I explain something here? Is it possible?


24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yesterday I said that we asked him

25 on the basis of the words that he had said, that the people of Kosovo is

Page 3128

1 everybody, so in spite of their religion or nationality, everybody is

2 considered the people of Kosovo. And after these words that he mentioned

3 -- it was a very short time that he said these things, a minute or two.

4 When he said these words, people were laughing. There were some soldiers

5 that laughed, and he said, If you don't respect what I'm saying then I

6 won't be your leader.

7 So I'm saying today what I already said yesterday: that he did

8 not accept to become a leader after the soldiers started to laugh. That

9 was my answer yesterday; this is my answer today, the same one.


11 Q. Have you ever given that account to anybody else? Have you ever

12 told anybody that before, that Celiku refused?

13 A. In the statement it says that he did not accept to become our

14 leader.

15 Q. Now, can you point to me where it says that in your statement, if

16 you're talking about your statement from 2003. Take your time.

17 A. Here where it says what he talked about made us respect him as a

18 leader and we wanted him to be a leader. And Celiku said that if we

19 respected what he said in this speech, then he would be ready to become

20 our leader. But we laughed -- I did not laugh myself but there were some

21 people who laughed. And he went away and he said, I won't accept. He

22 did not accept what we offered him.

23 Q. And -- sorry, just so I'm clear, that's your explanation as to

24 how the statement, the part you read out which says: "The things he

25 spoke about made us respect him as a leader and we wanted him to be in

Page 3129

1 charge. Celiku said if we respect what he said in his speech, he would

2 be prepared to be our leader" --

3 MR. GUY-SMITH: He doesn't say that --

4 MR. TOPOLSKI: No, no, no.

5 MR. GUY-SMITH: He says then. Then is the qualifying word with

6 regard to the issue that is being presented here. And once again it's

7 here, since we're not only dealing with interpretation but translation,

8 it's critical that each and every word is put to the witness and words

9 are not left out for purposes of making an argument within a question.


11 Q. The English version of the statement reads: "Celiku said that if

12 we respect what he said in his speech, he would be prepared to be our

13 leader."

14 Now, there may be a "then" in the Albanian version; however, the

15 original, the authoritative is the English. This is what was taken and

16 what was read back. Now, I don't think it makes any difference. I'll

17 rephrase my question with the word "then," if the witness prefers. But

18 the English which is what was --

19 JUDGE PARKER: Perhaps you might explore whether the Albanian

20 version he has in front of him contains the word which is the subject of

21 the submission by Defence counsel.

22 MR. NICHOLLS: Yes, Your Honour.

23 Q. Witness, will you please read verbatim the sentence in paragraph

24 11 which begins: "Celiku said that if we respect what he said in his

25 speech". Read that sentence word for word as it appears in your

Page 3130

1 language.

2 A. Aloud, you mean?

3 Q. Yes, please.

4 A. "Celiku said that if we respect the things that he spoke about in

5 his speech, then he -- so then, he would be prepared to be our leader.

6 So then he" --

7 Q. Right. In any event his -- what Celiku said was that he would be

8 prepared to be the leader, qualified on his -- what he said in his speech

9 being accepted. Are you claiming -- and just so I understand that this

10 sentence explains why you said yesterday that Celiku refused to be --

11 MR. KHAN: Well, Your Honour, I do apologise and perhaps there's

12 no utility in my standing, but this is still examination-in-chief; it's

13 not cross-examination.

14 MR. NICHOLLS: And --

15 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you, Mr. Khan. But we've got to get to the

16 bottom of this.

17 MR. KHAN: Your Honour --

18 JUDGE PARKER: I won't attempt to frame the question for you, Mr.

19 Nicholls. It's clear the point you are seeking to make. The Chamber is

20 in the difficulty that it doesn't have the statement. One thing that

21 occurs to me is whether there is an express statement one way or the

22 other whether leadership was accepted or not in the statement. If there

23 is no express statement, the position for you may be more difficult.

24 MR. NICHOLLS: There is no express statement; however, the

25 statement taken as a whole, if the Chamber would read it, would show that

Page 3131

1 the witness indicates that after the oath ceremony Celiku is referred to

2 as Commander Celiku and before the oath ceremony he is not. He is

3 referred to simply as Celiku. There is no express --

4 JUDGE PARKER: Well, you haven't yet explored whether the

5 witness's recollection of those matters remains today as it was

6 yesterday.

7 MR. NICHOLLS: Well, what I'm trying to explore, Your Honour, is

8 that a little while ago the witness stated when I asked him: Have you

9 ever told this to anybody before that Celiku refused to be a leader

10 because his speech was not well-received and the soldiers, in the

11 witness's words, retorted to his speech. I asked him if he ever told

12 that to anybody before, and he said yes in his statement and then he

13 pointed us to this passage.

14 So what I'm simply trying to do is to have the witness clarify

15 that answer. And to do that, I'm trying to get him to explain to us how

16 these two statements are the same. And I don't think I've gotten there

17 yet. What I'm trying to do is have him read the statement and in his own

18 words explain how what he said in the statement that he meant -- that

19 where Celiku accepted that he would be in charge, that it actually means

20 the opposite of what he said yesterday.

21 JUDGE PARKER: It's to that point that my observations were

22 directed. If there is no express statement of the outcome, your

23 foundation for there being a material difference is not very secure.

24 MR. NICHOLLS: Well, I think there is a material difference, Your

25 Honour --

Page 3132

1 JUDGE PARKER: That's a matter for submission later, if it should

2 ever become relevant. We're at the point of questioning now and you went

3 on to suggest, well, the clear implication of the statement is that from

4 that point on, for instance, Celiku was referred to as commander. Now,

5 that is not presently the evidence. Now, if you want to see whether the

6 evidence is affected by being refreshed by this statement in that

7 respect, it may be something worth pursuing for you.


9 Q. Mr. Karpuzi, yesterday you stated that in the time period --

10 well, I won't summarise. I'll look at the exact quote. Yesterday I

11 asked you on page 54: "After the oath ceremony before the 26th of July,

12 1998, during that period of time did you ever hear of Celiku referred to

13 as Commander Celiku?"

14 MR. GUY-SMITH: Your Honour, if I might interject.

15 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, Mr. Guy-Smith.

16 MR. GUY-SMITH: We're trying to figure out a way to make this

17 perhaps a bit easier for all. And we've just canvassed between the

18 Defence and it might be of some assistance for the Chamber to have the

19 statement, or at least this particular paragraph, so that you are not in

20 the dark as we are thrashing about in an attempt to deal with evidentiary

21 concerns. And that way the Trial Chamber may be able to focus in a way

22 that the advocates are. Or maybe not, but who knows; but in any event,

23 you have the information.

24 JUDGE PARKER: There was a silence about you at that point.

25 Would you think that a practical course?

Page 3133

1 MR. NICHOLLS: I do, Your Honour, I have no objection. But I

2 think it needs to be the whole statement for it to have any real utility.

3 MR. GUY-SMITH: That would be fine.

4 JUDGE PARKER: -- propose at this moment to read the whole

5 statement, but paragraph 11 seems to be the point of focus.

6 MR. NICHOLLS: Yes. And we actually have that ready. We can

7 distribute it. I don't think it has been yet.

8 JUDGE PARKER: Unfortunately the last line of the page is hinted

9 at but not present.

10 MR. NICHOLLS: Well, that's unfortunate because that's an

11 important line. That's unfortunate. I can read out the bottom of page

12 5, if that helps, and then we'll get a new cleaner copy. The last

13 sentence on page 5 is: "He was talking about the people of Kosovo being

14 one, regardless of ethnicity, religion, gender or such."

15 And we can put that on Sanction I think.

16 [Trial Chamber confers]

17 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, Mr. Nicholls, there seems to be no direct

18 reference to commander in that context. What is perhaps not here is any

19 reference to there being some group of soldiers laughing at his words.

20 MR. NICHOLLS: That's correct, Your Honour. The plain meaning is

21 exactly the opposite, I would suggest. And what is also not there is any

22 express statement by Celiku that he would not be their leader, which is

23 what the witness stated yesterday -- the witness used the word "refused

24 to be our leader."

25 JUDGE PARKER: Right. Now, coming back to a point made by Mr.

Page 3134












12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.













Page 3135

1 Guy-Smith, we are cross-examining. You are in the point at the moment of

2 examination of the witness.

3 MR. NICHOLLS: And --

4 JUDGE PARKER: Is a statement made by him you have sought and

5 been allowed to have the witness read it to see if it refreshes his

6 recollection. On what basis do you suggest that you can now

7 cross-examine him about the differences, if there are any?

8 MR. NICHOLLS: I don't think I'm cross-examining him, Your

9 Honour, just asking him to clarify his answer, because to me his answer

10 doesn't make sense where he states that this paragraph is exactly where

11 he said what he said yesterday. So that is just what I --

12 JUDGE PARKER: Well, you can explore that by proper questions of

13 examination, indeed.


15 Q. Now, Witness, the same question, the same topic. I asked you

16 about this passage in your statement, whether you had told this to

17 anybody else. And you directed us to this portion of paragraph 11. Now,

18 where in your statement does it say that Celiku refused to be a

19 commander?

20 A. During the interview we had problems in the beginning with

21 investigator about such words, and I was not asked such a question,

22 whether he was made commander or not. And I did not answer that, so I

23 did not emphasise such a thing.

24 Q. Okay. That wasn't the question, whether you were asked whether

25 he was a commander or not. My question was about where in here you say

Page 3136

1 he refused, because what you've told us and what I understood you to say

2 was that this is what you meant by this sentence, that Celiku refused to

3 be commander.

4 A. This question was not asked, and that's why I did not give an

5 answer about it, whether he was made or not a commander. If they had

6 asked me the question, I would have answered it.

7 Q. And where in that paragraph or in the statement --

8 MR. KHAN: Well, Your Honour, it goes back to the beginning of

9 this session. My learned friend put the document as a memory-refreshing

10 document; that was the ambit of the statement. The witness has looked at

11 the statement and has been asked if it refreshes his memory. Your

12 Honour, I think it's quite clear what my submission is; my friend should

13 put questions of the proper form. I don't think there's any real dispute

14 between the parties as to what the witness said; the witness's evidence

15 is clear. If my friend asked proper questions to the point, I don't

16 think we will be in any difficulty. Your Honour, that's my observation

17 at this point.

18 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you, Mr. Khan.

19 There may be, Mr. Nicholls, if I may venture a suggestion, other

20 points where you feel the evidence of the witness is at some variance to

21 what is here. If you want to explore the witness's present recollection

22 about those matters.

23 MR. NICHOLLS: I will, Your Honour, but just to say why I think

24 this line I've been following is proper is the witness's response to the

25 question: Have you ever told anybody about this before that Celiku

Page 3137

1 refused? Yes. And he pointed to this paragraph.

2 JUDGE PARKER: He pointed to it. Now you want to say it is

3 different; but you haven't by questions that are questions in-chief

4 sought to expose those differences.


6 Q. Witness, do you remember in your statement talking about when

7 Celiku became referred to as a commander? Do you remember talking about

8 that topic?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. When was it that you first started hearing about Celiku --

11 MR. GUY-SMITH: I hate to interject, but the common practice when

12 dealing with refreshing a witness's memory is to point counsel to the

13 part of the statement that you're referring so we can follow along with

14 you, Mr. Nicholls.

15 MR. NICHOLLS: We can jump ahead and go to paragraph 6.

16 MR. GUY-SMITH: Thank you.


18 Q. And, Witness, could you read paragraph 6, please, in your

19 statement, and let me know when you're done.

20 A. I read it, yes.

21 Q. Thank you.

22 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for Mr. Nicholls, please.


24 Q. Does that help you remember these events at all?

25 A. These are already in my memory. Even without reading them I

Page 3138

1 remember the things that have happened. And the things that I

2 remembered, I expressed them here.

3 Q. Okay. Good. Now, did you ever hear - I'll go back to

4 yesterday - Celiku referred to as Commander Celiku?

5 A. I don't understand.

6 Q. Do you remember whether you ever heard Celiku referred to as

7 Commander Celiku?

8 A. It is also in the statement that by October and November we heard

9 that he became a commander. This is what I said in the statement, too.

10 MR. KHAN: Your Honour, can I refer you to yesterday, page 53,

11 line 18, when the witness gave the same answer.

12 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you, Mr. Khan, but I don't think you need to

13 remind us of those matters.


15 Q. And the question was - let me ask you again: When was the first

16 time, just to be clear, that you heard Celiku referred to as Commander

17 Celiku?

18 A. October or November.

19 Q. And when was the first time that you heard of Celiku, of this

20 person called Celiku?

21 A. As Celiku, I heard this name, Celik, I heard this name after the

22 oath ceremony. But as Commander Celiku I heard that name, Commander

23 Celiku, in October or November 1998.

24 MR. NICHOLLS: Excuse me one moment, Witness.

25 Q. Let me ask you, Witness - again this is a question from yesterday

Page 3139

1 - Do you know what Haradin Bala's pseudonym was in May of 1998?

2 A. Shala.

3 Q. Thank you. And is that the name you knew him by in May 1998?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. And let me try to ask you another question. You've said that it

6 was after the oath ceremony that you first heard about Celiku, and you

7 said yesterday you saw him two or three times between the oath ceremony

8 and the 26th of July battle. What were you doing on those times when you

9 saw Celiku? What were the circumstances of those meetings?

10 A. You mean what I was doing or what Celiku was doing?

11 Q. What both of you were doing.

12 A. We met on -- in the course of fighting on the defence line.

13 Q. And what were you actually during that fighting -- I'm sorry.

14 Can you tell me specifically as best you remember what were you doing

15 during that fighting, what type of weapon you were using, anything you

16 can remember.

17 A. Again, what period are you asking me about? If you can explain

18 that.

19 Q. I am talking about the period -- well, you stated you had never

20 met Celiku before the oath ceremony. So I'm talking about the period

21 between the oath ceremony, which you stated yesterday was between the end

22 of June/early July, and the 26th of July when you were wounded in battle.

23 That's the period.

24 A. I mentioned it earlier, that during that period I saw him two or

25 three times, including the ceremony during that period in the course of

Page 3140

1 fighting, in defence line. As all the other comrades, we had a very

2 strong enemy in front of us so we were fighting, all of us.

3 Q. My question is: If you remember, how were you fighting? What

4 were you doing during those times that you were at the front line or

5 fighting with Celiku?

6 A. We were fighting.

7 Q. And what was Celiku doing?

8 A. The same, he was fighting.

9 Q. And where was he staying at that time, if you know? And I'm

10 speaking specifically about where he was staying at the times you met him

11 between the oath ceremony and 26th of July.

12 A. I don't know where he stayed. I know only about that day when we

13 were fighting that we received some port [as interpreted] from many

14 people and we were fighting, all of us. The Serbian forces were in front

15 of us. I don't know where he was during the fighting. I would say that

16 he was in a position where he could shoot, where he could kill

17 paramilitaries or soldiers. And, you know, even if my brother had been

18 there next to me, I wouldn't be able to tell you now what exactly my

19 brother was doing there next to me.

20 Q. Thank you.

21 [Prosecution counsel confer]

22 MR. NICHOLLS: Your Honour, if we could send the witness out for

23 a moment.

24 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Karpuzi, would you be kind enough to wait

25 outside the court for a little while. There must be a matter which

Page 3141

1 counsel debates with the Chamber. So if you could wait outside a little

2 while, we'll call you in as soon as we've dealt with that matter. Thank

3 you.

4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I would only be happy to do that,

5 Honourable Judges.

6 [The witness stands down]

7 MR. NICHOLLS: Can we go into private session for a moment.

8 JUDGE PARKER: Private session.

9 [Private session]

10 (redacted)

11 (redacted)

12 (redacted)

13 (redacted)

14 (redacted)

15 (redacted)

16 (redacted)

17 (redacted)

18 (redacted)

19 (redacted)

20 (redacted)

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

Page 3142











11 Pages 3142-3164 redacted. Private session.















Page 3165

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted)

4 (redacted)

5 (redacted)

6 (redacted)

7 (redacted)

8 (redacted)

9 (redacted)

10 (redacted)

11 (redacted)

12 (redacted)

13 (redacted)

14 (redacted)

15 (redacted)

16 (redacted)

17 [Open session]

18 MR. NICHOLLS: I take it, Your Honour, the next break will be

19 approximately 6.00 p.m. or is it ...

20 JUDGE PARKER: I would target a little before 6.00 I think, Mr.

21 Nicholls, 10 to, 5 to, depending on how the evidence is at that moment.

22 MR. NICHOLLS: Thank you.

23 [The witness entered court]

24 JUDGE PARKER: I'm sorry you had such a long wait outside, but

25 we've managed to deal with the matters that were raised and Mr. Nicholls

Page 3166

1 will continue with his questioning now. Thank you.


3 Q. Can you hear me all right, Mr. Karpuzi?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Do you remember what the first thing you said into that

6 microphone was when you came into court yesterday?

7 A. Yes. I took the oath to say the truth and only the truth.

8 Q. That's right. And one of the first questions I asked you was

9 about your statement made to the ICTY on the 19th and 21st of July, 2003.

10 I asked: "Were you truthful to the best of your belief and memory when

11 you made that statement?"

12 And you stated that you were. Do you remember that?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. And I also asked you about the signed statement which you made

15 here in The Hague on Sunday where you made corrections to your 2003

16 statement, and you testified that you were truthful in that statement as

17 well. Right?

18 A. Right.

19 Q. Now, I want to talk a little bit just for a moment about your

20 interview in 2003. That took place in your home. Is that right?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Over two days?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. Mr. Lehtinen asked you questions and you gave him answers?

25 A. Yes.

Page 3167

1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, if you allow me, I

2 would like to make an explanation.


4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] When Mr. Lehtinen questioned me --

5 I mean, when he came for the first time, he asked me these words. He

6 addressed me saying that, You are Mr. Ruzhdi Karpuzi? And I said, Yes.

7 And you have your pseudonym Shala? Yes. You have been a member in the

8 Lapusnik battle? Yes, I said. Then he said, On the authority of Mrs.

9 Carla Del Ponte we are here to take a statement by you. Having respect

10 for the Tribunal and for the General Prosecutor, I accepted to make the

11 statement which you might have seen by now.

12 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.

13 Yes, Mr. Nicholls.


15 Q. Thank you, Mr. Karpuzi. And while you spoke and answered

16 questions and made statements, Mr. Lehtinen typed up what you said on a

17 laptop. Right? He made notes?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. After taking the statement was done, it was printed and read back

20 to you by an interpreter. Correct?

21 A. Yes, that's correct. During -- when they read me the statement,

22 I had many reserves, but since I'm not a well-educated person I may have

23 understood them differently from you, since as I said I don't have many

24 years of schooling.

25 Q. And after the statement was read back to you in your home, you

Page 3168

1 were given the chance to make any changes to it, to fix any mistakes?

2 A. Yes. Indeed, it was -- when it came to the signing of the

3 statement, I had to tell the interpreter, Sir, are you interpreting --

4 are you telling him what I'm saying or the guy who is taking notes, he is

5 writing what he wants? If he's writing what he likes, then I'm not going

6 to sign this statement.

7 Q. But after the statement was read back to you, you did sign it.

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. And you signed it - I can show it to you if you like - under a

10 block of text which states that the statement was true to the best of

11 your knowledge and recollection.

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. Now, you and I met one day in your house last October. Do you

14 remember that?

15 A. I don't remember the month, but yes I remember that you were

16 there.

17 Q. Just briefly. And then the next time we met was Sunday morning

18 here in The Hague.

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. And you were given a copy of your statement in the Albanian

21 language, weren't you?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. Because you wanted to read it, didn't you?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. And you were given a green felt-tip pen so you could make any

Page 3169

1 notes while you were reading of things you thought were important.

2 A. Not about the things that were important, but as I said, even

3 earlier I had some reserves, some contestations. That's why things which

4 might have happened during the interpretation or when he was taking down

5 notes.

6 Q. Right. Which is why we had you read your entire statement in the

7 Albanian language and you were told you could fix any mistakes. Right?

8 MR. GUY-SMITH: Well, that calls for speculation on the witness's

9 part as to why they had him read his statement unless that was explained

10 to him at the time the statement was just given.

11 MR. NICHOLLS: That's what I just said.

12 JUDGE PARKER: It's nearly what you said, but you might just make

13 it a little clearer.


15 Q. You were given a copy of your 2003 statement in the Albanian

16 language. Correct?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. You were given a felt-tip pen. Correct?

19 A. Correct.

20 Q. You were told you could take your time, as long as you needed, to

21 read the statement. Correct?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. You were told to make notes on the statement if there was

24 anything you wanted to correct.

25 A. I was given the felt-tip pen to make my corrections where I felt

Page 3170

1 I should, and this is what I did as far as I was able to understand. The

2 things that were most striking in the statement I corrected.

3 Q. Right. And you spent about 40 minutes reviewing your statement

4 and making some notes. Right?

5 A. I don't remember. I can't tell you how long it took me.

6 Q. But you remember you worked for a while and then we had a break

7 to have a cigarette and a cup of tea and then you went back and finished

8 reading your statement. Do you remember that?

9 A. Yes, I remember.

10 Q. And you did make some notations on the Albanian copy of your

11 statement with a green pen, didn't you?

12 A. Yes, I did.

13 MR. NICHOLLS: Sorry. One second, Your Honour.

14 Q. I'm going to give you a copy of your witness statement of Sunday,

15 the 6th of February being made here in The Hague and we'll just go

16 through it a little bit. Now, you don't need to read it right now, but

17 just like your first statement in 2003, after this statement was taken it

18 was read back to you in Albanian by an interpreter. Isn't that right?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. And again, at the end you signed that this statement was true to

21 the best of your ability to remember, recollect, and speak the truth?

22 A. When do you mean?

23 Q. I mean on Sunday when you signed your statement making

24 corrections.

25 A. Yes.

Page 3171

1 Q. You signed that "it contains everything I said to the best of my

2 knowledge and recollection," that's specifically what it says.

3 A. Yes, that's how it is.

4 Q. Please take a look at that statement which should be before you

5 in Albanian. Do you have a copy? I'm just asking you now if you have a

6 copy, sorry.

7 A. Yes, yes.

8 Q. And let's look at paragraph 2. It states: "Today on 6th

9 February 2005, I have met with investigator Ole Lehtinen and attorney

10 Julian Nicholls at the ICTY in The Hague to prepare for my testimony in

11 court."

12 Do you see that sentence?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. "An Albanian translation of my previous statement was given to me

15 to read and I reviewed it carefully."

16 Do you see that sentence?

17 A. Yes. That's how it is.

18 Q. "After reviewing the statement, I have made the following

19 corrections to the representatives of the Office of the Prosecutor."

20 That's what it states. Right?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. And that's in fact exactly what happened on Sunday, isn't it?

23 You read your statement carefully and then you made some corrections to

24 it.

25 A. Yes.

Page 3172

1 Q. Okay. Now, in paragraph 3 of your statement of Sunday you made a

2 correction to paragraph 6 of your 2003 statement. Do you see that?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. And what you wanted to do there was correct in paragraph 6 the

5 way it was written in paragraph 6, that some of the villagers had no

6 actual weapons when you had stated that some of them did have axes and

7 other weapons. You wanted to clarify that part of paragraph 6. Correct?

8 A. The -- in the first statement I -- it was written that they came

9 there with some axes, but when I made the statement maybe it was my

10 mistake or the interpreter's mistake because I did not specify properly.

11 So in your presence, Mr. Nicholls, I said that the villagers came not

12 without weapons but with weapons, some carrying weapons, some carrying

13 axes, some carrying forks, and so on. This was my correction.

14 Q. Thank you. Now, in paragraph 4, speaking of the statement you

15 gave on Sunday, you found a mistake in paragraph 7 of your 2003

16 statement. And do you have copies of both statements in front of you,

17 Mr. Karpuzi? Do you have two statements there?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. So you can refer to both of them if you need to. And you found a

20 mistake in paragraph 7 of the Albanian translation that you had been

21 given to read. In the Albanian version in paragraph 7 it stated that you

22 did know of the headquarters above Lapusnik. And you wanted to make it

23 clear that what you had stated was that you did not know of any command

24 above Lapusnik. Correct?

25 A. Yes. That was how it was written, but in my conversation with

Page 3173

1 Ole and the interpreter, in English it was written what I said and my

2 remark after I corrected it. But in Albanian, it was that "I have

3 known." In English, it was "I have not known."

4 Q. Right. So Mr. Lehtinen made it clear to you that the English

5 statement was correct, didn't he?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. And we --

8 A. For that part we are talking about.

9 Q. Yes. And in your supplemental statement, though, you noted that

10 you had found this mistake in the Albanian language. Right?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. The next correction you found was in paragraph 8 -- of the 2003

13 statement, to be clear. You wanted to clarify that what you meant by --

14 that Gzim Gashi's house, calling it a main point, was not that it was a

15 main point for the KLA in Lapusnik but it was a main point for you and

16 other soldiers. Right?

17 A. Yes. Right.

18 Q. And that was recorded in your statement on Sunday as well?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. In paragraph 14 of the 2003 statement, you found another point

21 where you needed to make a correction. Correct?

22 A. Correct.

23 Q. You stated -- you state in the statement of last Sunday that you

24 want to be clear that you were in such a bad state after being injured on

25 26th July 1998 that you have no clear recollection of how you in fact

Page 3174

1 arrived in Klecka. That was the correction you needed to make. Right?

2 A. Mr. Nicholls, if you allow me, when you were present in the

3 presence of Lehtinen and the interpreter - I apologise for not knowing

4 her name - when you visited me at my home, even then I made this

5 objection. But Lehtinen told me, When you come there you can explain

6 whether that was so.

7 Q. Right. And then when you came here you did fix that part of your

8 statement about the bad state you were in when you were taken to Klecka

9 after being wounded.

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. The next correction you made was in paragraph 15 of your 2003

12 statement. That mention -- that paragraph described you as saying that

13 you were a squad leader after returning to your own village.

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. You corrected the statement to describe your position as a leader

16 of a group of friends in the village?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. Those were all the corrections you had to make to your 2003

19 statement?

20 A. Yes, to my recollection, yes.

21 Q. In fact, if you look at your next paragraph, 8, you state:

22 "Other than these corrections made in this statement, the statement taken

23 in July 2003 is accurate."

24 Right?

25 A. Right.

Page 3175

1 Q. Now, I want to ask you a couple of questions about your 2003

2 statement. Let me take you first to paragraph 11. Could you look at

3 paragraph 11, please. Do you have that in front of you, sir?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Now, that statement starts off, and I'll paraphrase, that one day

6 in June or July 1998 Voglushi gathered all the soldiers together in the

7 yard of the house that was next to the compound that's been mentioned as

8 a prison. And that's correct, isn't it? The soldiers did all --

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. There was a house and a flagpole in that yard. That's true,

11 isn't it?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. And you told us yesterday - and we saw the diagram that you had

14 marked - that that was a house of Bali Vojvoda. That's true, isn't it?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. Now, the statement says that: "Three persons raised the flag."

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. That's true, isn't it?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. And you were one of the persons who participated in the

21 flag-raising ceremony. That's true, isn't it?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. After that, there was a short oath read and the soldiers repeated

24 it. Right?

25 A. Right.

Page 3176












12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.













Page 3177

1 Q. And you don't remember exactly what the text was. That's what

2 you said yesterday, that's what it says in the statement, and that's

3 true, isn't it?

4 A. That's true.

5 Q. And you read all through this paragraph when you were reviewing

6 your statement on Sunday.

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. Now, after the oath was taken there was a gathering where Celiku

9 gave a short speech. That's true, isn't it?

10 A. Yes. Can I give an explanation if possible?

11 Q. You may.

12 A. It was not a meeting. After the oath was concluded, when we

13 broke up, we -- the group of friends, this is when these words were

14 uttered. It lasted one or two minutes. I told this even to Ole.

15 Q. Look at the sentence in your copy in Albanian which states:

16 "After the oath was taken, there was a gathering where Celiku gave a

17 short speech."

18 Does the word, and I may pronounce it wrong, "fjalim," appear in

19 that sentence?

20 A. There is the word "a gathering."

21 Q. I'm talking about the word for speech.

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. On the statement it's called a speech.

24 A. Yes, it's a short speech.

25 Q. Celiku gave a short speech. That's true, isn't it?

Page 3178

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. And you don't remember all the details of that speech,

3 understandably, but you recall that Celiku talked about the importance of

4 protecting and being careful with the civilians. That's true, isn't it?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. He talked about the people of Kosovo people being one regardless

7 of ethnicity, religion, or gender. You remember that being said?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. "The things that he spoke about made us respect him as a leader

10 and we wanted him to be in charge," and I've had the Albanian checked.

11 The Albanian translation says, "and we wanted him to be our leader."

12 That's what it says in the statement you've got. Right?

13 A. Yes. Yes.

14 Q. And that's true, isn't it?

15 A. It is.

16 Q. And Celiku said that if we respect what he said in his speech he

17 would be prepared to be our leader. That's true, isn't it?

18 A. True.

19 Q. And that's exactly what happened at the oath ceremony, isn't it?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. Now I want you to look at paragraph 12, please. And maybe we can

22 clear this up. I want to help me understand. This is another paragraph

23 that -- this is a paragraph that you didn't have to make any corrections

24 to. Now, the first sentence is that the oath ceremony was the first time

25 you saw Celiku. That's correct, isn't it? That was the first time you

Page 3179

1 saw him in person? Is that what you remember?

2 A. Yes, to my recollection.

3 Q. You didn't see him on the 8th or 9th of May, 1998, during the

4 fighting?

5 A. I didn't see him.

6 Q. And then it states: "The investigator asked me on how many

7 occasions I saw Celiku in Lapusnik and I think it was approximately

8 three."

9 And that's right, isn't it? You saw Celiku in Lapusnik about

10 three times?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. And you remember I asked you yesterday about that time period how

13 -- whether -- I asked you yesterday about the time period between the

14 oath ceremony and July 26th when you were injured fighting. And you

15 stated that it was during that period of time that you saw Celiku about

16 three times in Lapusnik. Right?

17 A. Yes, that's it.

18 Q. And next you say in your sentence -- in your statement: "He

19 might have visited there more often, but this is what I know."

20 And that's true, isn't it? You stated what you knew.

21 A. Yes. I said what I knew.

22 Q. What you knew was that he'd been there about three times, but

23 that it could have been more; however you didn't see him on those other

24 occasions.

25 A. Yes.

Page 3180

1 Q. Thank you. And you remember him coming to greet you and the

2 other soldiers in fighting positions "to see how the trench-digging was

3 proceeding and such." That's true, isn't it?

4 A. Yes, to see how the trenches were being dug. I don't remember to

5 have said this, but it's true that I have saw him during the fighting.

6 Q. Let me be very clear. You saw him during the fighting between

7 the oath ceremony and July 26th in Lapusnik. Correct?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. You also saw him in Lapusnik between the end of -- between the

10 oath ceremony and the 26th of July when he came to see how the

11 trench-digging was proceeding?

12 A. Not how the trench-digging was proceeding, because at a period

13 the trenches were already dug. But during the fighting I've seen him in

14 the trenches fighting along with us, because as I said people were coming

15 to our rescue from various villages. We didn't know who they were and it

16 was not our right to ask them. We didn't have the time to see where they

17 were coming from or who they were.

18 Q. The question I asked you just a moment ago was: You remember

19 him, Celiku, coming to greet you and the other soldiers in fighting

20 positions to see how the trench-digging was proceeding and such? And you

21 stated: "Yes, to see how the trenches were being dug."

22 Right? That's what you answered just a moment ago.

23 A. No.

24 Q. Look at the statement in front of you. All right.

25 "I remember him coming to greet us in the fighting positions to

Page 3181

1 see how the trench-digging was proceeding and such."

2 Do you see that sentence?

3 A. Yes, I see this sentence. I see it, but I'm here to tell the

4 truth and it's more than true that I've seen him in the front line during

5 the fighting. I said even earlier that maybe I'm incapable of having the

6 same understanding of things, of sentences, as you. I cannot go into

7 depth like you might, and some things might have happened. He might have

8 written this, but I don't know.

9 Q. All right. "I remember him coming to greet us in the fighting

10 positions to see how the trench-digging was proceeding and such."

11 Is there anything about that sentence that you don't understand

12 when you read it?

13 A. There isn't anything that I understand as far as the sentence

14 goes, but I don't remember that I have said this, that he came to visit

15 us to -- in the front line, in the fighting line. He fought with us in

16 this defence line.

17 Q. And the next sentence is: "I cannot remember ever seeing him at

18 Gzim's compound."

19 That's true, isn't it?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. And when you were reviewing your statement, you had your pen and

22 you carefully reviewed your statement, you didn't make any marks here,

23 did you?

24 A. I'm not clear. What do you mean? Where?

25 Q. What I mean is you've just told me, and I know you're right, that

Page 3182

1 there's nothing confusing at all about that sentence which states that

2 Celiku visited to see how proceedings were going during the

3 trench-digging.

4 When you reviewed your statement on Sunday, when you had time to

5 make notes on the statement, when you had time to correct your statement,

6 you didn't say anything about that sentence, did you?

7 A. It's true that I didn't.

8 Q. That's because you know that it's true.

9 A. I'm repeating that the truth is that I've seen him in the defence

10 line during the fighting. You may write what you like, you may interpret

11 it the way you want; I'm saying this, what I know.

12 Q. But we didn't write what we liked, we wrote -- Mr. Lehtinen wrote

13 what you said and that's why you were allowed to check the statement to

14 make sure that it was accurate --

15 MR. KHAN: Well, Your Honour, again it may be pointless to rise

16 to object, but again, there is a distinction between arguing with a

17 witness and cross-examining a witness.

18 JUDGE PARKER: You're on the edge, Mr. Nicholls. It would be

19 safer to move back.

20 MR. NICHOLLS: I'll move back, Your Honour.

21 One second, Your Honour. Sorry.

22 Q. Let me go to paragraph 6 of your statement please, sir, of your

23 2003 statement. Now, in that statement you begun talking about how there

24 was no actual command in Lapusnik when you first arrived there. That's

25 correct, isn't it, in your view?

Page 3183

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. Voglushi was a respected man among the soldiers. Right?

3 A. Right.

4 Q. He was picked to be a leader?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. That's true, isn't it?

7 A. That's true.

8 Q. He was killed fighting in Lapusnik on the 26th of July, 1998, as

9 it says in this paragraph. Correct?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. That's the same day that you were injured.

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. On the 18th of May - and you testified about this yesterday -

14 there was more fighting in Lapusnik, another attempt by the Serbs to take

15 over. Correct?

16 A. Yes. On the 18th or 19th, I'm not very certain which of the two,

17 but it must have been one of the two. That is the time I meant.

18 Q. And on that day, whether it was the 18th or 19th as it says in

19 your statement, you remember a man called Fehmi Lladrovci who came to

20 Lapusnik?

21 A. It was not that I remembered at a moment, but it was Lehtinen who

22 reminded me of this -- of this person being there in the fighting.

23 Q. What your statement says is that you remember a man called Fehmi

24 Lladrovci came to Lapusnik. Right?

25 A. It is as I'm saying. The investigator Ole Lehtinen asked me:

Page 3184

1 Were you present during a speech given by Fehmi Lladrovci? It was at a

2 moment that I remembered that that person was in the fighting, but I did

3 not remember his speech. Maybe I was in the position. I don't remember.

4 Q. And I didn't ask you anything about a speech. My point is the

5 statement is correct where it says that you remember a man called Fehmi

6 Lladrovci came to Lapusnik at this time.

7 A. With respect to whether I stated this and Ole asked me if it's

8 possible, I would kindly ask him to ask me whether it was he who

9 remembered -- recalled me -- reminded me of that.

10 Q. I'm not asking who reminded who. Try to just answer the

11 question. What you stated was that Ole asked you if you had been at a

12 meeting or heard a speech by this man, and you did not remember that

13 speech. Right?

14 A. I don't remember the speech, but I remembered after Ole reminded

15 me that he was there together with his wife. Both of them were soldiers

16 in the KLA.

17 Q. Thank you.

18 MR. NICHOLLS: Your Honour, it's about five or ten minutes before

19 you said. It would be a good time for a break, if possible.

20 JUDGE PARKER: Very well. We'll have the second break now and

21 barring some further interruption we'll resume at 5 minutes past 6.00.

22 --- Recess taken at 5.45 p.m.

23 --- On resuming at 6.09 p.m.

24 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, Mr. Nicholls.

25 MR. NICHOLLS: Thank you, Your Honour.

Page 3185

1 Q. Sir, I have a few more questions on paragraph 6 of your 2003

2 statement. The fighting you're talking about in that paragraph is a

3 second attempt around the 18th or 19th of May of the Serbs to re-take

4 Lapusnik.

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. A part of your statement there which we've just discussed about

7 remembering Fehmi Lladrovci, we're talking the period around 18th and

8 19th of May, 1998?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. You were asked whether you had attended a meeting with Fehmi

11 Lladrovci around the days of these fightings by Mr. Lehtinen, and you

12 told him that you hadn't attended any such meeting around the 18th/19th

13 of May, 1998. Right?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. During this fighting, the 18th and 19th of May, 1998, a lot of

16 villagers came to support you.

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. Some had weapons, some had axes and things like that. Right?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. This also led to an increased number of soldiers in Lapusnik

21 during the coming days. Right?

22 A. Right.

23 Q. At the time of the oath-taking ceremony that I will describe

24 later, I would estimate that there were some 50 to 60 soldiers. And

25 that's true, isn't it?

Page 3186

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. What you're talking about here in this statement is the period

3 between the 18th and 19th of May, 1998, and the oath-taking ceremony,

4 which is in late June or early July 1998. Right?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. And what you're explaining there -- since you testified yesterday

7 in the beginning there were only a few soldiers in Lapusnik -- this

8 number grew after the 18th and 19th of May until it was around 50 or 60

9 at the end of June, early July. That's the period we're talking about.

10 Right?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. You were asked when you first heard talks about Commander Celiku,

13 and you stated: "I would say it was around these same times we started

14 hearing rumours about a General Command of the KLA and about Celiku."

15 And that's true, isn't it?

16 A. With respect to a General Command, the fact is we referred to it

17 in order to increase the morale -- to raise the morale. But actual

18 terms, we didn't know about it. Regarding Celiku as a commander, this I

19 learned sometime later, October or November 1998. This is what I stated

20 even before.

21 Q. Let's look at what you stated in the statement. "I didn't say,

22 and if I did it's a mistake, Commander Celiku, I didn't."

23 This was the time when you first heard talks about Celiku. At

24 this time he was not called a commander.

25 A. No.

Page 3187

1 Q. So he was not called a commander from 18th of May, 1998, around

2 there, until the end of June, early July. Right?

3 A. I didn't hear people addressing him as Commander Celiku.

4 Q. No. During that period, I just want to be clear on this, it was

5 only Celiku?

6 A. I didn't hear it well.

7 Q. I'll repeat my question. During the period we're discussing,

8 18th of May, 1998, roundabouts 18th, 19th of May, to the end of June,

9 early July, you did not hear Celiku referred to as Commander Celiku.

10 Correct?

11 A. But we were members of Celiku unit ourselves.

12 Q. Right. And you -- answer the question, please. Tell me if you

13 need me to ask it again.

14 A. I think I answered it.

15 Q. I wasn't asking you whether you were members of the Celiku unit.

16 I'll try again. Listen carefully, please, and you can look at your

17 statement if you want to. Between the 18th and 19th of May, 1998, until

18 the end of June, early July, you did not hear of Celiku referred to as

19 Commander Celiku. Right?

20 A. I didn't hear it.

21 Q. At that time the only way you heard him referred to was as

22 Celiku, not as any kind of commander. Right?

23 A. I don't seem to remember it.

24 Q. You don't seem to remember whether he was referred to as

25 Commander Celiku or you don't seem to remember to refer -- is that what

Page 3188

1 you're saying?

2 A. I don't remember this as what you are saying.

3 Q. Okay. I'll try to make it very simple. During the time period

4 we're talking about, the time period you're talking about in paragraph 6,

5 Celiku was only known to you as Celiku. Correct?

6 A. At that time I didn't know him absolutely at all.

7 Q. I know you didn't know him. I know you hadn't met him until the

8 oath ceremony. But what your statement says -- your statement which

9 you've reviewed, your statement which you've sworn under oath is

10 correct -- is that about this time you heard rumours about Celiku. And

11 that's right, isn't it? Not that he was a commander, but you heard of

12 Celiku?

13 A. Yes. I have stated even earlier that I didn't hear people

14 calling him Commander Celiku until October, November. But I did hear the

15 word "Celiku," meaning our Celiku, we who were members of Celiku unit.

16 Q. Okay. Let's look at your statement. Look at your statement,

17 please. Bottom of paragraph 6. "The investigator has asked me when I

18 first heard talks about Commander Celiku."

19 Do you see that sentence?

20 A. Yes, I see it.

21 Q. "I'd say that it was during these same times we started hearing

22 rumours about a General Command of the KLA and about Celiku."

23 That's what it says, doesn't it?

24 A. Yes. This is what I said before. It's the same thing.

25 Q. The question is: That's what it says in your statement. Right?

Page 3189

1 A. Yes. This is what it's written here. "The investigator asked me

2 when I first heard about Commander Celiku I would say that during that

3 time we started to hear words about a General Command of the KLA and

4 about Celiku." This is what it's written.

5 Q. And the next sentence is: "At this time he was not called

6 Commander."

7 Right?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. You were talking in that sentence about Celiku, the man, the

10 person. Right?

11 A. About the man, but I have said here that I didn't know who Celiku

12 was.

13 Q. Right. You didn't know who he was. But we're not talking about

14 a Celiku unit in these last three sentences, we're talking about Celiku

15 the person you later learned to be Fatmir Limaj. Correct?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. Now: "Only after the oath ceremony I have heard this

18 expression."

19 That's what it says in the statement. Correct?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. So the first time you met Celiku was at the oath ceremony.

22 Right?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. Before that time you had never heard him referred to as

25 commander. Right?

Page 3190












12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.













Page 3191

1 A. Right.

2 Q. Before that time you had only heard the name Celiku of this

3 person, although you had not met him.

4 A. You mean our unit?

5 Q. No. We're talking about the three sentences here. I know that

6 you would have heard about the name of the unit that you were in at the

7 time you were in the unit. That's got nothing to do with this question.

8 A. I'm afraid I don't get it.

9 Q. All right. I'll try to speed this along. Read the last four

10 sentences just quietly to yourself of paragraph 6.

11 A. I may say that during that time we started hearing words about a

12 General Command and about Celiku it is said here. At that time he was

13 not called commander. It was only after the oath ceremony that I heard

14 this expression. After the oath was taken, after the Lapusnik gorge

15 fell, it was then that I heard this expression.

16 Q. The question was just to ask you to read those last four

17 sentences. Now, in those four sentences everywhere it states Celiku

18 we're talking about -- it refers to Celiku the person. Correct? I think

19 you've already answered that as yes.

20 A. What do you mean yes? I said here about the General Command and

21 Celiku, our unit Celiku.

22 Q. So in the next sentence when you -- it states: "At this time he

23 was not called commander." Right?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. A unit as a group of men in an army is never called a commander,

Page 3192

1 is it?

2 A. Yes, that's right.

3 Q. So when you say: "At this time he was not called commander,"

4 you're talking about the man Celiku?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. You're talking about the period between the 18th or 19th of May

7 and the end of June or early July. Right?

8 A. The words here, "at that time he was not called a commander,"

9 meaning that when Ole asked me -- he asked me: What did Commander Celiku

10 do at that time? I responded that in fact he was not a commander, but

11 after the Lapusnik gorge fell he was appointed a commander. And this is

12 when I heard about him because at the time I was not interested in many

13 things. It was in October or November that I heard the name mentioned as

14 Commander Celiku.

15 Q. Right. You state at the bottom of this paragraph: "Only after

16 the oath ceremony have I heard this expression," meaning that he was

17 called commander. Correct?

18 A. After the ceremony, oath ceremony, and after the Lapusnik gorge

19 fell, it was in October or November, sometimes around that time, that I

20 heard this expression.

21 Q. My question is: This is what it says in your statement at the

22 bottom of paragraph 6. Right? "At this time he was not called

23 Commander. Only after the oath ceremony have I heard this expression."

24 The question is: That's what it says in the statement?

25 A. Yes, yes.

Page 3193

1 Q. Now, you read this statement over when you reviewed -- you read

2 this paragraph over when you reviewed your statement and you made changes

3 to this paragraph. Right? Look at paragraph 6 of your statement of last

4 Sunday.

5 A. Yes, I read it.

6 Q. So you carefully reviewed this statement and you made one change.

7 The only change you made was about the villagers and whether they had

8 weapons. Correct?

9 A. Correct.

10 Q. And your testimony is that after the oath ceremony, the same one

11 we've been talking about where the soldiers asked Celiku if he would be

12 their commander, when you say "after the oath ceremony" you're talking

13 about September, October, November?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. Do you remember talking yesterday about how it was in September,

16 October, or November that you heard Celiku referred to as commander of

17 the area? This is on page 53.

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. And I asked you which area, and you said: "Brigade 121."

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. And I asked you which units made up Brigade 121.

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. And you said "all the small groups that were there from

24 Kizhareke, Nekovce, Bajice, Kroimire, Pjetershtice, Carraleve, up to

25 Luznica," all these areas merged into the 121. Right?

Page 3194

1 Let's do it this way: You tell me --

2 A. I'm sorry. I mentioned beginning from Kizhareke. I did not

3 mention Likovc -- Nekovce. By Shale, Pjetershtice, up to Luznica, I

4 said. All of them merged into the 121st Brigade.

5 Q. Let me give you a copy of map 6 from P1.

6 MR. NICHOLLS: We can give him the copy that was exhibited

7 yesterday perhaps. We don't have another blank copy here. That's P127

8 for the record. Can you put that on the ELMO, please.

9 Q. All right. You remember, sir, we looked at that map yesterday

10 and you marked on it the location of the -- of some of the units that you

11 were familiar with, Guri, Pellumbi, Celiku.

12 A. [No interpretation] --

13 MR. KHAN: Your Honour, perhaps my friend can deal with it.

14 There appears to be an error on LiveNote at line 11. It appears that the

15 witness did -- 16 on the main monitor -- that the witness did not say

16 Nekovce but -- Your Honour, I think I should stand when it's sorted out.

17 I apologise.

18 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you, Mr. Khan.

19 Yes, Mr. Nicholls.


21 Q. And can I just ask who is -- where this transcript correction is

22 coming from?

23 MR. KHAN: Your Honour, it's not my habit to answer questions

24 from counsel. I've already I think apologised to the Court for

25 interjecting.

Page 3195

1 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Khan, is the source the interpreter that you

2 have assisting you?

3 MR. KHAN: Your Honour, the interpreter -- to answer your

4 question, the interpreter conveyed a message.

5 JUDGE PARKER: Yes. Very well. There shouldn't be any fuss

6 about that. Often there have been errors in transcript, and if they can

7 be corrected that will be useful to everybody.

8 MR. NICHOLLS: Yes, thank you, Your Honour.

9 Q. Now, you talked yesterday about the 121st Brigade being formed in

10 September, October, or November. Right?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. You don't know exactly when it was formed.

13 A. That's right. I didn't know. I don't know exactly when that

14 Brigade was formed because I was injured and I didn't care much what went

15 on around me, how it happened, how it was formed.

16 Q. Now, look at the map please and tell me from this map if you can,

17 I'll try to make it clear, which area fell within the 121st Brigade when

18 it was formed. You started talking about the units, where they were from

19 yesterday.

20 A. I don't know the units by name, with the exception of our unit,

21 Celiku 3. How the other units were called, this I don't know. I can

22 only tell you -- describe you the territory covered by this brigade, 121,

23 that was formed.

24 Q. And that's exactly what I would like you to do, please. And can

25 we give you a pen, please. Can you just draw a circle. I know you won't

Page 3196

1 be able to do the exactly, but as best you can the area of the 121st

2 Brigade when it was formed.

3 A. [Witness complies]

4 Q. Okay.

5 A. This is approximately the one.

6 MR. NICHOLLS: All right. And I won't read off all the names of

7 the towns, but the witness has drawn a large circle extending below south

8 of Lapusnik in an oval shape over to Malisevo and back around.

9 Q. So this was the area that was the area of responsibility of the

10 121st Brigade when it was formed?

11 A. I think so, yes.

12 Q. And Fatmir Limaj was the commander of the 121st Brigade when it

13 was formed?

14 A. I have information that this is how it was. I don't know

15 exactly, but in the beginning that's what was said.

16 Q. Now, let me ask you again about your answer on paragraph 6. When

17 you were asked about when you first heard talks about Commander Celiku

18 you stated: "Only after the oath ceremony have I heard this expression."

19 Correct?

20 A. I said after the oath, but October or November, that's when I

21 heard this expression. It's the umpteenth time that I'm repeating this.

22 Q. Right. I'm talking about your statement that you reviewed, that

23 you checked, that you corrected, statements only after the oath ceremony

24 have I heard this statement Commander Celiku. That's pretty easy, yes or

25 no. That's what the statement says.

Page 3197

1 A. Even earlier I explained these things to Ole and to you that

2 later, after the oath -- later, much later, in October or November I

3 heard this expression at that time.

4 Q. You've made that explanation many times. Your testimony on that

5 that you've tried to put forward is clear. I just want to ask this one

6 more time and then I'll stop. Read the last sentence of paragraph 6. It

7 states: "Only after the oath ceremony I have heard this expression."

8 Correct? Yes or no, please.

9 A. That's what it says, but I explained when I heard it.

10 Q. Okay. Try to just answer the question I ask you. You've

11 explained many times now that it was after the formation of the 121st

12 Brigade you now say is when you first heard of Fatmir Limaj as Celiku,

13 Commander Celiku. Right?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. You say that's in September, October, or November 1998. Right?

16 A. Approximately at that time. I can't remember exactly when it was

17 when I heard it.

18 Q. Okay. So when you were asked in your interview when the first

19 time was that you heard of Commander Celiku, why do you say "after the

20 oath ceremony"? You don't say after the fall of Lapusnik, you don't say

21 after the formation of the 121st Brigade, you don't say in September,

22 October, or November. Why do you say "after the oath ceremony"?

23 A. Could you repeat the last part of the question, please -- oh,

24 right. I said that -- after the oath ceremony. When Ole asked me: Did

25 you hear this at the oath ceremony? And I said: No, I didn't hear that

Page 3198

1 at that time; I heard that after the formation of the 121st Brigade.

2 Q. You made this statement over two days. You've sworn it was

3 correct. You've checked it and you've stated here under oath that it's

4 true. Right? This is the 2003 statement.

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. The statement says you were asked what time you heard that Celiku

7 was a commander. Right? Let me -- sorry. Strike that.

8 The statement says: "When the investigator asked me when I first

9 heard talks about Commander Celiku." Right? That's what the statement

10 says.

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. You read that. You didn't correct it. You didn't say: No, the

13 investigator has asked me if I heard of Celiku being Commander Celiku at

14 the time of the oath ceremony. That leading question does not appear in

15 the statement, does it?

16 A. It is not in the statement, but the reality is that you can ask

17 Ole about it, whether it was like that or not.

18 Q. You have linked in your mind the time that Fatmir Limaj became

19 called Commander Celiku at the formation of the 121st Brigade. Right?

20 A. I don't understand the question. Could you repeat it, please.

21 Q. You stated here several times that your recollection of when you

22 first heard of Celiku referred to as Commander Celiku was when he became

23 commander of the 121st Brigade. Right?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. When you were asked the question: When did you first hear talks

Page 3199

1 about Commander Celiku? Your answer is: "Only after the oath ceremony

2 have I heard this expression."

3 My question is why you didn't say "in September, October,

4 November," why you didn't say "when the brigade was formed"?

5 A. I don't know why I didn't say it, but this is the reality. And

6 where is my answer that says that I have heard it at that period?

7 Q. You read through this statement and you didn't make any

8 corrections to this paragraph other than the part about the villagers,

9 correct? And their weapons.

10 A. Honourable Chamber, I explained it earlier that I don't know

11 things the way you know them, the way you emphasise them. I can't draw

12 the essence of things that you think about. I look at the statement as

13 it is now. I said the truth the way I knew it and I'm still saying the

14 things I know, and that is it.

15 Q. Now, you know that when the 121st Brigade was formed, Fatmir

16 Limaj was its commander. Right?

17 A. This is what I heard.

18 Q. Right. Did you hear what units he commanded before he was made

19 commander of the 121st Brigade?

20 A. No.

21 Q. Did you hear of him commanding any units in August?

22 A. No. I did not hear anything about it.

23 Q. I mean August 1998. Did you hear of him commanding any units in

24 July 1998?

25 A. No.

Page 3200

1 Q. You testified today and yesterday that he was fighting alongside

2 you when you saw him in Lapusnik between the oath ceremony in the end of

3 June, beginning of July.

4 A. I'm not clear about the period; if you could say that again.

5 Q. You're right; it's a bad question. You testified today and

6 yesterday that the times you saw Fatmir Limaj in Lapusnik in person were

7 between the oath ceremony and the 26th of July battle. Right?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. And you were testifying essentially that he was fighting as an

10 ordinary soldier, that he was no commander. Right?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. You testified that he wasn't visiting the troops at the trenches

13 to see how trench-digging and other such activities were continuing.

14 Right?

15 A. I did not keep watch on him, what he was coming for there. But I

16 don't know whether he came for that. I saw him fighting in the

17 positions, just like all of us, all the rest of us.

18 Q. Right. Now, is your testimony then that Celiku became commander

19 of the 121st Brigade of the area you've drawn on the map and all those

20 villages without ever commanding any other units beforehand?

21 A. Well, I don't know that.

22 Q. So you don't know which units Celiku may have commanded before he

23 became the commander of the 121st Brigade. Is that right?

24 A. Yes. I didn't know that.

25 Q. Let me ask you a couple questions on a different topic. You

Page 3201

1 talked yesterday about how you kept records in Gzim Gashi's compound.

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. Can you tell me when you started that record-keeping.

4 A. I can't remember exactly, but some time -- a month and a half

5 before the Lapusnik gorge fell.

6 Q. Now, did you do that full time? Was that your only job during

7 that time, keeping records?

8 A. No, not only that task. I also had guard duties when we went to

9 the positions to observe the terrain. But also when a new soldier came I

10 had to take his details, where he was from, whether he was married or

11 not, what kind of weapon he had, whether he had a weapon at all. This

12 was my task.

13 Q. And what about the if the soldier was issued a weapon? Would you

14 keep track of that?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. I know - and we'll talk about it later - that you were injured in

17 the battle on July 26th when you were fighting. My question is: Before

18 those injuries did you have any physical disabilities?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. Can you describe what those were, speaking now about May, June

21 1998.

22 A. Yes. Earlier I had an accident and I was injured earlier. That

23 is it.

24 Q. And could you describe how you were injured and what the injury

25 was, please.

Page 3202

1 A. This happened -- the tractor -- I was run over by the tractor and

2 I was injured. I broke my knee, but with the passing of time I felt

3 better.

4 Q. And was that broken -- when was that injury when you broke your

5 knee?

6 A. Sorry, not the knee. It's --

7 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter does not understand the word

8 "kuka."


10 Q. Okay. I think you've just indicated your left thigh. Is that

11 right?

12 A. Yes, the hip.

13 Q. The hip. When did you have that injury, your broken hip? When

14 did that happen?

15 THE INTERPRETER: There is no translation --

16 A. The accident happened in 1991.

17 Q. Now, I've noticed you limping when you come in and out of court.

18 Is that due to that hip injury?

19 A. No. It was repeated after the -- during the war because there

20 was shelling. And because of that shelling I had injuries but I also

21 injured my hip again. I had injuries on my knee, below my knee, on my

22 arm, my head.

23 Q. And you talked about this injury beforehand. Did that cause any

24 problems for you or difficulties in serving in the fighting positions in

25 May, June, and July 1998?

Page 3203

1 A. Yes. But I did not spare myself because I had set myself a task

2 to be a member of the KLA, and that's what I did. And I'm saying here

3 frankly, I never thought I would come out of it alive but I wanted to

4 become a part of the history for the defence of my people.

5 Q. Yeah, I understand that and I believe you. My question is: Did

6 this injury to your leg beforehand or your disability, does that have

7 anything to do with why you were spending some of your time doing office

8 work, keeping records?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. And if you remember, who was it that decided that you could do

11 some office work and some fighting at the front lines or serving at the

12 front lines?

13 A. This was decided by Ymer Alushani, aka Voglushi.

14 Q. And did he decide it all by himself or did he discuss it with

15 anyone else?

16 A. No, he decided it all by himself but he informed Qerqizi.

17 Q. Okay.

18 MR. NICHOLLS: That's a good time for me, Your Honours.

19 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you then, Mr. Nicholls. We will break for

20 the evening. Do we take it you're near the end of your examination?

21 MR. NICHOLLS: I'll try to be brief tomorrow, Your Honour. I do

22 have a little bit more to go.

23 JUDGE PARKER: That is what is called a gentle hint.

24 We will adjourn now until 2.15.

25 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 6.59 p.m.,

Page 3204

1 to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 9th day of

2 February, 2005, at 2.15 p.m.