1004
Tuesday, 26 February 2002
[Open session]
[The accused entered court]
[The witness entered court]
--- Upon commencing at 9.33 a.m.
JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Milosevic.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Before I continue where I left off, I should like to say the following: It is quite clear that the only means that I have at my disposal is a telephone and even that telephone, yesterday afternoon, wasn't working. But that's just a small detail. I don't think we can talk about any kind of equality of arms between the parties or any kind of trial, even before an illegal Tribunal of this kind, when there is absolutely no equality of arms, when one party only has the right to a telephone, whereas the other side has all the strength and power and everything here to construct these false accusations and indictments, and that is why I once again ask you to set me free, because I have the right to equality, to an equality of arms and to a defence.
You know that the international pact on human and political rights and the European Conventions --
JUDGE MAY: Mr. Milosevic, I'm -- Mr. Milosevic, I'm going to interrupt you for this reason: There is a witness here, and we're in the middle of his examination. If we're in the middle of an examination of the witness, it's right to finish that and then, at an appropriate time, to deal with administrative matters. 1005 Now, the Prosecution, in this case, as I understand it, have some matters which they wish to raise.
Mr. Nice, is that right?
MR. NICE: Certainly. I discussed it with --
THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please, counsel.
MR. NICE: Yes, there are some matters we wish to raise. I've discussed it with your legal officer just shortly this morning before you came in. It would be more convenient to be dealt with perhaps tomorrow than today, not least because a motion dealing with 92 bis is in the final stages of preparation and will be served, I hope, by lunchtime today. But it's obviously a matter that the Chamber, the amici, and the accused may wish to consider, and for other reasons tomorrow will be more convenient than today, although today is possible if that's what the Chamber would prefer.
JUDGE MAY: Would it be convenient to deal with it after the next witness? Rather than fixing a time to finish another witness and then deal with those matters?
MR. NICE: Certainly.
JUDGE MAY: Yes. Mr. Milosevic, we will deal with administrative matters - and this will be the rule throughout the trial - at appropriate times. So what we'll do is we'll hear your applications after the next witness. If there are urgent matters, of course, you can raise them as you have done in the past, but on the whole, we should try and deal with the witnesses' evidence once they've started and finish it before we break it off. So if 1006 you will finish your cross-examination now, and we'll deal with the other matters tomorrow.
WITNESS: AGRON BERISHA [Resumed]
[Witness answered through interpreter] Cross-examined by Mr. Milosevic: [Continued]
Q. [Interpretation] Is your cousin, your uncle's relative Naim Berisha? Is that his name?
A. I am Agron Berisha, and I said at the start of my testimony that Naim Berisha is a close cousin, if we are talking about Naim Berisha, the doctor, who at the moment is living and working in Germany and who has been there for the last seven or eight years.
Q. I'm talking about the Naim Berisha who was the head of the terrorist group of the KLA, who is your cousin on your uncle's side.
A. I must say that the accused is confusing the Naims who have lived in Suhareke. The Naim Berisha who I mentioned is my uncle's son and lives in Germany and is a doctor by profession.
JUDGE MAY: Are you related to the Naim Berisha who it is said is connected to the KLA?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Do you mean he's connected with the KLA now or was connected with the KLA?
JUDGE MAY: Do you know a Naim Berisha connected with the KLA at any time?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. My cousin, the doctor, Naim Berisha, who is away, I said the truth. He is a doctor and works in Germany. I also knew another Naim Berisha who died in the war. He was a 1007 distant cousin of mine, and I didn't have any connection with him. I didn't know him personally. I only knew him as a face, and I know very little about him.
JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Milosevic. That's the answer. THE ACCUSED [Interpretation] All right. We've heard answers like this. One of the previous witnesses said that he didn't even know his own son.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. So your cousin, this man Naim Berisha, do you happen to know that the killed policeman, Vranovci, whom I mentioned yesterday, and he was also an Albanian, was an uncle of his on his mother's side?
A. I don't know anything about these things that the accused is talking about.
Q. Do you know that this man Naim Berisha, whom you say is a distant cousin, killed that uncle of his by the name of Vranovci?
A. I said that Naim Berisha was a distant cousin of mine. There are about 150 Berisha families in Suhareke. I do not have close ties of blood with the person you have mentioned and I don't know anything about him killing an uncle of his.
Q. That is usually the state of affairs amongst you, that you have no connections. You talked about a cousin who was killed at a petrol station too. Did you know that that particular petrol station in your town was full of weapons and ammunition belonging to the KLA?
A. The cousin about whom I spoke was Jashar Berisha, and he too was a distant cousin of mine. Jashar, the late Jashar, was not killed; he 1008 disappeared. He was taken on the 26th of March 1999 by people whom I don't know. He was taken several hours after the events in the pizzeria belonging to the Shala family, in which the Serbian police killed women, men, children, in the cruelest fashion, and unborn children too.
JUDGE MAY: You were asked about the petrol station. It's suggested that it was full of weapons and ammunition belonging to the KLA. That is the suggestion which is made. Do you know anything about that? If you don't, Mr. Berisha, simply say "No."
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. How, then, do you know how the people were killed in the cafe, when you weren't there either?
A. In my testimony, I explained very well. I didn't see these murders. These murders were related to me by people who were witness, who were eyewitnesses of this horror on that day.
Q. That means that you are testifying to things that you have just heard about from others; is that right?
JUDGE MAY: Mr. Milosevic, he said that in his evidence. He said: I didn't see this, but I was told about it by survivors. Now, we understand that. We understand that, and this doesn't call for comment.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. Did you claim yesterday that you watched somebody in front of a bus station killing a man or, rather, a man and a woman, a male and female person?
A. No, it's not right that I said that. I said that several minutes 1009 after I saw Nexhmedin Berisha wounded, seriously wounded and lying on the ground, and his wife, pregnant wife Lirie dragging him across the ground and putting him behind a shop in behind the shopping centre known as Malesia Reisen, a few minutes later, I saw a policeman looking at the ground and following some traces on the ground, and I'm supposing that he was following the bloodstains of the wounded Nexhmedin.
Q. The policeman you saw, you saw him in front of the bus station. That's what you said; is that right?
A. He was in the bus station, and the police came out of a small door in the fence behind the bus station, following, it appears, the bloodstains of the wounded Nexhmedin.
Q. And you saw that, did you?
A. I saw the policeman. I saw him watching the ground and walking.
Q. I received information yesterday, while the phone was still working, that between your house and the bus station there is a building, Kosovovino, belonging to the Kosovovino company, and that from where you were, you couldn't see the bus station at all because of this building in between. Is that true or not?
A. It is not true. The high building from which we're talking is about 200 or 300 metres from my house.
Q. You claim, therefore, that from your house you saw the policeman at the bus station looking for that cousin of yours who was wounded; is that right? Is that what you're saying?
A. I said that the policeman was looking at the ground. And I supposed that he had found these traces of blood from the wounded 1010 Nexhmedin and was walking them -- walking along them. I am not sure what he was looking for or who he was looking for, and I only saw -- said what I had seen.
Q. Everything that you saw -- the only thing that you saw was the policeman walking and looking at the ground at the bus station; is that right?
A. Not in the bus station. I said that he came out of the little door in the fence round the bus station, and in the place where I had seen the wounded Nexhmedin, he started to look at the ground and to walk, looking at the ground. And he went in the direction in which the wounded Nexhmedin was dragged by his wife.
Q. How far from your house and from where you were watching is it to the bus station?
A. Seventy to 80 metres.
Q. And it is on the basis of you seeing the policeman that you concluded that he was looking for your cousin; is that it?
A. I said that I supposed that he was following the traces of the blood of the wounded Nexhmedin.
Q. Very well. You are testifying on the basis of your assumptions. Do you happen to know -- do you know --
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Excuse me, Your Honours, a moment. I am not -- I am not here to make suppositions or to give my own views. I have come here to testify to what I saw with my own eyes. I saw how my cousins were killed in the most cruel fashion by the police, and I saw this event by -- with my own eyes, and I'm not going to deal with 1011 assumptions.
JUDGE MAY: Mr. Berisha, we understand that. As you'll appreciate, the accused is entitled to ask you questions about your evidence. If they're not proper or they're in the form of comment, we will not require you to answer.
It may assist matters -- it's a matter for you but it may assist matters if you answer the questions shortly - "Yes" and "No" are sometimes sufficient - and we might be able to get on more quickly in that way. Mr. Milosevic, this is a chance for asking questions, as you'll appreciate, not for commenting on the witness's evidence.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I assume that I am asking the questions.
JUDGE MAY: Yes, but not making comments.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. Do you know how many policemen were killed before the aggression in the environs of Suva Reka?
A. Before which aggression?
Q. Before the NATO aggression, before the 24th of March, in fact.
A. I would call the NATO aggression an attack by NATO on the former Yugoslavia. It was not aggression.
JUDGE MAY: Yes. Don't worry about that. Can you just answer the question whether you know how many policemen were killed before the 24th of March.
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] 1012
Q. Do you know about an event when, on the 29th of April, 1998, a person was killed? His name was Sasa Jovic, and he was a policeman, and he was killed at Dulje, which is very close to you.
A. The village of Dulje is not far from Suhareke. It's about nine kilometres away. I don't know about this event, because at this time, on 29th of April, 1998, I was studying.
Q. And the 17th of June, 1998, what about that, when, at the same spot, a policeman was killed, another one? His name was Sladjan Niric. Do you know anything about that?
A. No.
Q. Did you hear anything about it?
A. No.
Q. Do you know about another event that took place on the 24th of June, 1998, in the village of Birac? That's three kilometres away from Suva Reka.
A. No.
Q. Well, I haven't asked you what the incident was yet.
JUDGE MAY: He doesn't know about any incident that day. Yes, let's move on.
When was it you said you got back, Mr. Berisha, to Suva Reka, from your studies?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I returned the day after graduating to Suhareke. I graduated on the 25th, so I returned home on the 26th of June, 1998.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] 1013
Q. Therefore, you heard nothing about the incident in which seven people were killed, including a child, only three kilometres away from Suva Reka, one day prior to your arrival in Suva Reka; is that right?
A. I don't know anything about the event you are talking about.
Q. And do you know about another incident when, at Dulje, Dragan Tomasevic, Milos Stevanovic, and Goran Boskovic were killed, on the 8th of January, 1999? At that time, you were practicing as a doctor in Suva Reka.
A. I was working at that time in Suhareke, but I hadn't heard about the incident you're talking about.
Q. Did you hear about an incident in Sematista, nearby Suva Reka, when, again, on the 28th of March this time, 1999, Ivica Spasic was killed? He was also a policeman.
A. On the 28th of March, I was with my aunt in Prizren. This was the time when I was forced to flee my home, and I stayed with my aunt for four days. So it was impossible for me to find out about what was happening in Suhareke, and still more in the village of Sematista.
Q. I assume you know nothing again about the killing of seven policemen in Suva Reka at the beginning of April, or rather, in April.
JUDGE MAY: Well, I think we dealt with that yesterday. He was in Albania in April, and said, when he was asked about events then, that he knew nothing about them.
Is that right, Mr. Berisha?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's right.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] 1014
Q. You said yesterday that you saw nothing of the bombing; is that right, or heard it either?
A. I said that after the beginning of the NATO attack, I didn't stay long in Kosova. In all, I spent three days in my home and four days with my aunt in Prizren. During this time, I didn't see anything of these bombings.
Q. That's why I'm asking you. That's precisely why I'm asking you, because on the 24th of March, that is to say, on the first day, the repeater station Bukova Lala was bombed, near Suva Reka, and the whole of Suva Reka vibrated from that bombing. Is it possible that you could have heard nothing of that?
A. The place about which you're talking, Bukova Lala, is a long way from Suhareke, deep in the hills, and above the village of Budakov. I didn't hear any detonation or thunder or great noise on that night.
Q. How do you know it was during the night?
A. Well, the bombings, the NATO bombings, started at 8.00 on the evening of 24th of March, 1999.
Q. And do you know about a residential block near the market in Suva Reka, which is 500 metres from your own house, and was hit by a bomb?
A. My house is near the police station, near the bus station, and the place about which you're talking is in an entirely different part of the town of the Suhareke.
Q. Suva Reka is a small town. I suppose that when a bomb hits a small area of a small town, the whole town knows about this, and you're claiming that you know nothing of it. Well, just go ahead and say you 1015 don't know anything about it and we'll continue.
A. I need not answer this comment. This is not questions that you're putting to me.
JUDGE MAY: When is it alleged that the bomb hit the residential block near the market? What date is that, Mr. Milosevic?
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] At the very beginning of the bombing. I don't have the exact date. My phone didn't work yesterday afternoon, so I couldn't find this out.
JUDGE MAY: Very well. Yes. Can we move on, please?
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. Do you know about the KLA attacks prior to the beginning of the aggression in the villages around Suva Reka, Rektina [phoen], three kilometres; Musatiste, six kilometres; Budakovo, five kilometres, Vranic, seven kilometres? So all of these villages around Suva Reka where the KLA attacks took place, do you know anything about these attacks?
A. No.
Q. But you know everything about the houses being searched when they were looking for weapons after these attacks. As far as I understood, you only know about the searches; is that right?
JUDGE MAY: That's a matter for comment, Mr. Milosevic, which you can make to us in due course.
Yes. No need to answer that.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. I will now refer only to the time when you were in Suva Reka, 1016 which means starting with the 23rd of August, 1998, until the beginning of the aggression on the 24th of March.
Do you know that 15 Albanian civilians were killed by the KLA?
A. I have no knowledge of such an event you are talking about.
Q. This all took place in the area of Suva Reka where you resided.
A. During that time, I went from my home to my job and back home. All the time I was in Suhareke, I never went to the outskirts of the town. I said right at the outset I didn't see any soldiers of a KLA or any activity conducted by KLA. What occurred in the villages, I don't know, because I haven't been to those villages myself.
Q. Do you know that at the end of May in 1998 until the end of June of 1998, Albanian doctors who worked in Belgrade all left Belgrade en masse?
A. No, I don't.
Q. You didn't hear anything of it, did you?
A. No.
Q. I was told that there was even a letter by the director of your clinic, stating that Albanian doctors at that time had left all together the clinic and went back to Kosovo. This took place in May and June of 1998.
A. Apparently you have been misinformed.
Q. You said that together with you doing the residential training, there were several Albanians. Did you remain? Did you remain at the clinic after they left?
A. I stayed there during all the month of June until the date was up 1017 for me to pass the test of graduation, which I took on the 25th of June. One week after me, Flora Belegu was also graduated.
Q. What about the rest of them? Did they remain after you at the clinic?
A. In June, the lessons ended. The academic year ended. So most of them left to go home on vacation.
Q. Very well. Do you remember when in March, prior to the NATO aggression, the KLA announced mobilisation?
A. No.
Q. Very well. Do you know about the monastery in Musatiste, a Serbian monastery from the thirteenth century?
A. I heard that there is a Serb monastery in Musatiste village. I don't think that it dates to the thirteenth century. I have never seen --
JUDGE MAY: You needn't worry about that.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. Do you know that it was burnt down?
A. No.
Q. Very well. Do you know how many people were killed in the Suva Reka environs? Perhaps you learned of this later, upon your return. So how many people were killed prior to June of 1999?
A. When I returned from Albania, which was on 28th of June, 1999, I found Suhareke destroyed and ruined. In the town of Suhareke, I saw about 50 per cent of the houses burnt down. Of the 50 villages of Suhareke, 49 were burned. Each and every house of them was burned down. I heard that during this war, Suhareke was deprived of 500 of its dear inhabitants. 1018
Q. Do you know about the facts concerning how many people were killed by the KLA in that area, since you know that a lot of people had been killed there? Do you know the figures? Do you know that, according to the records, 72 people had been killed by the KLA? This is what was recorded, and there are a lot of stories going about this as well. Out of these 72 people, 19 were Albanians.
A. No, I don't know.
Q. All right. I'm not going to ask you anything about these KLA crimes, because it is obvious that you know nothing of this, especially as far as the bombings are concerned. Forty per cent of the bombings took place in Kosovo, and Kosovo represents ten per cent of the entire territory of Yugoslavia, which means that the majority of bombings took place in Kosovo, and you know nothing about this. This is obviously clear from what you stated.
Did you go to Prizren after the bombing?
JUDGE MAY: I think he dealt with that yesterday, that -- Help us, Mr. Berisha. Did you see any bombing in Prizren?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You mean NATO bombing, sir?
JUDGE MAY: Yes.
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. You said that before the war, the residents in Suva Reka were mistreated and they seldom went out into the streets, and then after that, you said that the policemen confiscated the car of your friend, Fatani, but you also said that it was taken from him for several days. How many 1019 days later did they return the car to him?
A. He was not my friend; he was a cousin of mine, a close cousin of mine. He was killed on the 26th by the Serbian police and didn't have the good fortune to have his car back. The car remained at the police station in Suhareke. When I went to Albania, I saw the car there. I don't know what happened afterwards.
Q. You said you went into town every day; is that right?
A. I went to work every day.
Q. Did anybody mistreat you, since you went into town every day?
A. I went to work every day, very afraid, in fact, but I was not mistreated. I already spoke about my mistreatment which happened on the 26th of -- 27th of June, when I was returning from Belgrade. 26th, I'm sorry.
Q. This cousin of yours, Fatani, did he belong to the family who had a gas station, the Fatani family who had a gas station in the village of Pirana?
A. His name was Faton, and he didn't have any gas station. He was not the owner of any gas stations. He was an unemployed person.
Q. I asked you because this gas station was hit by the NATO bomb, which caused fire in the village. You said that from the police station, they shot towards your house. However, you said that nobody was hurt and that in fact the policeman was simply demonstrating how far he could shoot. Did you see him doing that, showing how far he could shoot, or was there perhaps some other reason behind the shooting?
A. I didn't say that they fired at my home, someone fired at my 1020 home.
Q. Either toward your house or toward the area near your house, you said that a bullet went nearby. I think you said through the wall or through the window.
A. Yes. I said that in the summer of 1998, someone fired at Ahmet Berisha in his home. The bullet entered his window and hit the back part of his room, the back wall of his room.
Q. You said that it was the policemen who did the shooting.
A. I went on the next day and saw with my own eyes the hole from where the bullet entered and from where it left. I saw the trajectory of the bullet, which showed that it came from the police station in Suhareke.
Q. And how far is the Suva Reka police station?
A. From where?
Q. From this area that was hit by this bullet that you just described.
A. About 100 metres.
Q. So that means that from every -- this bullet could have been shot from any point within the 100-metre diameter around it. Is it so or not, since you obviously very professionally concluded that this was the fact, this was the case?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think this is not a question. It is a comment by the accused.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. Did you see a policeman shoot at the house of your relative? 1021
A. No, I didn't. It was evening.
JUDGE MAY: I think we've -- Mr. Milosevic, I think we've exhausted this topic. Can we move on, please?
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes. I think this case is obvious. We can continue.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. Well, let me put this question in general terms. Was anybody shot at in those days prior to the aggression? Was anybody shot at? Was anybody hit by a bullet in Suva Reka, a bullet shot by the police?
A. Yes. I remember well an event which occurred in Suhareke. It was the summer of 1998. That day, about ten persons were killed in the centre of Suhareke. First a worker, a Serbian worker, was killed, who worked in a state-owned shop in the centre of Suhareke. Nobody knew who killed him. I don't know his name, but I know that he was from Sopi village. Afterwards, the police killed eight, up to nine civilians in the streets and houses of that part of the neighbourhood in Suhareke. I remember this event.
Q. So you saw it? You saw this event?
A. No. I didn't see it myself because, at that time, I was working. The work where I worked was on the second floor of the hospital of Suhareke. I was with my patients and my nurses who were all very scared when we saw the dead Serb person brought to the clinic, and there was a lot of upheaval on the ground floor. I remember that we heard some fire shots on the ground floor of the clinic. We were really very scared. We closed the door of our ward and waited there for everything to boil down, 1022 to calm down.
Q. Who fired on the ground floor of the hospital?
A. I don't know.
Q. Didn't you inquire afterwards?
A. I don't know.
Q. When the situation calmed down, didn't you inquire about who was shooting on the ground floor?
A. No.
Q. Was it perhaps an attack of the KLA? I'm talking about this event when this Serb got killed and when they fired at the policeman, this event from the summer of 1998.
A. I said he was killed by unknown persons. We never learned who killed him. They were never discovered. He was a civilian. And I feel pains when I see civilians killed irrespective of what ethnicity they belong to.
Q. But from my -- from what I gathered, you did not regret the killing of the director of your health centre, Mr. Vuksanovic. Yesterday, you said you didn't feel bad about his death because he was not a good person.
JUDGE MAY: We've already gone over that. We're not going back to it.
Now, Mr. Milosevic, have you got anything else for this witness?
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I certainly do.
JUDGE MAY: Well, we will expect you to bring the cross-examination to a close fairly soon. 1023
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. May, I expect that you will take an unbiased stance because I have a right to conduct my cross-examination.
JUDGE MAY: You have a right to conduct your cross-examination, but we also have a duty to ensure that this trial is concluded expeditiously, and that we will do. Now, you have a right to put your case to the witness. You have a duty to do so. But we note that there's a fair amount of repetition in what you've put and a fair amount of comment. So could you kindly ensure that these -- these matters are dealt with as quickly as possible.
Now, let's get on with this and finish this cross-examination.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. When asked whether you heard about some propaganda aimed against Kosovo Albanians, yesterday, as far as I can remember, you replied by saying that you had heard Vojislav Seselj saying -- saying the following, "We will expel all Albanians across the Prokletije mountains." Do you know where Seselj stated this?
A. No, I don't know. I said yesterday I heard -- I don't remember whether I heard it on television or read it on newspaper or heard it from someone. I can't be sure.
Q. Are you sure that he was speaking about the Albanians, or was he speaking about the KLA terrorists, if he said that at all?
A. I said I'm not sure.
Q. Do you remember that any functionary, representative of the government, or any official person of Serbia or Yugoslavia said something against the Albanians? 1024
A. I do not remember anybody having said such a thing, but it was a reality. It happened. We million Albanians went out of Kosova, and is it very important whether somebody said this or whether somebody didn't? Everybody knows that a million Albanians went.
JUDGE MAY: Mr. Berisha, if you'd confine your answers to just dealing with the question. There's no need to comment. Yes.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. You said that the president of Macedonia, Gligorov, spoke about the route the Albanians should be expelled by. I did not understand the point of that explanation, so I'm asking you the following now: Are you saying that the leadership of Serbia, or rather, of Yugoslavia, made an agreement about this with Gligorov, the president of Macedonia? Is that what you're saying?
A. Yes, that's what I meant. And also the statement of Gligorov, I don't know whether I heard it on television or I heard it from somebody or I read it in a newspaper, mentioning a corridor by which -- the Albanians should go through a corridor through Macedonia to be directed towards Albania.
Q. Did you hear of an order by the KLA that everybody should leave Kosovo?
A. No. That's ridiculous.
Q. And did you hear that the only columns of Albanian refugees who were bombed by NATO were those who were returning and not those who were leaving Kosovo? None of the columns leaving Kosovo were bombed. Did you hear about that? 1025
A. I won't talk about what I have heard. I will talk about what I saw with my own eyes. On that day, when I left for Albania, everybody was going in that direction. Nobody was coming back in the other direction.
Q. Do you remember a slogan by the KLA: "Let's get out as fast as possible so that we can get back as fast as possible"?
A. No.
Q. And do you remember all the pamphlets in Albanian, appealing to the Albanians to leave Kosovo?
A. No.
Q. You never saw a pamphlet of that kind, ever?
A. No. These are ridiculous things that you're saying.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I hope that Mr. May will caution the witness not to make comments.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. You said yesterday that after establishing the Kosovo Verification Mission, the state of affairs changed radically.
A. Yes, that's what I said.
Q. And the mission lasted six months?
A. I said about six months. I don't know exactly how long, but something like that.
Q. It's not important to know exactly, but do you consider that the situation had returned to normal in Suva Reka, completely?
A. Approximately normal.
Q. Do you consider that the following conclusion is right and correct, dating back to those times -- or rather, the following 1026 observation, do you consider it to be correct? The observation is as follows: In the whole region - Prizren, Pec - that means that whole region along the Albanian border -- but let me read the full observation. In the whole region of Prizren and Pec, there were abductions being carried out and killings of Albanians loyal to the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, on orders from the command structure of the KLA.
JUDGE MAY: I think, Mr. Milosevic, you've put this case thoroughly. We've heard what the witness has said. He said he knows nothing about this, and nothing is to be gained by repeating questions over and over and over again in a different form. Now, is there anything else on a new topic that you wish to ask this witness? Otherwise, we're going to conclude the cross-examination.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. May, you are not allowing me to finish even my question. I asked the witness whether the situation changed radically for the better after the arrival of the Verification Mission, and he said yes. And I now quoted a portion of a report by the Verification Mission of the OSCE relating to the 5th to the 12th of March, 1999, in which it is officially noted that during that period, when he says he considers the situation was normal, that in the whole region of Prizren and Pec, there were abductions and killings going on of Albanians loyal to the SFRY, on orders from the command structures of the KLA, and I am quoting a report by that particular mission for the period that the witness considers the situation was normal and which refers to the activities of the KLA themselves, precisely.
JUDGE MAY: Very well. Very well. That question will be put. 1027 You've heard what Mr. Milosevic has read out to you. It is in relation to the period which you described earlier. Now, then, do you agree with the observations made in that report or not?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can reply about the situation in Suhareke because I said I didn't go out among the villages or in the towns mentioned by the accused. I can only talk about the situation in Suhareke, and at that time, people came out more freely into the town, some cafes opened, so that, more or less, the situation became more relaxed.
JUDGE MAY: Mr. Milosevic, you can tender that report in due course as part of the evidence and we'll consider it, but there seems little point in going on with this witness with this line of questioning when you've heard the answers. Now, unless you've got anything else, we'll conclude it.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I do have something else, yes, but at your insistence, I will skip this portion.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. The period of the mission and the KLA activities, and when you say the situation was normal, you skipped over that, but you did note that the situation deteriorated rapidly when the Verification Mission was withdrawn. Is that correct?
A. Yes, that's what I said. After the international observers left, the situation became very serious, and it went back to the same it was that prevailed in my town in the summer of 1998.
Q. Do you consider that this sudden withdrawal of the Verification 1028 Mission was, therefore, a factor which had a negative effect on the situation in Kosovo and Metohija?
A. I didn't understand this question.
Q. You said that the situation was normal during the presence of the Verification Mission and that after that, after it withdrew suddenly, the situation deteriorated. That's what you said.
Now, do you consider that this withdrawal of the Verification Mission was a factor which had negative repercussions on the situation in Suva Reka where you, for instance, lived? I don't want to say Kosovo and Metohija, but in Suva Reka, where you in fact lived.
A. But the very fact that the situation went in that direction shows that the departure of the international observers led to a deterioration of the situation.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. May, I'm going to skip over all the questions that I wanted to ask with respect to concrete events, but I can't skip over all of them.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. Witness, you know that the provisional executive council of Kosovo and Metohija, at the beginning of the aggression, issued an order that every health centre should set up two medical teams for assistance to the refugees and the injured and wounded from the bombing. What did your medical centre do? Did it set up these two teams?
A. I have no knowledge of any medical teams such as you mention. I was a gynaecologist, and I was -- dealt with my own work.
Q. Did you, as a gynaecologist, make up part of any medical team for 1029 assistance to the refugees and the casualties of the bombing?
A. During the NATO bombing, you mean?
Q. Yes. I mean during the war, the whole war.
A. I said two days before the NATO bombing, I wasn't able to go to work because I was in physical danger.
Q. How many Albanians were doctors in Suva Reka? Apart from you, how many others were there?
A. I don't know the exact numbers, but there were 20 to 25 Albanian doctors in the clinic of Suhareke municipality.
Q. Were they afraid too, or had they been appointed as members in these medical teams?
A. I have no knowledge of the creation of these medical teams. This is the first time I've heard about this.
Q. Do you know anything about the burning of Serb houses in the Suva Reka municipality?
A. I returned from 28th -- on the 28th of June from Albania, in 1999. That is three weeks after the end of the war, after the agreement was signed. The reason why I was late was that I had a small child --
JUDGE MAY: Mr. Berisha, we'll get on much better, just answer yes or no. Do you know about the burning of Serb houses?
A. Yes. When I returned, I saw some houses of Serbs burnt.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. Did you see a Serb house that hadn't been burnt in Suva Reka? Now.
A. Yes. There are a lot, a lot. But there are Albanians now living 1030 in these houses. Albanians whose houses were burned are living there, and people who are unable to renovate their houses are living in them.
Q. And the houses that weren't forcibly taken over by the Albanians were burnt; is that right? The Serb houses, I'm referring to.
A. Yes. I said some houses of Serbs in Suhareke I saw burned. Most of them, and also in most of the public housing, Albanians are living.
Q. And where are the Serbs from Suva Reka?
A. I don't know. I think they are in Serbia.
Q. Is there a Serb left in Suva Reka now?
A. Not one. Not one.
Q. And as far as their houses are concerned, they were either taken over by the Albanians or burnt. Those are the two variations; right?
A. I don't think this situation that they were taken is a sufficient one. I'm saying that Albanians are now living there.
Q. Well, I didn't expect you to say anything like that, but I just wanted to take note of the fact that those who were forcibly taken over are inhabited now and the rest were burnt. But the fact is that there is not a single Serb in Suva Reka.
Do you have any idea how many Serbs were killed and kidnapped after the 10th of June, that is to say, after your arrival there in Suva Reka?
A. I arrived in Suhareke on 28th of June, three weeks after the signing of the agreement. I came very late. What happened in those three weeks, I'm not able to say.
Q. You have no idea how many Serbs were killed and -- 1031
JUDGE MAY: He said he doesn't.
Q. -- abducted?
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well.
MR. NICE: May I raise a point? Your Honour, I reserve comments about the cross-examination by this accused generally for later, but I see the time, and it must be possible that the Chamber will be drawing matters to a conclusion. Perhaps at the break. I don't know. The accused has yet, as I understand it, to cross-examine on the central issue in this case, and I have in mind that the Court drew to his attention his ability to do so under Rule 90, and obviously it's going to help in the joining of issues if he can identify his case and cross-examine on that rather than on matters that may, many of them, be peripheral and irrelevant.
JUDGE MAY: We'll consider that.
[Trial Chamber confers]
JUDGE MAY: We will deal with the scope of cross-examination generally when we deal with administrative matters, and it would be helpful to hear from the amicus on that too, and we'll hear from the Prosecution.
We note that there has been a very great deal of cross-examination about matters which are certainly not central to the witness's evidence. At this stage, we are not going to require the accused to ask any questions. It's a matter for him how he conducts his examination. But this examination should conclude in ten minutes, Mr. Milosevic. You will have had then over two hours cross-examining. In particular, you should ask in that time, if you have any questions you 1032 want to ask, with events of what this witness said he saw on the 25th and 26th of March.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, we differ as to what is essential and what is not. Our views differ on that point. Because that side over there with the false indictment has endeavoured to explain --
JUDGE MAY: Just --
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] -- to explain how the Albanians were subjugated, how they lived in a difficult fashion from 1989 to the NATO aggression, which saved them. And now we hear from the witness here that all that wasn't so. He did his regular university training, and all the other Albanians, who were a majority, that he got a job, that he did his specialist training, that he went to Prizren and other towns, went back to Belgrade and then continued in his job, continued working. They are all essential, vital questions. Now, this pivotal point, this pivotal question that the Prosecution wishes to impose as being pivotal, is what I said in my opening statement, that that false indictment is endeavouring to turn about notorious facts, such as the 78-day aggression and bombing and the KLA activities be denied through witnesses, so that --
JUDGE MAY: Yes. I'm going to stop you. We've heard these points. At this stage, we're dealing with cross-examination of this witness. Now, in the ten minutes remaining, is there anything more you want to ask him?
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'm going to ask questions for as long as I'm given an opportunity to ask questions, and I don't understand why you are limiting me in doing so. It is difficult to make a selection 1033 of questions now, but I see that this is a unique case in the world, where a Tribunal, even an unlawful one, openly stands on the side of terrorism.
JUDGE MAY: Just ask the questions.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. When you cautioned the policemen -- no. I have a question before that. Let me start again. You said that policemen went round in groups on that day, stormed houses, burnt down doors, and so on.
A. Which day do you mean?
Q. I'm referring to that critical day that you have been talking about, when they stormed your house, and the day before that as well.
A. Yes, and what was the question?
Q. The question was: You heard shooting in the house in which a number of people were killed, but you saw nothing; is that right?
A. It seems that the witness [as interpreted] was not concentrating on what I was saying. He was not interested in listening to what I said I saw.
JUDGE MAY: Mr. Berisha, we'll get on more quickly if you don't comment, please. Now, you've been asked a question. Could you just answer it.
A. The events that took place, I saw these in the yard, the events in the yard, and not in the house, at a distance of ten metres. I saw the Serbian police killing civilians, innocent civilians, unarmed.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. You said that the shots were in the house and that the policemen were there shooting. I listened to you very carefully. I listened to 1034 what you said very carefully, so in addition to what you were saying about the yard.
A. I also heard shots in the house, room by room, and the house was quickly enveloped by smoke and flame.
Q. And are you sure that nobody shot at the policemen when they entered the house?
A. I'm very sure.
Q. Were there no weapons in the house at all?
A. I think there were no weapons, but the police who came did not come to look for weapons; they came to kill Albanian civilians, men and women, children and pregnant women. The reason, the sole reason, was because they were Albanians.
Q. You're an Albanian too.
A. Yes.
Q. They didn't kill you.
A. Fortunately, no.
Q. Therefore, how do you arrive at the conclusion that they had come to kill the Albanians, whereas you, as an Albanian, was not killed?
A. But they went into the other people's house, not my house, and my family was safe.
Q. They came to your house too.
A. They came to my house on the next day. This was another group of policemen. They came with another duty: to burn my house.
Q. Is there an Albanian family without any weapons in Kosovo today, now? 1035
A. I do not know whether Albanian families have weapons or not. I say that I don't have weapons in my house, and I didn't have before the war, and never have. I have always considered guns as piles of iron that cause disaster.
Q. Let's move on to you personally. You said that they stormed houses, broke down the doors, set fire to them, and then you explained to us that you opened the doors for them. So they did not break down your door; you opened your own front door. Yes or no.
A. Yes, I opened the door myself, which wasn't broken by the first kick from the policeman.
Q. You said that you warned them to behave properly, and that after that warning, they did behave in a proper manner, or at least more properly.
A. What kind of good behaviour is it when they ask for a thousand marks to save a house and to save the lives of the family and then to burn the house?
Q. I am just taking note of what you yourself said, and that's what you said.
A. Yes, that's what I said. After the start of this dialogue between me and the policemen, they seemed to calm down a bit.
Q. And then they asked for all your money - I wrote that down and put it in quotation marks - all your money, and you said you wouldn't give them anything else because they would carry out what they had in mind to do, and that then they released you.
A. That's right. 1036
Q. So they let you go, although you didn't give them, as you yourself said, all the money, and you cautioned them to behave well, and they let you go nonetheless. And then, to focus on vital issues, you said that you made a very difficult decision, the most difficult decision you had ever had to make in your life, and that was to go to Albania. I'm jumping over the four days you spent in prison -- in Prizren, I'm sorry. Prizren. And now you have to decide between two things, because it is quite obvious that we're dealing with a key question here of showing how allegedly the Serb authorities deported the Albanians. Now, you had to decide. Did you yourself decide to go to Albania or were you deported to Albania by the Serb authorities? Because both things can't be true.
A. I think I explained well yesterday why I went to Albania, and I can say again it was the most difficult decision in my life. But to stay in Kosova was a dangerous thing for Albanians at that time. I thought to go to Albania to save my life and the lives of my family, and when all this was over, I would return.
Q. I don't want to go into your motives. All I'm saying is that you yourself decided to go to Albania. It wasn't that the Serb authorities deported you, because you said you made that decision, and I assume that you were telling the truth when you said that.
The reason you mentioned later on was that you were going so that they should not discover that you had been an eyewitness to some of their, as you explained here, misdeeds. And the police who let you go, who let you leave Suva Reka, undoubtedly knew that you had been there the previous day. 1037 So I cannot find anything logical in your explanation, because if they knew that you were an eyewitness --
JUDGE MAY: Just a moment. You've got a question. The question, I take it, is: Why did the police let you go the day before if you fear that they might have decided to kill you if you were an eyewitness, or to harm you? Can you help or not?
A. The police released me after taking a thousand marks from me.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. Is that your answer to the question?
JUDGE MAY: That's his answer.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well.
JUDGE MAY: If the interpreters allow us, we will go another five minutes before the break.
Mr. Milosevic, you've got another five minutes.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, it's very difficult for me to choose the questions from all the ones I've got here.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. Therefore, you didn't give him all -- give them all the money they asked for, but they let you go nevertheless. You were an eyewitness, but they let you go nevertheless. Now, what can you deduce from this? Did they want to kill you, or did they want to let you go?
A. I don't know. Ask them.
Q. You can't give an answer to that question?
JUDGE MAY: No, it's not for him. It would be for them to answer. 1038
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. So you say that the Albanians did not flee because of the bombing, that they did not flee because of the conflicts on the terrain between the army and the KLA, but that they fled exclusively because they were being persecuted by the Serb police and the army of Yugoslavia. That is the gist of your conclusion, is it?
A. I think that the residents of the town of Suhareke left because of the 50 victims who died in Suhareke that day and the victims who died in the village of Trnje where men and women, unarmed, were killed. This was a message to the population, "Go, because you are in danger."
Q. The population got that message because of the war activities and operations. Do you consider that these activities and operations were also a message to the inhabitants and population to take shelter from the war operations?
A. Then -- then they could have taken shelter in their own homes and not left Kosova.
Q. And if nearby, near their homes there were conflicts and operations going on between the army and police and the KLA, do you still consider that they could have taken cover and been safe in their own homes without falling casualty in these conflicts?
A. I don't know. I wasn't living in such places. Yes. There was never fighting near my house in Suhareke.
Q. And now with respect to fighting between the army and the KLA, or the police and the KLA, add to that the bombing, the NATO bombing in 1039 support of the KLA. And when you add all this together, do you consider that that was the message sent out to the population, to flee from the danger that it was exposed to?
A. No, no. The people were only afraid of the Serbian police and army. This was the reason why they were forced to leave Kosova.
Q. Therefore, the bombing was no factor at all. They weren't afraid of any bombing.
A. They were not afraid of the NATO bombing. I said we saw the NATO bombing, and we welcomed it with joy. We were convinced that the NATO bombs in Kosova would bring freedom.
Q. Did you see how many Albanian corpses were taken out of the rubble and ruins in Pristina, Prizren, and other towns that were bombed by NATO?
JUDGE MAY: He's already dealt with these matters, and that -- and that brings the conclusion -- that brings -- Mr. Milosevic, that is now quarter past eleven. That brings the cross-examination to an end, in our judgement.
We will now adjourn until quarter to.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] I have one more question, just one more question, Mr. May, please. Just one more question.
JUDGE MAY: One more. One.
THE ACCUSED: One.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. When, where, and to whom did you give statements about what happened? And when I say -- I mean the authorities of this institution which is filing the indictment. Where and when and to whom did you make 1040 these statements?
JUDGE MAY: Do you remember that now?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I remember well. I made my first statement while I was a refugee in Albania and my second statement about a year ago, in Suhareke.
JUDGE MAY: Very well. We'll adjourn now.
MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours.
JUDGE MAY: Mr. Tapuskovic.
MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I would need just a few minutes for my own cross-examination. Just a few minutes after the break if - with the Court's indulgence, please.
JUDGE MAY: Yes.
--- Recess taken at 11.15 a.m.
--- On resuming at 11.47 a.m.
JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Tapuskovic.
MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. Can I just ask you for your indulgence for a brief explanation? You were able to see that we intervened only on a few occasions, asking questions and participating and questioning the witness, and we were guided in this - at least, I speak on my own behalf - by the fact that, as you know, Mr. Milosevic refuses to accept any documents from the Tribunal, including the witness statements, the statements of the witnesses provided previously to the OTP. So therefore, up until now, we only focused on vital questions which Mr. Milosevic was not aware of because they are contained in these previous witness statements. And now I would like to 1041 put just one question, which is a vital, pivotal one, concerning this witness's testimony, and this is what it is about. Questioned by Mr. Tapuskovic:
Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Berisha, yesterday, during your testimony, you confirmed that, from a short distance, you saw four people being killed: Faton, Djedata [phoen], Sedata [phoen], Gjura; is that correct?
A. I stated that from a short distance, I saw two people being killed: Bujar and Sedat Berisha. The following minutes I saw that from the front part of my house -- that is, I saw on the back yard of the other house four dead people whom I could recognise. They were Fatime Berisha, Hava Berisha, Nexhat Berisha, and Faton Berisha. This is what I said yesterday.
Q. That is how I understood it as well. However, did you, on the 21st of April, 1999, when interviewed by the investigators in Tirana, in Albania, say the following: that from the distance of ten metres, you watched and you saw how four men from that house were lined up, four men - Fatime, Faton, Nedat [phoen], Gjura - and then killed, in other words, that they were shot there at that spot?
A. I don't remember to have said that precisely in Albania. If so, it must have been an error on the part of the interpreter. The truth is what I'm saying now, that I saw two men being killed, and then afterwards, four other dead persons of my relatives, who were pulled up to the dead bodies of the previous two persons whom I saw, as I said.
Q. Prior to signing this statement, this statement was read to you, and you apparently had no objections at the time. 1042
A. Yes, but I'm sure it must have been some errors in translation, even for the second part -- second time when I was read the statement.
MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
MS. ROMANO: Your Honour, I have no questions. I just wanted to emphasise that all the statements that have been taken from this witness have been served to the accused.
JUDGE MAY: Yes. Mr. Berisha, thank you for coming to the International Tribunal to give your evidence. That concludes it, and you are free to go.
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.
MR. NICE: Mr. Ryneveld will be calling the next witness.
[The witness withdrew]
MR. RYNEVELD: If it please the Court, the Prosecution calls as our next witness Ajmane Behrami.
And while we're waiting for that witness to be brought into the courtroom, in response to the Court's request last date for an additional line indicating the counts and paragraphs, I have now prepared new copies with that on this trial summary, along with a couple of other typographical changes. So if I may, I would ask that these be distributed to the Court and the amici and the accused in place of the ones you now have. There are some minor things that I think it would be preferable if you would use this one.
The other thing, before the witness actually comes into court, I'm going to ask that the declaration be read to her by someone and then translated as opposed to her attempting to read it herself. I understand 1043 the witness is unable to read and write.
JUDGE MAY: How can we get the declaration read to her?
MR. RYNEVELD: I was wondering whether perhaps -- we don't have an Albanian-speaking person. Well, if it could be read in English, it could be translated.
JUDGE MAY: Yes. Let it be read in English. Perhaps you would like to read it in English. It could be translated and then --
MR. RYNEVELD: I would be happy to do so. I'll just go get the ...
JUDGE MAY: Yes. Let's have the witness in, please.
[The witness entered court]
JUDGE MAY: Counsel will read the declaration to you. Could you repeat it when it's being translated by the interpreters? You'll hear that over your headphones.
MR. RYNEVELD: Thank you, Your Honour. Witness, would you repeat after me: "I solemnly declare that I will speak the truth ..."
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will speak the truth.
MR. RYNEVELD: "... the whole truth ..."
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The whole truth.
MR. RYNEVELD: "... and nothing but the truth."
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] And nothing but the truth.
MR. RYNEVELD: Thank you.
JUDGE MAY: Thank you. If you'd like to take a seat. 1044
WITNESS: AJMANE BEHRAMI
[Witness answered through interpreter] Examined by Mr. Ryneveld:
Q. Witness, would you state your full name for the Court, please.
A. Ajmane Behrami.
Q. Now, Witness, I understand at present you are a 32-year-old Kosovo Albanian Muslim widow; is that correct?
A. [No translation]
MR. RYNEVELD: I'm not getting translation.
A. Yes.
MR. RYNEVELD:
Q. And do I understand correctly that you have four surviving children?
A. I used to have five. Now I have four.
Q. We'll get back to that in a moment, yes. Thank you. Now, in March of 1999, do I understand correctly that you were a resident of a village called Izbica?
A. Yes.
Q. And that is in the Srbica/Skenderaj municipality, is it?
A. Yes, that's right.
Q. Now, at that time in March of 1999, were you married?
A. Yes, I was.
Q. Was your husband living at home?
A. Yes.
Q. What happened to your husband? 1045
A. My husband died.
Q. When?
A. In May.
Q. Now, did something happen to your village in March of 1999?
A. Yes, it did.
Q. Was your husband at home when the incident involving your village occurred?
A. No, he was not.
Q. Where was he?
A. The mountain.
Q. Doing what? Do you know?
A. No, I don't know.
Q. Was there anyone else in the mountains at the time, to your knowledge?
A. Yes, but I don't know. I was at home.
Q. Yes. We'll get back to that as well. Did your husband belong to any organisation of any kind?
A. He was a farmer.
Q. Yes. And in addition to being a farmer, did he later join any organisation?
A. No.
Q. Are you aware of the existence of an organisation called the KLA?
A. Yes.
Q. Was your husband, to your knowledge, involved in any way with the KLA? 1046
A. No.
Q. Did your husband -- you've already told us that your husband died in May; is that correct?
A. Yes. Yes, it's correct.
Q. Did you find out how he died?
A. I was not there. From the others, I heard that he was killed.
Q. Did you hear the circumstances under which he was killed?
A. In the mountains. He was there.
Q. Doing what? Do you know?
A. I know nothing. I was not there. I didn't see anything.
Q. Let's move on a little bit and we'll get back to this. You've already told us that you were aware of the existence of a group called the KLA; is that correct?
A. Yes, that's correct.
Q. How were you aware of their involvement? Let me rephrase that. Where were they and what were they doing in the area of your village, if anything?
A. In Izbica, we didn't have -- in the village, we didn't have anyone there. In the surrounding areas, yes, but I don't know what they did.
Q. Are you aware of any fighting that took place in the surrounding area, between the KLA and members of the VJ?
A. No. I saw nothing. I don't know.
Q. Were you aware that there was fighting in the area?
A. Yes. I heard that there was fighting in the surrounding area. I have heard that. 1047
Q. Was your husband at any point a member of the KLA?
A. Yes.
Q. And was he a member when he died?
A. He was civilian. No. He was civilian.
Q. I understand you say he was a civilian, but you said he was a member of the KLA. He was in the mountains, and he died; is that correct? At the time he died, was he a member of the KLA?
A. No, no. No. He just had taken to the mountains to take shelter.
Q. You've told us at some point your husband was a member of the KLA. When was that?
A. Before; in the past.
Q. Do you remember when that was?
A. No, I don't remember.
Q. Was it during 1999 or 1998, or some other time? Are you able to give us perhaps a wide range, if you don't know the exact date?
A. Not in 1998. In 1999.
Q. Do you remember any particular incident that occurred that may have prompted him to join the KLA?
A. No, I don't know.
Q. All right. Now, I'm going to ask you very briefly to describe what life was like in your village prior to the outbreak of this difficulty in March of 1999. Can you describe for us what the village living conditions were like?
A. We heard fire shots. Sorry. It was difficult.
Q. And difficult -- can you give us some examples of how life was 1048 difficult in your village prior to March of 1999?
A. It was difficult to live, because we were not free to leave our houses, especially the young people.
Q. What prevented their freedom from leaving their houses? Who did what?
A. They couldn't go out in the streets because the Serb policemen did not allow them. If they found them out, they beat them, they robbed them, everything.
Q. I see. Now, do you recall an incident in March of 1999 when NATO conducted a military exercise in a neighbouring community?
A. Nothing happened in our area.
Q. All right. Can you tell us where Skenderaj is? How far away was that?
A. I don't know. I can't tell you. It is far from us.
Q. Do you remember an incident involving NATO and Skenderaj?
A. I heard people say that there was an attack mounted on the munitions factory there.
Q. I see. And I'd like you to turn your mind now to two days after that attack. What, if anything, happened to your village two days after you heard about the attack on Skenderaj by NATO?
A. On the 28th of March, for two days, they bombed the village, the surrounding villages: Broje, Vojniku, Pilic [phoen], Liqina. They are surrounding villages. They were shelled for two days. Then, after two days, they came to Izbica.
Q. All right. I'm going to stop you there. The transcript seems to 1049 suggest that you said: "On the 28th of March, for two days, they bombed the village." Who are you talking about bombing the village? Are you talking about NATO or someone else?
A. No, not NATO. Serb policemen and army. Not NATO.
Q. So when you say "bombed" in that respect, do you actually mean bombing or do you mean shelling or do you mean something entirely different? Explain that.
A. I mean shelling, not actual bombing, but shelling. I mean shelling.
Q. I see. Can you explain to the Court, if you would, please, just tell in your own words now what happened to your village.
A. On the 28th of March, from morning, 7.00 in the morning, we heard shelling, all kinds of fire shots. At 11.00, we saw six tanks come to the village. There were other vehicles, but I don't remember. Then they came, surrounded the village from all sides, and they have -- they have sheltered us -- put us together: women, children, old people. Then the infantry troops came to the village, and then the children were afraid and they started to cry, and they found us out. They came and separated the men from the women. They have lined up the men. They forced us to leave in the direction of Albania. We left. The men were stopped there. I was there with my five children, and then the Serb soldiers asked to give them money. I gave them 100 Deutschmarks. And then we set out. After walking about 30 metres, we went to a hill in Apasha [phoen], and then we sat there and then we saw them burning the village. We stayed there for two or three hours. I don't remember well. We heard the fire shots, and then 1050 we heard that they had shot 108 people. I didn't see that with my own eyes, but I heard from others.
JUDGE MAY: Just pause there.
MR. RYNEVELD: Thank you, Your Honour. I thought I should let the witness just go on a free flow for a minute to get her story out, and then I was going to back up and have her fill in the details.
Q. We're going to stop there for a moment. I'm going to back up a little bit and ask you some specific questions to fill in some details, if I may. All right? Do you understand, Witness? Thank you.
A. Yes.
Q. Now, you've told us that when the assault began on your village, there was shelling; is that correct? What effect did that shelling have on your village?
A. What do you mean by "what effect"? I don't understand.
Q. Well, was any damage being caused? What did the people do as a result of that?
A. We got together there in a place. They were shelling all over us. Then the infantry troops came, I said.
Q. All right. Now, you call them "infantry troops." Can you tell us how many infantry troops came into your village, approximately?
A. Approximately -- many. I can't say how many exactly. I couldn't say how many they were coming.
Q. I believe you also said there were police. Am I correct in that? Or did you say infantry and police or just infantry?
A. Yes. Yes. 1051
Q. I'm sorry. That was my fault. My question was double-sided. Yes to what? Yes to military and police?
A. Yes.
Q. You also mentioned six tanks. What do you mean when you say "tanks"?
A. Tanks. I mean tanks.
Q. And you also said there were other military vehicles as well; is that correct? Nodding your head won't assist. We need an answer. Thank you.
A. Yes.
MR. RYNEVELD: At this point, I'm going to ask that the usher show you, I believe, Exhibit 17 and 18. First we'll start with 17, please.
Q. Now, Exhibit 17, I'm going to ask you to look -- there are some --
MR. RYNEVELD: No. Usher, could you hand it to the witness first so she can look at it before we put it on the ELMO.
Q. There are four pages of photographs. Would you just have a look at those four pages, please. Just take them in your hand. And before you comment, would you look at all four pages.
A. Yes.
Q. I'm not sure you've gone through all four pages, but I see you've stopped at a particular photograph and pointed to it. Do you see in those photographs any military vehicle that looked like the tanks that you've just described to us?
A. This one; 6.
Q. All right. 1052
MR. RYNEVELD: Mr. Usher, would you please put the photograph the witness has indicated, number 6, on the ELMO so that Their Honours can see what the witness has selected.
Q. Okay. Now, Witness, you have selected from Exhibit 17, which contains a series of 15 photographs, photograph number 6. Does that look like the kind of vehicles that you call tanks that were in your village on the 28th of March?
A. Yes. This is what I saw coming to our village.
Q. Thank you.
MR. RYNEVELD: Might the witness also be shown Exhibit number 18. And again show it to the witness before putting it on the ELMO.
Q. Witness, I'm going to ask you to look at what has been marked as Exhibit number 18. There is a series of photographs on one sheet. You've told us about infantry troops and police. Do you see in any of those photographs any uniforms that look like the infantry uniforms that you saw in your village?
A. Yes; this one here.
Q. And does it have a number underneath it?
A. Nine.
MR. RYNEVELD: Would you -- Mr. Usher, would you please place that on the ELMO.
A. And 6, the police.
MR. RYNEVELD:
Q. All right. So the police were wearing uniforms like number 6?
A. No, no. That's not the right uniform. 1053
Q. How is it different?
A. The colours are a bit lighter. Light blue and dark blue.
Q. All right. Would you please place the Exhibit 17 on the -- or 18, 18 on the ELMO so Their Honours can see, first of all, number 9, I believe the witness indicated. It's not visible. There we are. Thank you. And then the police uniforms, something like but a lighter blue in number 6, is that what you're saying, Witness?
A. Yes.
MR. RYNEVELD: Would you show number 6, please.
Q. And those are the police in number 6; is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, I believe you've told us that when these people came to your village, the men were separated from the women. How was it --
A. Yes.
Q. How was it that you were separated from each other? Did you -- how was it that you gathered together to be separated?
A. Because the infantry troops came. I said to you they ordered the men to be separated from us women and we women ordered to set out in the direction of Albania.
Q. Yes. Now, I take it at some point you're all in your homes. How is it you left your homes and where did you go initially when you were separated?
A. You mean when we separated from the men?
Q. No. I'm backing up a little further. The infantry came.
A. Uh-huh. I see. 1054
Q. How was it that you left your homes and where did you go in order to be separated?
A. We were about 30 metres away from our homes where we got together in a pasture, in a field. About 3.000 people.
Q. I see. And these 3.000 people, these were all civilian inhabitants of Izbica, were they?
A. No, no. There were all kinds of inhabitants from all the surrounding villages, not only from Izbica.
Q. And do you know how it is that those people ended up in this large pasture or field?
A. They came because they thought we were more safe there.
Q. Do I understand you to be saying that these people left from neighbouring villages and came to Izbica first and then joined the residents of Izbica in this field?
A. Yes.
Q. I see.
A. Yes.
Q. And I believe then you told us that you were separated. How did that take place? Who told you what to do? Who did the telling? Who did the ordering? What happened?
A. The Serb police and army soldiers, they were mixed together. I remember one of them talking to us in Albanian. "Go straight to Albania." And then they asked the men to sit on the side of the street, whereas us they ordered to leave for Albania.
Q. Did anybody appear to be in charge? 1055
A. Yes. He had -- he had an insignia, I think. I don't know, but I thought he was of a higher rank because he had an insignia on his arm.
Q. Could you tell whether this person you're referring to was a soldier or policeman?
A. No, no. He was a policeman.
Q. And did you see anyone there using a form of communication to other members? In other words, did he have any radio? Did you see anyone with a hand-held radio?
A. Yes, yes, I did. He had a radio in his hand.
Q. And what was he doing with the radio? Did you hear him speak?
A. He spoke. I couldn't say what he was saying in Serbian. I saw that he was saying something. We were afraid what they were going to do to us, to kill us or to drive us away. I couldn't say what he was saying. It was in Serbian.
Q. So the person -- all right. He was speaking Serbian, this person with the radio; is that correct?
A. Yes. Yes, yes.
Q. During the course of this, how were you being treated?
A. They drove us to the street. I said to you we went to another village. We stayed there.
Q. All right. You said you were told to go to Albania; is that right?
A. Yes, that's right.
Q. Who told you that?
A. The Serb soldiers. The Serb soldiers and police. They were all 1056 mixed up there.
Q. Were you permitted to take any cars or tractors or trailers or other means of transport?
A. No. No, nothing. Nothing at all. We left everything behind in the village. We just went on foot.
Q. How many women, children went on foot?
A. About 3.000 people. I can't give you an exact figure, but we were only women and children. I said the men we left behind. They were separated from us.
Q. Do you know approximately how many men were left behind?
A. About 150 or 60. I can't tell for sure.
Q. Where were the rest of the men?
A. What do you mean "the rest of the men"?
Q. Well, I understand we have close to 3.000 women and children and 150 men. Do you know if that was all the men in the village or were other men in the village elsewhere?
A. No, no. All the -- they were inhabitants from all other villages, I said, people who couldn't take to the mountains, and they came there, to Izbica.
Q. All right. So those who couldn't go to the mountains went to Izbica, and that was largely gathered in that field; is that correct?
A. Yes, that's right.
Q. And these men that were left behind, can you tell the Court approximately what age groups were represented in that 150 or 160 men?
A. From 95 years old to 30, 40 years old. 1057
Q. What happened to the young boys?
A. They went to the mountains.
Q. I see. Now, as you were starting to leave, on the way to Albania, on instructions, did anybody, to your knowledge, try to go back to the village, and if so, what happened to them?
A. A few women wanted to go back to the village to sees what was happening. We saw the entire village was on fire. We heard the fire shots, killing people. But they wanted to see with their own eyes what happened. They turned back, but couldn't walk for more than ten metres before the police turned them back, firing in the air, and told them to go back to Albania.
Q. Did they tell you anything that they saw?
A. No. They didn't see anything, because the police didn't let them go back, enter the village.
Q. In your earlier evidence, you said that you could tell -- let me just -- that the entire village was on fire. Could you see that for yourself?
A. Yes. Yes. I saw it with my own eyes, all engulfed by fire, flames. Everything was set fire to; the tractors, everything we had.
Q. Talking about tractors being on fire, do you remember an incident involving two old handicapped ladies?
A. Yes. They burned them in the tractor. One is the wife of Feiz Hoxha, the other of Hazier. We left them there. They couldn't walk. They were left in the tractor and they were burned there.
Q. They were alive on the tractor-trailer when you left? 1058
A. Yes, they were alive.
Q. As you left your village for Albania, did any troops, whether it be police or soldier or any other kind of troops, did any troops escort you along the way?
A. All the way we were accompanied by soldiers and policemen, accompanied I can't remember by whom exactly. When we went to Kopiliq, a village there, we were in a line. My sister was holding my son of 6 weeks old. And then they shelled the column and they killed two daughters of my uncle, and that's what happened.
Q. All right. So as you're marching along towards Albania, you were being escorted by police and/or infantry troops; is that your evidence?
A. Yes. Yes.
Q. And how far did you get before this shelling incident? Had you been walking for far, or long?
A. When they started shelling, three sons of mine, they were separated and they went to another village. We were forced to walk from Skenderaj and to walk in the direction of Albania.
Q. I understand that you probably aren't familiar with distances, but can you tell us how long you had been walking before the shelling took place?
A. From there, we walked for about half an hour.
Q. Would you be able to tell us -- did you know the way to Albania? Did you know where to go or did you have a destination in mind?
A. No, I didn't know. I'd never known that.
Q. All right. Now, this shelling that occurred, could you 1059 describe -- you're in a column, I take it, a bunch of people in front of you; is that correct?
A. Yes, and we were in the middle of the column.
Q. And you're in the middle of the column. Were you carrying anyone at that time?
A. I was carrying my son. I was carrying my son and we were walking, and we were shelled. And just before that started to happen, my sister carried my son. We were walking. And when shelling started, the column was split in two, and half of us stopped there.
Q. How old was your son that you had been carrying, that your sister then carried for you?
A. Six weeks old, my son.
Q. Were you breast-feeding at the time?
A. Yes, before I was breast-feeding him, but not at that time.
Q. No. I appreciate that. So your sister took over carrying your son shortly before the shelling started; is that correct?
A. Just before the shelling started.
Q. And you've told us that when the shelling started, the column of refugees split into two directions; is that correct?
A. Yes. Yes.
Q. Where did you go?
A. We stopped there, and the two girls were left there alive, and the police forces turned us back to Broje. That's what we call the village. And we sat there in a meadow.
Q. Was your sister in the group with you, your sister and your baby? 1060 BLANK PAGE 1070
A. My sister went towards Tushille village. I didn't see the children from that moment, because my sister left for the village of Tushille.
Q. So to summarise: You, your sister, and your three sons took different routes; is that correct? You got separated?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, I'm sorry to have to ask you this, but after that incident, did you ever see your baby again?
A. My baby, no, no. It died. It didn't have what to live on. There was nothing to feed him.
Q. And you got that information from your sister later on, did you?
A. Yes. After the war, my sister told me that the baby died because I couldn't feed her with anything, and nobody could breast-feed her, and so the baby died.
Q. Now, after the shelling incident, what happened? I know the troop -- the column split in two. What happened to your group? What can you tell us about the group that you were in?
JUDGE KWON: Excuse me, Mr. Ryneveld.
MR. RYNEVELD: Yes, Your Honour.
JUDGE KWON: Before we go on, could you clarify more about the shelling? Who did the shelling, for example?
MR. RYNEVELD: Yes.
JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
MR. RYNEVELD:
Q. Do you know where the shelling came from? You're walking along 1071 and, all of a sudden, something happens. Where was it coming from?
A. The shelling came from above. There were some lights, some red lights, and when they fell on us, we were dispersed.
Q. Do you know who did the shelling?
A. The Serbs, the army, the police.
Q. Did you see any tanks or military equipment which would explain where the shelling came from?
A. Yes, yes. Further away -- I can't tell the distance, but about half -- half an hour away from those hills, they shelled us because we were going towards Tushille which was a free zone, because we hadn't eaten anything.
Q. Now, was the column going in the direction that they had been told at the time the shelling started or was the column going in a different direction than you had been instructed?
A. We wanted to go to Tushille, which was less crowded, and we wanted to join some people, and they said it was safe there.
Q. Are you talking about before the shelling?
A. That is before the shelling. We wanted to join others in Tushille village. And the shelling split the column in two. That's when my sister went away with the two daughters, my two daughters.
Q. I understand that, Witness. So this Tushille village that you wanted to go to, was that in a different direction than your Serb escort --
A. In the direction of Skenderaj.
Q. Is that the direction that your Serb escorts originally wanted you 1072 to go or was that in a different direction?
A. It was -- it was in the direction where we wanted to go towards because the Serbs wanted us to go towards Albania. But they didn't allow us to go in the direction we wanted to go to and then started shelling.
Q. So the effect of the shelling, then, was that you eventually ended up in the direction of Albania instead of the direction that you wanted to go. Is that what you're telling us?
A. And we wanted to go towards the direction which we wanted to go to. They started shelling.
Q. And as a result of the shelling, did you go in the direction they wanted you to go?
A. They turned us back, and they turned us towards the other direction, the direction of Albania.
Q. I see. Now, after the shelling stopped, and I -- how long did the shelling go on for?
A. It lasted for about 15 minutes. And we were lying flat on the ground for 15 minutes. The shelling didn't stop. And when -- when the shelling stopped, we were taken -- we were forced to go the other direction, not where we wanted to go. And then we stopped at a field to rest.
Q. After the shelling stopped, did you see any additional uniformed people arrive?
A. A Serb policeman, soldiers.
Q. Do you remember what colour or kinds of uniforms they were wearing? 1073
A. No, no. No, I can't remember because I was very distracted. All the road -- all along the road there were soldiers and policemen, Serb soldiers and policemen.
Q. Did anybody die as a result of that shelling, that you personally know of?
A. I didn't know them. There was a woman with two children who died there. I didn't know them.
Q. Now, once these additional, I think you called them policemen, arrived, do you remember what they did? Were there any men who had joined your column of refugees?
A. Yes. When we were turned to go to the other direction, there were some men, Rexhep Thaci and Haxhi Thaci.
Q. Yes. And what, if anything, happened in relation to them?
A. I approached them and asked them which direction we would go, because I wanted to join the children and meet them.
Q. Yes. Did something happen to those two individuals?
A. They wanted to go to Izbica. There we were robbed of everything we had. They started calling names, and they started asking us, "Where is Hashim Thaci?" And they were kicking us. The children started crying, and the men were lying on the ground.
Q. What men?
A. Haxhi and Rexhep.
Q. Did you see if anything happened to those two men?
A. Yes. Then I was down in the convoy with my two children in my hand, and then there was a volley of gunfire, and they shot them. 1074
Q. When you say, "they shot them," who are you referring to?
A. Policemen.
Q. What effect did that shooting have on you and the women and children with you, if anything?
A. It was more difficult for us. We didn't know where to go. When we saw that they were killed, we didn't know where to go, and we didn't have our children with us. And I don't know how to describe it. It was terrible.
Q. Now, you said that they were saying -- sorry. You were robbed of everything, and they started calling you names. What were you robbed of, if anything?
A. They took -- they took money from the women. I'm not talking about myself. They looted us, and they insulted us, and then they pointed us in the direction of Kline.
Q. In order to obtain money, did -- first of all, did they obtain money?
A. Then when they pointed us towards Kline, they -- there was mud and water in a stream in the village of Jashanice and there were only men -- there were only women and children there, and there were three tanks there and one was below me and there was one at the front, one at the back, and one in the middle, and they wanted to run us down with tanks.
Q. Did they?
A. Yes. Yes, on the road. We were down below the stream.
Q. All right. When you say, "we were robbed," what do you mean? What was robbed from you? 1075
A. There I was, and they were lying down on the road, and we -- and they said to me in Albania, because I don't understand Serbian and they were speaking in Serbian, and then another one spoke Albanian, and then they said -- and they said, "Give me a thousand marks to save my family." And then I had to say -- and then they said, "Five thousand marks to get out of the convoy," but we couldn't do anything. We were just women and children.
Q. I see. Now, you've told us about being told to go towards Kline. Did you in fact get to Kline with this convoy? Did you walk towards Kline?
A. No. It was in the direction of Kline, and then they went from Broje to Jashanice, and then at Jashanice they were -- wanted to run us down with tanks.
Q. Yes. And all along, did you eventually head in the direction of Albania?
A. No.
Q. Where did you go?
A. They took -- wanted 5.000 marks, and they looted us. And from some women they took some -- women, and some from others, and then they forced us to go towards Kline.
Q. All right. And was Kline in the direction of Albania at that point or not?
A. Yes. Yes, it is. It's on the way to Albania. It's called Kline, Klina e Begut.
Q. All right. And once you got to Kline, were you -- 1076
A. When we got to Kline, then we were forced to go back, because they were burning a mill in Kline. And we were frightened, and we were forced to go back, and they told us to go back and take the children. And then they -- we hadn't gone a hundred metres, and they stopped us and they asked us, "Where are you going?" And we said, "We're going to get our children." And they wouldn't allow us. And then we had to go back to the police station at Kline. And then the column was stopped. And they didn't allow us to go back and get our children. And I went back, and I was going back through Kline, which was in flames, and there was the police station.
Q. All right. I understand there was a time of confusion in Kline. Did you eventually go towards another village or another town?
A. Yes. Then we went from Kline to Gjakova, and we stayed one night along the road, and they just told us, "Stay there." And then early in the morning, some men from Kline joined us, and they led the convoy. And it was an even longer convoy then, because we were joined by people from Kline. And we walked all day, and towards the evening, one villager from Kraljane gave us a little bit of food because we couldn't go all the way to Albania without eating or drinking anything.
Q. Yes. Now, when you say, "They told us to go to Gjakova," who is "they"? Were these still the same Serb escorts you had?
A. They were the same Serbs, always the same. Serbian soldiers. They escorted us all the way along the road.
Q. Now, en route, did you get a message from someone on behalf of the KLA? 1077
A. I don't understand that.
Q. Well, let me back up, then. Now, eventually do I understand that you were being escorted to the Djakovica municipality? You're nodding your head.
A. Yes.
Q. And while you were en route to the village of -- now, is it Glodjane? Do you know that town, or that village? I may be mispronouncing it. Glodjane?
A. They pointed us towards Gjakova, and then we rested two nights in Kraljane, and then we went to a village where we were to be a bit safer, in Glodjane.
Q. On the route to Kraljane, did you get a message from anyone, telling you to go in that direction?
A. Yes. A villager of Kraljane came out and said, "Go to Kraljane."
Q. Did he indicate to you why you should do that or whose message he was delivering?
A. He told us to go to Kraljane and then they'd give us bread and to rest a while, because it was -- it would take us a week to get to Albania, and we hadn't had food and drink.
Q. Did you know the KLA to be active in that particular area?
A. No. No, I didn't know anything about that.
Q. What happened when you got to Kraljane?
A. When we came to Kraljane, then we ate and drank, and then they forced us to go to Glodjane, and we stayed four days there. And they shelled us -- the village all night and all day. 1078
Q. Now, let me see if I understand this. You got a message from a villager on behalf of someone that you had -- that you should go to Kraljane; is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. This villager was not a Serb uniformed person?
A. No, no. He was an Albanian. He wasn't a Serb but an Albanian.
Q. All right. So you wanted to go to Kraljane. Do I understand your evidence correctly?
A. Yes. Yes.
Q. But you also told us that you were being escorted by Serb soldiers and policemen. Did they also want you to go to Kraljane? Sorry, I need an answer.
A. No. They just put us on the road, and when we went to Kraljane, they didn't do anything.
Q. They allowed you to go in the direction you wanted to go at that point; is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. And when you got there, Kraljane was being shelled?
A. Kraljane was being shelled, and then we were slightly -- we went slightly lower down, to a village called Glodjane.
Q. Were you fed in Kraljane?
A. Yes. Yes.
Q. Who fed you?
A. There were Albanians there, because they still hadn't left their village there. So there were Albanians there, and they fed us. 1079
Q. Now, while you were in that village, did any further soldiers or paramilitaries appear with any military vehicles?
A. No. We didn't stay long in Kraljane, only two days. And then at Glodjane, we were three days, and there were no soldiers there. And then they shelled Glodjane. And then, early in the morning, they came with tanks, plenty of them, and vehicles, and then we were again shelled while gathered at the church in Glodjane.
Q. So this is now in Glodjane. All right. We're no longer in Kraljane --
A. Yes.
Q. -- we're now in Glodjane. All right.
A. Yes.
Q. And that's where the additional troops and military vehicles - I think you said lots of tanks - that's where that happened?
A. Yes.
Q. I see. And were you given any explanation by these uniformed people as to why they were there?
A. No. No. They came and they forced us to go again to Albania. And they said to the people of Glodjane, "You are different. You are from Drenica." Because half the column was from Drenica. And they said we have nothing -- they told us not to get mixed up.
Q. So they didn't want the people from your village to mix with the people from Drenica? Is that what you understood them to be saying?
A. No, because the people in Glodjane are also Albanians, but they are Catholics. So they were told to go and stay in their own homes. 1080
Q. So what happened to the Catholics? Did they go -- continue on with you or did they go somewhere else?
A. No, no. They stayed where they were, and they told us to go on the road again and they forced us to go back to Kraljane. And when we were at Kraljane, it was burned, and then they told us to go to Klina e Begut.
Q. Just so that we're clear, who is it that are "they" and who is it that is "us" or "we"? I think you said, "They told us." Is this only the group from your village of Izbica?
A. No, they didn't -- they didn't know we were from -- just from Izbica. We were from all Drenica and from all the villages around Izbica. They couldn't tell which of us were from which village. We were all from Drenica.
Q. But the Catholics had been told to stay home? Is that what you told us?
A. Yes.
JUDGE MAY: Mr. Ryneveld, when you come to a convenient moment.
MR. RYNEVELD: Yes. You'll see I'm at the bottom of paragraph 16. I want to ask two more questions, and then I propose to continue after lunch, if I may.
Q. Now, en route, you've been telling us about all these locations you went to. Did you pass through smaller villages along the way that you may have not known the names of?
A. Yes, there were plenty of villages, but I don't know their names.
Q. And could you tell what condition they were in as you went 1081 through?
A. Well, it was dangerous, because people were coming out of Kraljane, 300 people, and then they told us to go back to Kline and I never saw them again. But I saw a man separated from his wife, and he was shot.
Q. Now, as you were on this forced march, did you ever try to stop and rest?
A. During the day, no. They never allowed us to rest during the day. They told us to keep moving, and there were a lot of vehicles moving, and tanks. But during the night, yes.
Q. So during the day, you were not allowed to stop?
A. No.
MR. RYNEVELD: All right. I believe that might be a convenient moment.
JUDGE MAY: Before we adjourn, I want to deal with two administrative matters. The first concerns the video recordings, Exhibits 11 and 13 to 16, which were mentioned last week. And it was proposed, with the agreement of the amici, that we should watch those, lasting three hours, twenty minutes, but without commentary, and that we should do so outside Court. The accused has had access to those video recordings, but he objects to their not being shown in public, saying that they are part of the evidence and should be shown in public.
We have now considered that objection. We do not consider it to be a valid objection. There's no reason why these exhibits should be shown in public. They are, of course, part of the record, and it's simply 1082 a question of when we see them. We have come to the conclusion that it would be convenient for us to watch them in private, which we shall do without taking up valuable court time. However, if on watching them we come to the conclusion that they should be shown in public, we will so order.
That is the first matter. The second is this: The accused has asked, because of a family visit on Thursday, the 7th of March, that we sit only in the morning that day. Because of the difficulties with the visa on this occasion, we will exceptionally arrange for the sitting hours to be changed, and we will sit from 9.00 until 1.45 that day, as, in fact, we will be doing for most of the week. However, this is not to be taken as a precedent.
We will adjourn now. 2.35.
--- Luncheon recess taken at 1.05 p.m. 1083
--- On resuming at 2.35 p.m.
JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Milosevic.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] You didn't allow me to say -- to make an observation, actually, with respect to your ruling, your decision, in connection with the videotapes. I should like to make things clear. I don't know what there is on those tapes, but I considered that they should be shown for reasons of principle in public and for only one reason, and that is that the trial is a public trial. Now, if that reason of principle does not stand, then my comment won't stand either. And when I wanted to show my own tapes here and to show them on a video player, I wasn't able to get one or show them, so -- but that's a lesser problem. It is a question of principle. And if there is any evidence to be presented, it should always be presented in public. So that is why I requested that too.
And another technical point, all the telephones of my associates that I tried to call up here -- from here yesterday have been disconnected, so that I found it very hard to communicate. I myself am not able to come by concrete information in any other way but through the telephone. So I should like to inform you that if I'm not able to make contact and come into contact with my associates when you are examining the witnesses here, then I shall ask for the cross-examination to be postponed until I am in such a position as to be able to communicate with my associates.
That is all. Thank you.
JUDGE MAY: Mr. Milosevic, as to the first matter you raise 1084 concerning the playing of the video, as I said, we had in mind your submission, which was that it should be played in public. For the reasons I've given, we decided against you. We shall look at it in due course, but not in public.
As to the other matter concerning the telephones, that is something we'll have to look into. It's also something about which you can address us at the next hearing when we deal with administrative matters.
Yes, Mr. Ryneveld.
MR. RYNEVELD: Thank you, Your Honours. I'm about to start at paragraph 17 of the summary.
Q. Now, Witness, just before the lunch break, you had told us about a somewhat circuitous route that you took to get to the border, and how long would you say that it took you, from the time you left the village of Izbica, to get to the Albanian border?
A. About six days.
Q. And apart from the one instance you told us that you were fed by the inhabitants, I believe it was of the village of -- I can't remember if it was Glodjane or Kline, were you given food along the way or given opportunities to stop and eat?
A. When we arrived in Kline, as I said, I told them, "I can't walk any more. Where are you talking us?" They ridiculed us, and then they gave us a little bread as if to ridicule us further. Then I said, "I can't walk any more. We can't walk any more." And then they turned us in the direction of Gjakova, and we stayed there one night and had food. 1085
Q. Who supplied that food?
A. The Serb police. They were kind of mocking at us all the time.
Q. Along the route, you passed through a number of villages before you got to the checkpoints at Djakovica. What can you tell us what kind of villages those were? Were they Serb villages or mixed villages or Albanian villages? Do you know?
A. No, I don't know, because I have never been there before. I never have been there. But I know that we walked all day, and when the night came, we rested a while, while in the day they didn't allow us to sit or [indiscernible]. So I can't remember those villages. I've never seen or been there.
Q. Many of the villages that you passed through, were they intact or were they somehow affected?
A. They were not intact. Some were burnt, some parts were not burnt, you know.
Q. Did you have any identity documents with you when you left your village of Izbica?
A. I didn't have anything, because I left everything in my home, and they got burnt.
Q. And how about your fellow refugees who were in the convoy? Did some of those have identity documents with them?
A. Yes.
Q. And could you tell what happened at any stage in relation to those identity documents?
A. When we arrived in Gjakova, on our way to Gjakova, I saw some 1086 big -- a place where they -- they put us in a place, in a checkpoint, I think, where they checked for our documents, and they asked us to hand over all our documents, and then when you arrive at the border of Albania, you will see what will happen. So all the refugees that were in the line, you know, threw away -- threw on the ground all the IDs and passports they had on them.
Q. Now, how far was Gjakova from the Albanian border at Qafe e Prushit?
A. We walked all day.
Q. And while you were walking towards the border, did you see any more Serb forces?
A. Many. All along the way, non-stop, I saw Serb forces.
Q. What were they doing, and how were they in view?
A. They told us to go ahead. They showed the way. We didn't dare to speak or do anything. We were tired, walking all day, no food, no drink, nothing at all. We just kept walking.
Q. Were these soldiers or these forces on foot or were they in vehicles, or what?
A. Some were on foot, some were in trucks, but those who were on foot told us, "If you do not arrive in Albania at 6.00 in the afternoon, we will turn you back from where you came."
Q. Did you make it to the border on time?
A. Yes, we did.
Q. Do you happen to remember the name of the border town that you crossed? 1087
A. Kruma.
Q. Do you remember the date that you crossed the border?
A. No. To tell you the truth, no, I don't.
Q. Witness, if you were asked this I'm now asking, "Why did you leave your village?" what would your answer be?
A. Because we were driven there by force, by Serb paramilitaries. They forcibly drove us out of our homes.
Q. Now, you told us earlier in your evidence about being aware of the NATO bombing before the Serb forces came to your village. Did the NATO bombing have any effect at all on your decision to leave your village?
A. No.
MR. RYNEVELD: Your Honours, in complete fairness, I feel that I must return, if I can, and with permission of the Court, to paragraphs 1 and 3 of the summary. I want to clarify some questions and answers that were given earlier. In complete fairness, I don't know whether the accused is reading this trial summary, but I feel I would like some further clarification of that area.
JUDGE MAY: Yes.
MR. RYNEVELD:
Q. Now, Mrs. Behrami, you've told us earlier that -- I asked you this question: "Was your husband at any point a member of the KLA?" And your answer was yes. Do you remember being asked that question and giving that answer?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. And you've also told us that he went up into the mountains. Do 1088 you remember that?
A. Yes.
Q. And later on in your evidence, you explained the absence of the men, the younger men in Izbica, by the fact, you said, that they went into the mountains. Is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, you've also told us that the KLA were in the area of your village but were not in your village itself; is that correct?
A. Yes. Yes.
Q. Now, did your husband -- you were married to your husband at the time. Did your husband tell you why he was going into the hills?
A. No, he never told me anything. He just told me that "I'm going to the mountains."
Q. Were you aware that the KLA also were in the mountains?
A. I don't know. Maybe they were in the mountains, but I was at home. I never saw anything.
Q. When you left -- I take it you went to Albania. Did you leave Albania and return to your -- did you return to your village sometime later?
A. Yes. After the war, we returned.
Q. Do you remember what month that may have been?
A. No. I can't remember.
Q. Did you stay in Albania very long?
A. About two months.
Q. So some two months later when you returned, is that when you heard 1089 what happened to your husband?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you know if any of the other men who were left behind died as a result of whatever went on after you left?
A. Yes.
Q. Were some of them members of the KLA?
A. No, they were not.
Q. Did you hear about any fighting between the Serb forces and the KLA in the area of Izbica upon your return?
A. No. I didn't hear anything. And I was not even interested, because I was very sad. My husband was killed. My son was also lost. So I was not interested in these things.
Q. Upon your return, did you find out what happened to the 150 or 160 men who were left behind in the field when you were separated from them?
A. When I returned, I saw my uncle there, and he showed me what had happened. They had buried them. On 10th of May, my husband was killed, and they had buried him there. After three days, they had exhumed them and taken them away from that place.
Q. Do you know how many men had been killed?
A. In the Izbica outskirts, 202 men. As far as I remember, 165 were buried there.
Q. Do you know how many of the men in the field, that were there with the women when you were separated, died?
A. I know them by name and last name.
Q. Have you stopped to count or do you know approximately how many 1090 there are rather than have you list all the names?
A. Yes.
Q. Can you tell us?
A. Rahudin [phoen] Behrami, Ramush Behrami, Muhamed Behrami, Muhamet Tahi, Azem Tahi, Ethem Tahi, Qazim Behrami, Zaim Behrami, Feiz Hoxha, Mustafe Sejdiu.
Q. Final question: The -- you told us about two old women who were left on a trailer who were alive when you left, when the trailer was set on fire. Upon your return, did you find out what happened to them?
A. Yes. They were burned in the trailer with all their belongings. They couldn't move, so they were burned in the tractor [sic].
Q. Thank you. I believe those are the questions that I have of this witness.
JUDGE MAY: If the registrar could come up, please.
[Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
MR. RYNEVELD: Your Honours, before cross-examination, I wonder whether the Court would want a copy of this witness's statement for any reason.
JUDGE MAY: Yes, we'll have a copy.
MR. RYNEVELD: Thank you. We'll provide that.
JUDGE MAY: Thank you very much.
MR. RYNEVELD: It's available now should you wish those.
JUDGE MAY: Yes, if you could hand them in. If the usher would collect them for us.
Mr. Milosevic, it's now for you to cross-examine. We've made 1091 inquiries about the telephone. We've said that it should be on tonight, and we'll discuss the matter further tomorrow, but it's now for you to cross-examine the witness.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I am sorry that the witness lost her baby, but I have to ask her a few questions.
Cross-examined by Mr. Milosevic:
Q. [Interpretation] The first question that I commented on with some of my associates in the course of the break, the lunch break, was something that the representative of the other side, the opposite side, referred to a moment ago, and the question was: Why did your husband become a member of the KLA in 1996? Because that's what I heard the witness to say. And as I received an answer that was that she didn't know, let me rephrase the question.
Who took him away to the mountains and why?
MR. RYNEVELD: Just before that happens, and I don't want to interject, but I have a copy of the questions and answers, and "1996" was not this witness's answer. So before she's cross-examined again with respect to a wrong date, I think it's my duty to bring that to everyone's attention. The question was:
Q. You told us at some point your husband was a member of the KLA. When was that?
A. Before, in the past.
Q. Do you remember when that was?
A. I don't remember.
Q. Was it during 1999 or 1998 or sometime? Are you 1092 able to give us perhaps a wide range if you don't know the exact range?
A. Not in 1998, in 1999. Just if that assists Mr. Milosevic with his cross.
JUDGE MAY: Yes. Yes. Now, can the witness answer the question? The question was: Who took your husband away to the mountains and why? Can you answer that?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Nobody took my husband. He went by himself because it wasn't safe to remain at home, and he went.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May I continue?
JUDGE MAY: Yes.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. There was a public television report on the alleged mass graves which were shown by satellite in the region of the village of Izbica, and it was ascertained with identical photographs that that was not true, that there were fields there. And they talked to Albanian witnesses who said that nobody was killed there or is buried there. Now, did you see that report on television or did you hear about it?
A. No, I didn't hear or see any such thing.
Q. The whole village of Izbica comprises 12 houses?
A. Not 12 houses but 60 houses.
Q. I have the figure of 12, that it has 12 houses and 70 inhabitants.
JUDGE MAY: The witness -- the witness -- 1093
A. No.
JUDGE MAY: [Previous translation continues]... said 60.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. You said that you did not hear of any operations and activities by the KLA in your area, and your area is Drenica; is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you hear of a man by the name of Selimi, and his nickname was Sulltan, from your area, from the Srbica municipality, who was one of the commanders of the KLA and later on became a general in the Kosovo Protection Corps? His name was Selimi and his nickname was Sulltan.
A. I have heard the name of Sulltan, but I wasn't interested in this sort of thing and I didn't know him.
Q. Have you heard of a man by the name of Ushtaku, from Prekaz, which is very close by - it is near Srbica - who is also a general today in the Kosovo Protection Corps?
A. I've heard the name, but I'm not interested in this sort of thing. I'm a mother of four children, left without a husband, and I'm interested in taking care of my children. I'm not interested in anything else.
Q. I'm just asking you about something that happened before that. Did you hear about those people before the war began?
A. I don't know anything of this.
Q. Have you ever heard that in Drenica there were five KLA brigades? Did you ever hear about that piece of information?
A. I don't know how many there were. 1094
Q. Were there many of them or few? In your opinion, would you say there were many or few?
A. I said I don't know how many there are, or were.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Was there any KLA brigade in Drenica at all?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know if there was. I am not educated and I don't know these things.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. I'll skip my next questions and move on. I have some very concrete questions to ask you.
You said on several occasions during your testimony today that, when you were moving from Izbica, you said at the end that it lasted a total of six days, that throughout that time you were escorted by the army and the police.
A. Yes.
Q. And then you said that at one point the column was shelled, the column that was accompanied, escorted, by the army and the police.
A. Yes.
Q. You said that the shells fell from a height, which --
A. Yes.
Q. So they were probably mortars, as the shells were falling from a height. Now, do you assume that the column, escorted by the army and police, could have been shelled just by the KLA and not that police and army escorting the column? Would it be right to assume that?
A. Not by the KLA but by the Serbs, because there were tanks on the hills, and the tanks came, and we saw them, and they were on the hills, 1095 and that was where the shells came, and we saw the red flash scattered on all sides.
Q. The tanks neutralised the KLA, who was shelling the column. They weren't shooting at you. These shells from tanks do not fall from a height. Did the idea come to you that you were in fact being shelled by the KLA?
A. I'm not thinking about the KLA. I'm saying that what I saw is the truth, and I was on the road, and I am telling the truth of what I saw.
Q. Yes, but do you think it reasonable that the army and police should shell a column which was being escorted precisely by the army and the police?
A. They told us to go to Kline, but we wanted to go to Tushille, and then they started shelling us, and that was why they shelled us.
Q. But they were with you all the time - you said that several times - and later on too.
A. Yes. All the time before -- while we were on the way to Albania, they were with us.
Q. You said the following: The column was interrupted due to the shelling, and then you said that after the shelling, the police turned you round about. They turned you round. That's the term you used. The army and the police who were with you turned you round and returned you to another village. That's how you put it. Now, do you think that the police and army turned the column round to avoid casualties and victims, because there was shells falling on you, and then the army did an about-turn, turned you round to stop you from becoming casualties? Did 1096 that idea occur to you?
A. If they were thinking of saving us, they would not have shot at us. But it was their intention to get us out of Kosova and get us to Albania. And this shelling divided the column, and there were five people killed. And they wanted us to go to Albania, and we didn't want to go, because it was such a long way and we had nothing to eat and drink, but they wanted to get us all out of Kosova.
Q. Yes, but a moment ago you said that they warned you and said that unless you go in that direction, they would turn you back. They just wanted to move you away from the road. You said that they told you, "Either go there or we're going to turn you back to your village."
A. No, no. It was when we got to the border, went to cross the border on foot. It was half an hour before we reached the border, saying that "If you don't get to the border by 6.00, we'll turn you all the way back that great long road."
Q. You said that along the whole route there were Serb soldiers and policemen.
A. Yes.
Q. Why do you think that they were mocking you when they gave you food?
A. I don't know what they were thinking about when they were mocking us.
Q. How did they mock you?
A. They made jokes about us and mocked us, saying we were just women and children, and why didn't we have any men with us? And they made jokes 1097 about this.
Q. And they did that while they were giving you food?
A. What food? It was one loaf of bread that they threw at us, just as a joke, just throwing a loaf of bread as a joke. They didn't give us a thing. They didn't let us rest. They didn't let us stop to breathe.
Q. You said that you kept moving during the day and rested during the night.
A. Yes.
Q. You said that when you got close to Kline, that there was fire there and shooting and that they told you to go back and not to enter Kline. Do you remember what date that was on?
A. No, I don't remember dates. They told us to go to Kline, but because I'd left three children, I wanted -- I wanted to go back. But I was ... [no interpretation].
Q. Asked who told you to go to Djakovica, your answer was: "The same Serbs who escorted me throughout, who escorted us all the way."
A. There was plenty. They just said, "Go to Gjakova." I didn't talk with them any more. Then they insulted us in Serbian. I didn't understand these Serbian words.
Q. Now, as the army and police escorted you and, in my opinion, provided security for you while you were passing through these war zones, do you happen to have an idea as to who the fighting was between, the army and the KLA or the army and the police and the KLA? Between whom would you say that was happening?
A. I wasn't thinking about these things. I was only thinking of my 1098 children and how to save them and thinking of the road and how to join them. And I left three sons over there, and that's all I was thinking about.
Q. You said that in Glodjane, the Albanians who lived there were told to stay there, and you said that there were no military operations there and that those Albanians there were Catholics. Therefore, I would like to ask you, since you yourself gave us these elements, do you think that they were told to remain there because there were no military operations there or they were told so because they were Catholics?
A. I don't know. I don't know a thing.
Q. Except that they were told to remain there. That's what you said, right?
JUDGE MAY: Yes, that's what she said.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. Do you remember the incident in 1998 when three Albanians were killed in Srbica by the KLA, Zaim Turivuci [phoen]; Sefer Zinavi [phoen]; and Shefqet the forestkeeper; and Blagoje Jovanovic, a Serb? Do you remember this incident?
A. I don't remember, and I haven't heard about it.
Q. Nobody ever told you anything about it?
A. No one.
Q. Do you remember when, on the 5th of March in 1998 in Prekaz, which is nearby, a police station was attacked and two policemen were killed, whereas eight were seriously wounded? Do you remember that incident?
A. I don't know anything about it, because I wasn't interested in 1099 that.
Q. Do you remember the murder of an Albanian called Gashi Mark on the 17th of July, 1998, on the road near Srbica?
A. Nothing.
Q. Do you remember how on the 20th of February, 1998, also between Srbica and Kline, Hakaj Murat was killed as well. He's an Albanian. Have you heard of that murder?
A. I haven't heard and I don't know anything about it.
Q. Have you heard that a woman called Habije Rameraj was killed in the village of Rudnik, also nearby?
A. I haven't heard a thing because I'm not educated and I'm not interested in those things. So I haven't heard and I haven't asked.
JUDGE MAY: Mr. Milosevic, there can be little point putting these things to the witness. She says she doesn't know. In due course, as you've been told before, you can put evidence before us about them, but there's no point going on asking her about them when she doesn't know.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. May, I attempted to determine at least one fact for certain, and I want to tell you that everything we've heard so far was copied from the book of The Fund of Humanitarian Law, pages 345 and 346, whereas these events that are mentioned as taking place in Izbica were copied from the pages 343 up to 352. So everything that we heard being testified to here was copied from that book. I want to say that the Prosecutor is manipulating with these witnesses. The Prosecutor coldly ascribes this to me these events, although they don't know who in fact perpetrated them. They claim to have 1100 evidence that police and the army arrested the culprits, the perpetrators of these crimes. They are very serious documents confirming this, and I don't wish to continue -- I don't want to continue with these questions to which I'm not being given proper answers.
JUDGE MAY: Mr. Milosevic, you have now mentioned a document. You could put that document before us, and we will consider it in due course. If there is any question of manipulation by the Prosecution, of course we'll deal with it, but there's been none so far. Now, this witness has given evidence. If you have any more questions about that evidence, you should ask it, otherwise, we'll bring the cross-examination to a close.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I will put just one more question, the same that was put by the Prosecution; namely, the Prosecutor asked something along these lines, whether these people ran and whether they fled and whether that had anything to do with the NATO bombing, which I would describe as just half of the question that I want to put. So my full question would be:
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. Did the fact that these people were fleeing have anything to do with the fact that there was shooting going on in the territory where they lived? There was combat operations between army and the KLA, which was assisted by the NATO.
A. I don't know that. I've only seen the Serbs shoot at us, because NATO wasn't shooting at us. We were not free to go anywhere.
JUDGE MAY: Yes. Mr. Tapuskovic, do you want to ask anything? 1101
MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, since you were provided the witness's statements which had been given to the investigators before, in these statements she discussed how the residents of her village had problems with the army and the police. And if you allow me, I would like to put several questions to the witness regarding this.
JUDGE MAY: Yes.
MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] I sincerely regret all the events that occurred and all the misfortune that she suffered. Questioned by Mr. Tapuskovic:
Q. [Interpretation] I would like to ask you the following, madam: Did these problems that you had with the army and police -- and the police have to do anything with the fact that they frequently searched your house?
A. They have searched our house frequently. They came to search for weapons, to get money from us and so on.
Q. Previously --
JUDGE ROBINSON: What page in the witness's statement are you referring to?
MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Page 1, Your Honour, of her statement dated 14 May 1999. So first page of that statement given on the 14th of May, 1999.
JUDGE MAY: Yes.
MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. On that occasion, on the 14th of May when you gave a statement, 1102 you discussed how they searched the house, looking for weapons. At that point, you did not mention them looking for money.
A. They were looking for weapons, but they have also taken money from us. We -- my husband has an old gun from my grand grandfather, and they took it away. And I don't know.
Q. Very well. I understood you well. Is it true that on occasions when they would find some weapons in the houses, as was the case when the police looked for weapons in your house, that then, upon finding weapons, they would take the men from the house and interrogate them?
A. Yes.
Q. Is it true that this lasted for several years until the KLA presence in your area forced the Serb police to leave you alone?
A. As far as I know, we didn't have any bases there in Izbica, not in our village, not in Izbica.
Q. This is what you said when you were interviewed on the 14th of May, 1999. This is what I saw in your statement. This is how you explained it on that occasion.
A. I can't understand.
Q. On that occasion, you stated that these problems that you had with the police lasted all the way up until the presence of the KLA in your area caused the Serb police to leave you alone. Yes or no, please.
A. I haven't said that.
Q. Was your husband a member of the KLA from the very beginning, and participated in the operations always, and stayed in camps together with other KLA members? This is what you stated when you gave your statement 1103 to the OTP investigators.
A. I don't know. I don't know. For as long as we were there, he wasn't a member of the KLA. When he had to go, because he was not -- we were not left alone, I don't know afterwards what happened.
Q. Then, as you said, the NATO bombing began, and you said during your chief examination that the Srbica ammunition factory had been hit.
A. Yes.
Q. Yes, but previously you said that some kind of an antenna had also been hit. Could you please explain this to us? What antenna was this all about?
A. I don't know how I've said that. For the factory, for the munition factory, yes, but as far as the antenna is concerned, I can't remember.
Q. This is what you said on that occasion when you gave this statement. Can you tell me how far this ammunition factory is from the place where you lived? Were you able to detect anything, anything that took place in that factory?
A. No. No, because we are two and a half hours away. I didn't know a thing. Far from Skenderaj.
Q. Yes, but two nights later, two nights after the beginning of bombing, your husband came home and warned you to get ready urgently, to leave that place; is that true?
A. Yes.
Q. Did he tell you to take food with you, and clothing, and to hurry up, to leave as soon as possible? 1104
A. He told us -- because we couldn't go anywhere. It was just getting out of the house, because we were afraid for our house because it was going to be burnt down. We feared that.
Q. You also spoke about the shells that were falling, but previously you stated that most of the shells fell in the hills area, and it seemed that they were shelling the hills in order to suppress the KLA activity. I've exhausted this topic now.
You previously also stated, and you also mentioned this during your chief examination, that you saw when a burst of fire was opened on Haxhi Thaci and Rexhep Thaci. You said that you witnessed this burst of fire; is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. You saw that the soldiers did the shooting; is that right?
A. They were mixed soldiers and policemen, and I wasn't able to distinguish them. There was just a volley of automatic rifle fire, and they fell to the ground. And we were just women, and we went on, out of fear. I don't know whether it was police or soldiers who fired.
Q. But when you were giving your statement on the 14th of May, 1999, you told the investigator that a member of the paramilitary forces took out his pistol and then fired a shot into the chest of each of them; is that right?
A. No. I said automatic, two at once, and I saw it with my own eyes.
Q. Did they read back your statement to you on the 14th of May, 1999? Did they read back to you what they recorded as your statement?
A. Yes. 1105
Q. And on that occasion, you did not object to what you heard. You did not object upon hearing that this incident was described just as I read it to you, and you gave this statement on the 14th of May, 1999, which means just a few months after this incident took place.
A. What do you mean, 14th of May? I don't understand.
Q. So on the 14th of May, you gave a statement about what you experienced in 1999 while you were in Albania. So you gave this statement, and in that statement you described this event the way I just told you. And when your statement was read back to you, you did not object to this incident being described along these lines. Is that right?
A. Well, I didn't understand.
Q. Very well. When you were in Kraljane, when you arrived in Kraljane, you stated previously that there were no Serb soldiers or policemen there; is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. And when you left Kraljane, you said that you needed one hour to go from Kraljane to Glodjane, and that on that occasion you were driven by the KLA members on tractors on the side roads, and that there were no problems during that ride, there was no shelling going on. Is that right? You were driven there by the KLA. And I have just two more questions.
A. There were. There were. There were civilians.
Q. You said that you did not take your ID documents with you from your house, but rather that your ID documents remained in your house and burnt down. And you also stated that you had them at the time. Last time 1106 you said that even if you had them on you, you would not have turned them over because the man who was taking them away was in civilian clothes. He was an Albanian. And a long way before the border, he --
A. Civilians. I'm not saying that they were Albanians, but that they spoke Albanian as if they were Albanians.
Q. Very well. Just one more question. When you arrived at the border, you did not have to wait. You crossed it right away. And then you said that nobody asked for your documents at all.
A. Yes.
MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
MR. RYNEVELD: One question in re-examination arising from that, and one housekeeping matter, if I may, thereafter. Re-examined by Mr. Ryneveld:
Q. Witness, when you were just being asked by Mr. Tapuskovic about not being asked for your documents at the border, had you earlier been asked for your documents on the way to the border?
A. Yes, in Gjakova.
Q. So by the time you got to the border, that had already been accomplished; is that what you're saying?
A. Yes.
MR. RYNEVELD: I have no further re-examination. The housekeeping matter, if I may --
JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Ryneveld --
MR. RYNEVELD: Yes, Your Honour.
JUDGE ROBINSON: I'd like to congratulate Mr. Tapuskovic on his 1107 line of questioning. I think it is classically the role of the amicus. The accused in this case has not read the witness statements, and what he has been trying to do is to show discrepancies which could be very relevant to the matters at issue, and I think that is classically the role of the amicus.
MR. RYNEVELD: Yes, Your Honour, I wholeheartedly concur, which is also why, you'll recall, I intended -- I brought these sections to my learned friend's attention and also tried to ensure that the statements would get to all parties. And it's that -- it's the housekeeping matter --
JUDGE ROBINSON: And the statement should be exhibited.
MR. RYNEVELD: That's my point. I don't recall them being given numbers, and I would ask that they be given numbers. Now that they have actually been cross-examined on by Mr. Tapuskovic, I think it's only proper that they be received and be given proper exhibits numbers. Thank you.
THE REGISTRAR: The statement of May 1999 will be Exhibit 22, and the other statement of October 2001 will be Prosecution Exhibit 23.
JUDGE MAY: As far as the witness is concerned, that concludes her evidence. We would like to thank you, madam, for coming to the International Tribunal to give your evidence. You're now free to go.
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
[The witness withdrew]
JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Nice.
MR. NICE: Your Honour indicated this morning that we wouldn't 1108 start with another witness until administrative matters have been dealt with, and so there isn't another witness available to start now. I don't know if you want to deal with administrative matters or start to deal with them now.
JUDGE MAY: Yes.
MR. NICE: Or certainly list the matters that we ought to deal with.
JUDGE MAY: Yes.
MR. NICE: So far as 92 bis statements are concerned, a motion has been filed at lunchtime, I think, and I rather doubt if you've had an opportunity yet to see it. We made sure that -- we have some courtesy copies available now, but I'm not asking you to read them straightaway. I respectfully suggest that that matter be put over until tomorrow morning for consideration. We may be able to deal with one or two other matters.
JUDGE MAY: It may be beyond that, because it seems to me that this being the first occasion, we've got a make a ruling. It would be sensible to have a substantial number of statements to consider.
MR. NICE: Certainly.
JUDGE MAY: And rather than ruling in a vacuum, to do it in relation to specific statements.
MR. NICE: Yes. We put a schedule together at the back of the motion which lists the statements so far that may fall for admission under 92 bis, but, of course, the issue is a very broad one in the setting of this particular case, and indeed the approach taken in this part of the case may have its consequences for the other parts of the cases yet to 1109 come.
JUDGE MAY: And that's why we need to take our time about it. What would be helpful would be, besides a list, would be the actual statements, because we don't have them.
MR. NICE: I'm sorry. Yes, of course. I'd forgotten that. The reason you don't have them, of course, is one of the other administrative matters we've got to deal with and this: Village binders were -- not village binders. Location binders were being prepared in accordance with an earlier indication by the Chamber that this would be a helpful practice. We were prepared in respect of killing sites and then in respect generally of deportation and served in full and indeed with, I think, colour photocopies where relevant, and that's significant, on the accused, who won't have read them, and on the amici. And those binders contained the proposed 92 bis statements collected together location by location or in respect of deportations.
When it became apparent that the Chamber didn't want us to complete that exercise so far as the Chamber was concerned, we arrested it, so far as the Chamber was concerned, and of course in those circumstances, you didn't get the 92 bis statements. So I'll make sure they are provided separately overnight. And that may remind us -- or not overnight, as soon as court rises this afternoon. But that may remind us that the binder issue is one to which it may be convenient to return to tomorrow because we're anxious to provide materials in a way that will help the Chamber in its work. We can only do that in a sense if guided by the Chamber. 1110 The --
JUDGE MAY: Just while we're on the binders.
[Trial Chamber confers]
JUDGE MAY: Again so we're not talking in a vacuum, I think the best thing would be is if you let us have one example of a binder.
MR. NICE: Certainly.
JUDGE MAY: And then we can look at it, maybe next week return to it again, but it would be helpful to see what's envisaged.
MR. NICE: I know that the binders as served on the accused and the amici contained material that your legal officer informally, I think, suggested shouldn't be included in the binders for yourselves, for example, containing an investigator's summary of events which is a topic to which we may have to return.
I would propose on this occasion that we provide you with, if we can, an exactly identical version of the document served on the accused and on the amici so that you can, even if you don't look at the material that may offend any rules of admissibility provisionally considered to be binding on you, at least you can know what's available to the accused and his associates who it may be do have advantage, I don't know, of looking at some of this material. Because that shows how easy or difficult it is for him to prepare for the various issues as they are coming forward in evidence.
So we'll do that if we can. Yes, we think so. Although the process was arrested, I'm sure we can put one together for the Chamber. So as to 92 bis itself, the motion will be with you this afternoon 1111 or immediately the court rises.
Now, the amount of jurisprudence is comparatively limited. The practical significance of that jurisprudence for this case may be very substantial. I'm quite happy to address the issues tomorrow morning or, if the Chamber so decides, to put it off until people have had more time to think about it.
JUDGE MAY: I think we need to consider it. We need to consider the statements themselves before we hear oral argument and also look at the jurisprudence and your motion. So I think probably next week for that.
MR. NICE: Very good. Can I just deal with a couple of other matters in any event that are still on my mind? One, there's the question of cross-examination by the accused, which I said I would return. And perhaps it would just help if I set out our position, because quite intentionally we've taken a very low intervention rate with the cross-examination by this accused for pretty obvious reasons, really, for those whose understanding of these cases is not entirely limited to what they see on television and films about jury trials. Where you've got professional Judges, intervention is really, frankly, unhelpful, and it's particularly difficult to be effective where you have cross-examination conducted through interpreters, with the delay that that builds in, because by the time you make an intervention, all too often the moment's passed and it can sometimes be unhelpful as well as confusing. And of course, insofar as intervention is concerned to protect witnesses from improper questioning, with professional Judges that's 1112 typically taken care of by the Chamber itself.
We also had in mind, at least thus far, that this unrepresented accused has been finding his feet as to this particular task that he's decided to discharge himself. And for what it's worth, questioning can be revealing of the process of questioning and the questioner. However, we do have to have in mind the effect that questioning can have on witnesses yet to come, and it would be foolish to pretend that this process isn't being given very wide publicity. And we would respectfully suggest to the Chamber that questioning that contains a very large quantity of comment and argument, it would appear to us, may now be capable of giving a misleading impression. In particular, it may be seen, not of course by Your Honours, we understand that, but elsewhere as really adducing evidence.
And so we would respectfully suggest that the accused, who must now understand the Rules very well, should be kept wherever possible, and it will save time if he is kept, be kept wherever possible to asking questions and not to building comments into them. Your Honour, I've been aware that the particular provisions of Rule 90, as to cross-examination by counsel, were amended -- or not amended, were interpreted in the direction given to the accused in a way that requires of him less than is required of counsel. I have in mind in particular that under 90(H)(ii):
"In cross-examination of a witness who is able to give evidence relevant to the case for the cross-examining party ..." Excuse me one minute. 1113 "In cross-examination of a witness who is able to give evidence relevant to the case for the cross-examining party, counsel shall put to the witness the nature of the case of the party for whom that counsel appears which is in contradiction of the evidence given by the witness." So it's mandatory for counsel.
In the order that Your Honours made effective on this particular accused, under "Annex B, Cross-examination Rule 90," matters were expressed differently because it was said it was his opportunity to ask questions relating to his case, the case which he wished to put forward. We would obviously be much assisted, so that it's not -- so that it's not mandatory in the way that it reads. We, and we suspect the Chamber, would be much assisted by the accused putting his case to witnesses. He's plainly in all ways capable of doing so, and it's only when cases are joined by the putting of a case that both the Prosecution and the Chamber are in a position to know how to deal with evidence to come, what evidence should indeed be brought, what evidence, for example, may come in under 92 bis and what should not. And in cross-examinations that have been extensive on material arguably less central or arguably peripheral, it has been noticeable that from time to time the accused has not focused on the central issue, which is the issue of deportation and associated acts, in respect of which a case should be put.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Nice, in my view he has been putting his case. Perhaps not in so many words, but it is becoming pretty clear to me at any rate what his case is from his line of questioning. He -- the Chamber has been fairly relaxed in addressing issues which might be 1114 considered peripheral, but I think we have taken that approach because the accused is representing himself. But your case can be put in in many ways. In the system from which we come, it is put in a particular way, but notwithstanding the use of specific and express language, which indicates that the case is being put.
In my view, the accused's case is quite apparent. And it may be that the Chamber will consider giving further guidance to him in this matter.
MR. NICE: Well, I'm grateful for that helpful indication. And all I would say in addition to what I've already said is this: It really is quite important for us to know, in the case of witnesses who are giving evidence that they've left for a particular reason, whether that reason is being challenged and, if so, whether an alternative is being advanced, but there it is.
Your Honour, that's all I desire to say about cross-examination, having drawn to your attention the particular form of the order and its contrast with Rule 90(H)(ii).
JUDGE MAY: Mr. Nice, we obviously knew what the order was -- the Rule was when we made the order. We are dealing here with a litigant in person, who is in a different position to a professional counsel appearing for an accused, and the order was tailored to have that matter in account.
We of course take note of your concerns. We have them in mind. As Judge Robinson has indicated, it may be that we will be returning to this issue, and we would be grateful for the assistance of the amicus in 1115 it, but in particular on this topic: What should be the scope of cross-examination on issues other than those directly related by the witness when giving evidence? In particular, what should be the scope of cross-examination allowed on matters involving the KLA, for instance, and also the NATO bombing, having in mind that the accused will have the opportunity, of course, of putting evidence in front us in due course? To what extent should cross-examination be permitted on those issues? How broad should it be?
MR. KAY: Would Your Honour like a paper from us on that matter? Would that be helpful? Because it might be, as it is such an important subject, a useful matter to have time to reflect upon rather than just having oral argument.
JUDGE MAY: Yes, it would be. And perhaps you could extend it, if you're going to put something on paper, to considering this, which is behind all this, which is the extent to which in international criminal proceedings the defence of tu quoque, as it's called, i.e., "the other side is to blame" -- now, what is the extent to which that can be advanced? Some tribunals have taken a very strict view of that.
MR. KAY: Yes.
JUDGE MAY: And we would be grateful for assistance from you on that topic, to what the correct approach is.
MR. KAY: Yes.
JUDGE MAY: We haven't ruled it out, of course, so far, evidence or questions on this area, but it may be argued by some that it's strictly irrelevant. 1116
MR. KAY: We'll research the matter and perhaps include it within the same paper so that all the issues can be considered together.
JUDGE MAY: Thank you.
MR. NICE: And, Your Honour, although we've taken a very non-interventionist role in relation to that particular defence, I think the time has also come for us to address you, perhaps in writing, on that issue as well, and I hope that will be helpful. Subject to all these matters I've raised this afternoon, I intend to pursue the essentially non-interventionist role wherever possible, and I assume that that's what the Chamber, in charge of its own procedure, wishes of us.
JUDGE MAY: Yes. You can rest assured that we approve that approach.
MR. NICE: Yes.
JUDGE MAY: This is not a jury trial, where it is helpful to have counsel bobbing up and down and making objections. Rather, the reverse. It takes up a lot of time and usually is to no point. This is a Tribunal of professional Judges and should be allowed to decide for itself when questions or anything of that sort are improper or not or inadmissible.
MR. NICE: Your Honour, then mindful, as I am, of the time, and seeing that Mr. Boas isn't here, he having particular responsibility for the Croatia and Bosnia part of the trial, I know that there are some outstanding issues in relation to that part of the trial to be dealt with, in particular, issues about timing of service of documents. Can I make one point now, although I'd be grateful, if possible, for the opportunity to develop it a little more tomorrow, and it reverts 1117 back to what the Prosecutor was herself saying the other day to you about her undertakings, and I think they were her undertakings to the Appeals Chamber about timing and about provision of pre-trial briefs and witness statements being conditional. You will remember that, and you will remember that there was a reference to one of the Rules. In fact, what the Prosecutor had in mind, I think, was 65 ter (E)(i), which refers to the timing of the final version of the Prosecutor's pre-trial brief and so on, which by, as it were, implication allows for the possibility of conditional or provisional ones. Be all that as it may, it was, of course, the understanding of the Prosecution that it was possible, as has been done in other cases but in different circumstances, to present documents on a provisional basis. Well, Your Honour, I note -- I have in mind, of course, what Your Honour said to the Prosecutor a week or so ago.
Can I, however, ask the Chamber to give very serious consideration to this or these two realities: As a result of what is being asked by the accused in respect of proposed 92 bis statements and as a result of any decision that may be made, there may be inevitably some change in the overall time scale of this part of case. Whether we like it very much or not, that may be inevitable.
The second reality is that the pre-trial brief in the Plavsic/Krajisnik case, which is, of course, in many ways closely associated with this case, is due in at the end of April. Now, it is desirable, of course, and indeed important that the Prosecution in these cases is coordinated as opposed to the reverse. The Plavsic/Krajisnik 1118 material certainly can't be advanced before that date, and it would be of very considerable assistance to the Prosecution and ultimately saving of any of the sorts of appeal problems that have been arising in other cases which have been parallel but tried in a disjointed way, it would be extremely helpful for us if we could certainly have that extra month, both to ensure that what we are advancing as a single Prosecution is properly coordinated across relevant cases and also because the time pressures on us, as the Prosecutor was making clear when she spoke of conditional or provisional witness lists and pre-trial briefs, they are so substantial as to make proper compliance with the earlier date very, very difficult, simply by the amount of material to be dealt with. So I would ask you to give some thought to that, but I would be grateful, if I can, to have an opportunity just to develop it a little further tomorrow morning. As you know, I haven't been here yesterday, and there have been one or two matters occupying me today that have kept me away from looking into that a little bit further, and I would like that opportunity.
There's then one other entirely different topic that I wanted to refer to for some time - and I have mentioned to your legal officers, and I don't know that I've mentioned it to the amici, but there's no reason why they shouldn't hear about it now - and it relates to the documents that will be presented to the Court at the close of proceedings at the end of the trial.
As the Court may know, I think, from representations I may have made in either this or in other cases, it often seems to be the case that 1119 different parties to the trial - Prosecution; where there's a Defence, Defence; here perhaps the amici; and maybe those serving the Chamber - will be producing significantly similar documents but not actually identical ones. That presents, I suppose, two interesting problems. One is just that the manpower problem of the same people doing different -- sorry, different people doing the same thing. It presents another problem that sometimes documents that may have some persuasive effect won't necessarily be seen by an accused. And in this particular case, it presents a problem for the accused, who may not be preparing any of these documents which are tools of analysis of one kind or another that would help him.
And I've been considering for some time whether there's a way, with a trial that's going to take a considerable period of time on any reckoning, whether there's a way we can have documents being prepared that will serve everyone's purpose and that will be, in a sense, common documents; for example, chronologies, or documents that provide some analysis of the evidence as it's being given in a table of a kind that, for example, the accused would himself be able to use at the end of the trial to make his comments in presenting written arguments to the Court. I'd like to be given at least a short time in Court for the Chamber to think about that, but I need to have the documents with me to present to you, and I wasn't expecting to have to do this until tomorrow, at the earliest. And so if it's convenient, tomorrow, or otherwise later this week or next week, might we think about that? It may be impossible performance or it may only be capable of being dealt with by the 1120 Prosecution preparing its documents and serving them from time to time on the other parties for them to use. But in an environment where we have to be imaginative in order to be economic and in order to ensure that the accused's interests are properly reflected, this type of document, common to all of us, may serve a significant purpose.
Can I return to that a little later?
JUDGE MAY: You want to return to something tomorrow, you said?
MR. NICE: Well, that tomorrow, and the issue of the dating of the pre-trial brief in Croatia/Bosnia are the two topics I'd like to return to. And the document is a topic I'd like to return to because I'd like to have some models available for you.
JUDGE MAY: Very well. Tomorrow morning, then. The registrar, please.
[Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
JUDGE MAY: We'll sit again tomorrow morning, half past 9.00.
--- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 4.08 p.m., to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 27th day of
February 2002, at 9.30 a.m.