1848
Monday, 11 March 2002
[Open session]
[The accused entered court]
[The witness entered court]
--- Upon commencing at 9.30 a.m.
JUDGE MAY: Yes. Let the witness take the declaration.
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
JUDGE MAY: If you'd like to take a seat.
WITNESS: SAKIR TAC
[Witness answered through interpreter]
JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Saxon.
MR. SAXON: Thank you, Your Honours. Good morning. Examined by Mr. Saxon:
Q. Sir, would you --
A. Good morning.
Q. Would you state your full name, please.
A. Sakir Tac.
Q. Mr. Tac, what is your ethnicity?
A. Turkish.
Q. And is your first language Turkish?
A. Yes.
Q. But are you able to understand the Albanian language?
A. I understand it a bit.
Q. So today we'll be speaking using the Albanian language, but if 1849 there is any moment when you don't understand something that you hear from one of the interpreters, would you please tell us so --
A. Yes.
Q. -- that we can make sure your testimony is clear.
A. Yes.
Q. Can you do that?
A. I agree. Okay.
Q. And are you also able to understand the Serbian language?
A. I understand it a bit.
Q. Mr. Tac, where was your place of birth?
A. I was born in Mamusha.
Q. And is Mamusa in Kosovo?
A. Mamusha, yes, it's in Kosova.
Q. And your date of birth, Mr. Tac, when was that?
A. 5th of March, 1954.
Q. What is your occupation?
A. Farmer.
Q. When you were a younger man, did you perform your military service in what was then the JNA?
A. Yes.
Q. What did you do in the army?
A. I was in the infantry.
Q. Where do you live today?
A. In the village of Mamusha.
Q. Did you live in Mamusa in 1999, Mr. Tac? 1850
A. Yes.
Q. Today, are most of the residents of Mamusa of Turkish ethnicity, like you?
A. Yes. Yes. Ninety per cent Turkish and 10 per cent Albanian.
Q. And in 1999, were most of the residents of Mamusa also Turkish, with a minority of Albanians?
A. Yes, that's right.
Q. Did any Serbs live in Mamusa in 1999?
A. There have never been Serbs in Mamusha.
Q. 1999, approximately what was the normal population of Mamusa?
A. In the village of Mamusha alone?
Q. Yes.
A. About 5.500 to 6.000.
Q. All right. Mr. Tac, I'd like to show you a map, please.
MR. SAXON: And I'm going to ask the usher for some assistance now. We have a map which will need a number, if Madam Registrar could also assist us.
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
MR. SAXON: And if copies of this map could be distributed to the Judges, to the accused, to the amici, and one to the Registry --
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Right.
MR. SAXON: -- and if a copy could be placed on the ELMO, please.
THE REGISTRAR: Prosecution Exhibit 51.
MR. SAXON: If I could ask that map could be projected on our screens so that everyone can see it. 1851
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
MR. SAXON:
Q. Mr. Tac, I'd like you to take a look at that map, and hopefully you'll be able to --
A. Yes.
Q. -- identify some areas on it. Where -- in what municipality, first of all, is the village of Mamusa?
A. In Prizren municipality.
Q. All right. Could you take up the pointer that's on the desk in front of you and point on the map that's on that projector and point out where Prizren --
A. Here. Prizren is here.
Q. All right. And let's go a little bit more slowly, please. And where is the village of Mamusa?
A. [Indicates]
Q. All right. Mr. Tac, if you could, could you pick up a pen - and hopefully there's a pen on the table in front of you - and draw a circle where your village is.
A. [Marks]
Q. Thank you. And if you could, Mr. Tac, could you write your initials, ST, next to that circle, please.
A. [Marks]
Q. Thank you. Mr. Tac, apart from Mamusa, were there any other towns or villages -- are there any other towns or villages in that area of Kosovo where the population is mostly of Turkish ethnicity? 1852
A. Apart from Mamusha, there were Turks in Prizren, in Prishtina, and in other towns a few, but really only in Mamusha there were Turks.
MR. SAXON: All right. That exhibit could be removed from the ELMO now. Thank you.
Q. Mr. Tac, I'd like to ask you, please, to turn your mind to the events of March 1999, if you will. In March of 1999, was there any KLA presence --
A. Yes.
Q. -- in Mamusa?
A. There wasn't.
Q. At the same time, around March of 1999, did the Serb police patrol in Mamusa from time to time?
A. They often came to watch the village.
Q. And Mr. Tac, do you recall when NATO forces began bombing in parts of Kosovo on the 24th of March, 1999? Do you recall that?
A. Yes, I remember.
Q. Was there ever any NATO bombing in Mamusa?
A. No, there wasn't.
Q. Did the NATO bombing in Kosovo make you afraid?
A. No, they didn't. We were on their side.
Q. Could you be a little bit more specific as to what -- when you say they didn't make you afraid --
A. No, we weren't afraid. We were all there in the village.
Q. Did you and your family remain in Mamusa throughout the war in 1999? 1853
A. Yes. We were all in Mamusha.
Q. What happened, Mr. Tac, in Mamusa on the evening of the 25th of March, 1999? Do you recall?
A. On the 25th of March, in Mamusha, at about 10.00 at night, a whole group of refugees came, about 1.000.
Q. And if you know, Mr. Tac, where did these refugees come from?
A. They came from the surrounding villages. They all came from the villages round about to Mamusha.
Q. What was the ethnicity of the refugees who came to Mamusa that night?
A. They were Albanians.
Q. Did you speak to any of them?
A. The whole village was absolutely crammed full of them.
Q. Did any of these refugees stay in your house that night?
A. Yes, they did.
Q. And did they tell you -- did any of them tell you why they came to Mamusa?
A. Yes. They said because it was quiet. To save their lives, that was why they came to us.
Q. So why would they come to Mamusa, why would these refugees come to Mamusa to save their lives? What was special about Mamusa?
A. Mamusha was very quiet at this time. There had been no conflicts. They had come to save their lives.
Q. And approximately how many people of Albanian ethnicity sought shelter in Mamusa beginning on the 25th of March? 1854
A. On the 25th of March, they came about 10.00 at night. We didn't see them, so we couldn't tell how many there were.
Q. By the next day, could you give an estimate as to how many people were there?
JUDGE MAY: He has said a thousand.
MR. SAXON: He did say a thousand on that night, Your Honour.
A. No. No. On that day, we didn't see, but when we came out after two days later, there were about 30.000.
MR. SAXON:
Q. Mr. Tac, let's move forward to the events of 27 March 1999. Were you in Mamusa on that day?
A. Yes, in Mamusha.
Q. What happened on the 27th of March, 1999 in Mamusa?
A. On the 27th of March, 1999, at about 10.00 or 11.00, the army came, with tanks, and entered Mamusha.
Q. And at this time I'd like to show you an exhibit, Mr. Tac.
MR. SAXON: And if the usher could assist me again to show Exhibit 17 to the witness.
Q. Mr. Tac, I'd like to ask you to take a look at the photograph that has been placed on the projector next to you. A minute ago, you said the army came in tanks, and I'm wondering if you could look at the photographs --
A. Yes.
Q. -- if you could look at the photographs on those pages on the projector and see if you can identify a photograph containing a tank as 1855 you know it, the kind of tank that came on the 27th of March. Can you take a look on the projector next --
A. There are none of them here.
MR. SAXON: Mr. Usher, can you put another page on, please.
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There. They had -- they had long barrels.
MR. SAXON:
Q. And what number? Which photo, which number of photo are you pointing to, Mr. Tac?
A. Number 6.
Q. All right. Thank you very much.
MR. SAXON: If those photographs could be removed now, please. And if we could have Exhibit 18 placed on the ELMO as well.
Q. Mr. Tac, I'd like to ask you to take a look at the photographs that are on the exhibit that's to your left and see if you can identify the -- a photograph or photographs containing the uniform resembling the uniforms worn by the soldiers that came to Mamusa on the 27th of March, if it's there in that exhibit.
A. Number 5. They were camouflage uniforms.
Q. All right. Are there any other photos that also resemble the uniforms that you saw?
A. The soldiers in green like that.
Q. And which number are you pointing to now?
A. Number 5.
Q. All right. Thank you very much. That can be removed now. 1856 Mr. Tac, when the Serb army first arrived in Mamusa on the 27th of March, where were the residents and the refugees that day?
A. In among the houses.
Q. What was the atmosphere like?
A. They came to the middle of the village -- into the middle of the village with tanks, and the refugees were among the houses, and they told us all to come out into the centre of the village.
Q. And at some point did the residents and the refugees leave their houses and come to the centre?
A. We all went out with all the refugees and all the villagers of Mamusha into the centre of the village.
Q. Mr. Tac, is there a road that runs through the centre of Mamusa?
A. Yes, there is. There is a road. It is a long one, and all the road was full of people.
Q. Did anyone give any instructions to the people gathered in the centre at that time?
A. The soldiers came in among them. I don't know who they were, but they came in, in around the people.
Q. Were any instructions given to the people at that time?
A. Everybody was ordered to go out into the middle of the village, the residents and the refugees alike.
Q. And what happened when all the people had gathered in the middle of the village?
A. Yes. We went out of the houses and left the houses empty, and we went out into the middle of the village and they said to us, "You of 1857 Mamusha go on one side, and you refugees on another side."
Q. And when you say on one side or the other side, are you referring to the road that runs through the centre of Mamusa?
A. No. No. The population of Mamusha at one side and then the Albanian refugees separately.
Q. All right. What language did the soldiers speak?
A. Serbian.
Q. Were you able to understand what they said?
A. Yes, we understood. They said, "Separate yourselves. Refugees on one side."
Q. And did the people -- did the people gathered there follow the soldiers' instructions and divide into two groups, separate themselves?
A. We separated into two groups.
Q. Mr. Tac, why did the people follow the army's instructions on that day?
A. We -- we were afraid. What else could we do?
Q. And when the people were divided into two groups that day, what did the soldiers or their commander, if there was one, say to the people?
A. They said, "You people of Mamusha bring out your carts, buses, trucks, everything you've got, and fill them with refugees and take them away from here."
Q. How did you feel at that time?
A. He told me to get trucks and fill them with refugees, and all our friends came out on the street with these vehicles and parked them there and started to fill them up with people, all the buses and trucks. 1858
Q. Did any of the displaced persons, the refugees who were in Mamusa on that day, have their own vehicles?
A. Yes, there were some, but those carts were left in the yards.
Q. Did the soldiers -- or what, if anything, did the soldiers tell the refugees to do with their vehicles?
A. We filled those carts and cars that had come out, and then they asked, "How did all these people get to Mamusha?"
Q. And what was the response?
A. We told them that they had come with tractors and horses and carts and anything that they had.
Q. And then what, if anything, did the soldiers say to do with those tractors and trailers and carts belonging to the refugees?
A. All our vehicles were filled up, and they said, "All right. Don't you use your carts, but let them go out with all their own carts and let them all go out in the streets with what they have."
Q. And at that time, did any of the refugees bring their own vehicles?
A. Yes. Those who had their carts went back and fetched them, whatever they had, and they got on board, and then they set out.
Q. Let's go a little bit more slowly, Mr. Tac. Were the soldiers in Mamusa carrying weapons that day?
A. Yes. They were all armed.
Q. Did you feel that the people had any choice as to whether to obey the soldiers or not that day?
A. The people had no choice. We had to obey their orders. There was 1859 BLANK PAGE 1860 nothing we could do about it.
Q. Did any of the displaced Albanians that you saw, any of the refugees that you saw in Mamusa that day, have any weapons?
A. You mean the Albanians? No, the Albanians didn't have any weapons. If they did, they would have killed us. They were simply refugees: children, women, elderly people.
Q. Were any of the refugees that you saw, the Albanians, wearing a uniform that day in Mamusa?
A. No.
Q. Did you notice any planes bombing in the area that day?
A. No, I didn't.
Q. Did you see a battle going on or hear the sounds of a battle taking place on that day?
A. No. In Mamusha village, there was never any fighting, not only that day, but never; never in the past did we have any fighting there.
Q. At some point was a convoy made of the vehicles owned by the refugees in Mamusa?
A. Yes. There was a convoy of refugees. We, the inhabitants of Mamusha, were sitting aside.
Q. Do you own a truck, Mr. Tac?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. Did you use your truck on that day or did you remain in Mamusa?
A. That day, I did not use my truck. Other friends of mine did. I, no; I didn't.
Q. Did you watch the convoy of vehicles when it left Mamusa? 1861
A. Yes. We all saw them leave for Prizren or I don't know where they were taking them.
Q. On that day, did the Albanian residents of Mamusa remain in Mamusa or did they also join the convoy?
A. They were in Mamusha together. We were all together there.
Q. So just so that the record is clear, the Albanians who lived in Mamusa stayed there on that day; is that correct?
A. Yes. They stayed together with us, the Albanians of Mamusha.
Q. Mr. Tac, after the convoy and the refugees left, did the commander of the soldiers say anything to the people who remained behind in Mamusa?
A. Yes. There was a commander. I don't know who he was. He told us that all women, elderly, and children should go back to their homes.
Q. And what happened after all the elderly and women and children went back to their homes?
A. We remained there. Then they gathered us together in the middle of the village, all of us villagers of Mamusha.
Q. And what was said to the villagers of Mamusa at that time by the soldiers?
A. One of them got on a ladder and then he said to us, "Look here, you villagers of Mamusha. If you do something against us, we are going to burn your homes and to kill you." And we said, "No, we are not going to do anything to you."
Q. Just so that the record is clear, the translation that I heard says that one of them got on a ladder. Would it be more accurate to say that one of them got on a staircase? 1862
A. Yes. Yes. It was a small staircase, and he got on top of it. In front of a shop, it was. And he told us, "If you fire at us, if you do something against us, we are going to kill you, to burn your homes." We said, "No, we aren't going to do anything against you," and we never did, in fact.
Q. And in fact, at any time, Mr. Tac, during the day of the 27th of March, or that evening, did anyone from Mamusa shoot at the soldiers?
A. No. We went back to our homes, all of us.
Q. Now, you mentioned before that some of your friends from Mamusa were driving vehicles in the convoy that left that day towards Prizren. Approximately what time did your --
A. Yes. They left. First there were the buses, trucks from Mamusha that left to Prizren, then the refugees got on their own cars and, as I said, we were left behind.
Q. Mr. Tac, I understand that, so I'd like you just to listen to my question. My question is: Approximately what time did your friends who drove vehicles in that convoy return to Mamusa?
A. I don't know. We didn't see them that night. We saw them on the next day but not that night.
Q. All right. On the following day, did you have an opportunity to speak to any of your friends who had driven a vehicle in that convoy?
A. Yes.
Q. Did they tell you where they had taken the refugees?
A. Yes. They told us that they had taken the refugees to the border with Albania. 1863
Q. Let's talk now, Mr. Tac, about the evening of 27 March, 1999. On that evening, where were you?
A. I was at home. All of us were at home.
Q. And what happened in Mamusa that evening?
A. That night - it was about 6.00 in the afternoon - we saw that the houses of the village started to go in flames.
Q. Was it dark?
A. Yes, it was dark. About 6.00.
Q. And how were you able to see what was happening?
A. We were in our own homes and then we saw flames coming out of some houses. We were inside. It was from a distance. We could see the smoke and the flames. We were -- we went to our cellars to hide there.
Q. About how many houses were burned in Mamusa that night?
A. About 30, I think.
Q. Did anyone in those houses die as a result of the fires that night?
A. That night, we didn't know what was happening, I mean in terms of people who got killed or injured. On the next day, we found out that seven people had been killed.
Q. What was the ethnicity of the persons who perished that night in Mamusa?
A. Three Turks, four Albanians.
Q. At some point during that evening, the 27th of March, did a tank come near the village of Mamusa?
A. Yes. A tank was coming in the direction of Mamusha. When it came 1864 in the village, we went to a brook nearby. No. I'm sorry. The tank had an accident and rolled over.
Q. Who did the tank belong to, if you know?
A. It belonged to the army, the Serb army.
Q. When you say that the tank rolled over, where did this tank roll over?
A. It rolled over about 200, 300 metres above the village it was.
Q. After this tank rolled over, were more homes set on fire in Mamusa?
A. We didn't know what was happening, but we found out that this burning stopped.
Q. All right. Did you actually see the tank where it was lying when it rolled over?
A. I didn't see the tank that night, but on the next day when they came to pull it over with a crane, we saw the army troops passing by in the middle of the village to go to the place where the tank had the accident.
Q. Were you able to see who started the fires in Mamusa on the evening of 27 March?
A. I didn't see who set the fire, but people there know.
Q. The following day, on the 28th of March, did you discuss the fires with any of the people who fled the burning homes?
A. They left, and then the army came and they set fire to the houses, and they drove us away from our homes. It was the Serb Yugoslav army that did that. 1865
Q. Mr. Tac, did anyone tell you that it was the Serb army who set fire to those homes?
A. Yes, they did. The Serb army has burned the homes, and they drove us away from our homes, and they killed seven people.
Q. Mr. Tac, my question is: Who told you that? Do you recall who told you that?
A. Our villagers who left their homes, they told us.
Q. And on the 28th of March, was there a funeral in Mamusa?
A. Yes, there was a funeral. We buried the people who were killed.
Q. Let's move forward now to the events of the 2nd of April, 1999. Mr. Tac, on that day, were you at home in Mamusa?
A. Yes, I was in Mamusha.
Q. At about noon on April 2nd, what happened in Mamusa?
A. On the 2nd of April - it was in the afternoon at about 12.00 or 1.00 - the police came to the centre of the village.
Q. Approximately how many police came to Mamusa that day?
A. Five or six, I think.
Q. And what, if anything, did the police tell the people in the centre of the village to do?
A. They -- they told us to give us [as interpreted] our trucks.
Q. I'm not quite sure --
A. To give them our trucks. They needed our trucks. This is what they told us.
Q. Did the police want the villagers to bring their trucks somewhere? 1866
A. They wanted us to bring out our trucks to the road.
Q. Mr. Tac, did you hear the police give this order or did someone tell you about it?
A. I was at home, and someone told the villagers who went to the middle of the village. He said, "All of you bring out your trucks to the road."
Q. And how were you informed about this order?
A. Some of the trucks were about to leave, and a neighbour of mine came up to me and said, "You, too, should come out with your truck."
Q. And so what did you do?
A. I took my truck and I drove to the road.
Q. When you reached the road, what did you do?
A. When we reached the road, we parked beside the road and we were waiting for them to tell us what they wanted us to do.
Q. When you were parked in a line along that road, did you see the policemen there on the road?
A. Yes. The police were coming around the cars and trucks.
Q. Were the police armed that day?
A. Yes, they were armed.
Q. Mr. Tac, did you come to learn the identity of any of the police at that time?
A. Serb police.
Q. My question really was: Did you learn the identity of any of the individual policemen who were in Mamusa on that afternoon?
A. I didn't know any one of them, but some of my friends said that 1867 this policeman is called Sipka.
MR. SAXON: If I could, I'd like to ask the usher's assistance one more time, and if we could show Exhibit 18, have that placed on the projector, please, once again.
Q. Mr. Tac, I'd like to ask you to please look at the photographs that have been placed to your left, and if you can, if you could point out a photograph that shows the uniforms or uniform worn by the policemen on that day.
A. This blue uniform.
Q. Which number -- which photograph number were you pointing to? Is that 4?
A. This one here. The blue, number 4.
Q. All right. Thank you.
MR. SAXON: That exhibit can be removed now.
Q. Mr. Tac, while you were parked in your truck on the road, did any of the other drivers from Mamusa arrive late or even without their truck?
A. A friend came and said, "My truck has broken down."
Q. And what, if anything, did the man known as Sipka, known to you as Sipka, say to this friend whose truck had broken down?
A. He said, "Come out with your truck in five minutes, otherwise I'll burn your house."
Q. What language did Sipka speak?
A. Serbian.
Q. Were you close enough to hear him?
A. Yes. I was just there by my vehicle and he was forced to bring 1868 his vehicle and come.
Q. Eventually, Mr. Tac, about how many trucks were lined up along that road?
A. There were 12 of us.
Q. And when all the trucks were lined up, what, if anything, did the policeman known as Sipka do?
A. He walked along the trucks and told us to start them up, get ready.
Q. And then what happened?
A. We started the trucks up and got into the vehicles, and he was in front and we were behind him.
Q. And did you and the other drivers follow Mr. Sipka in your trucks?
A. Yes. We all went after him.
Q. Why? Why did you follow him?
A. Well, he told us to come out in our trucks and set off after him. We were forced to set off after him.
Q. And when the trucks left the village of Mamusa on that day, where did they go?
A. To Medred, Xerxe, and then to Pirana.
Q. Is there a road junction in Pirane, an intersection?
A. There's a crossroads to Rahovec and to Prizren.
Q. And did Mr. Sipka stop anywhere?
A. He stopped at Pirana and told us -- and indicated to us with his hand: Go up there towards Rahovec.
Q. And did you and the other drivers continue driving towards 1869 Rahovec?
A. We went on towards Rahovec, and when we arrived in Xerxe, the police stopped us.
Q. And what did the police who stopped you in Zrze tell you to do?
A. In Xerxe, they pointed us towards Rahovec.
Q. And eventually did you pass through Rahovec?
A. We were directed to Rahovec, and the police in Rahovec stopped us again.
Q. And what did the police who stopped you in Rahovec tell you to do?
A. They told us to go to Malisheva.
Q. And Mr. Tac, eventually did you arrive in the centre of Malisheva?
A. Yes. We went to Malisheva.
Q. And what did you see when you arrived in the centre of Malisheva?
A. There were a lot of refugees in Malisheva, and Serbian police and soldiers surrounding the refugees there.
Q. When you say "a lot," could you describe what you mean by "a lot"?
A. There were -- I can't give you a number, but there was an unimaginable number of refugees there.
Q. To your knowledge, Mr. Tac, what was the ethnicity of these refugees in Malisevo that day?
A. Albanians.
Q. When you arrived in Malisevo that day, did you see any planes dropping bombs?
A. No. We didn't see anything like that. 1870
Q. Did you hear the sounds of shooting or of a battle taking place?
A. No. I didn't hear anything like that. I only saw refugees, policemen, and soldiers.
Q. When you parked in the centre of Malisevo, what, if anything, did the police do?
A. The police told us to get down and to open down the gates of the trucks. So we opened up the trucks.
Q. And what happened then?
A. Then they told the refugees, "Go on. Get into the trucks."
Q. And did the refugees there in Malisevo get into the trucks?
A. They did, and the trucks were filled up and we closed them.
Q. Mr. Tac, how did you know that the people there in Malisevo were refugees?
A. They were refugees. Malisheva was absolutely full. All the area -- the entire area of Malisheva had gathered there.
Q. My question is: How did you know that these people were -- that these people were refugees who had gathered in Malisevo? Did you speak to any of them?
A. We spoke to them and said, "Here you go. Go on, get into our trucks."
Q. I'll move on. After the trucks from Mamusa were filled with people, what, if anything, did the police tell you to do?
A. I didn't understand the question. I was in the truck.
Q. All right. After the refugees, as you called them, got into the trucks, what, if anything, did the police tell you to do? 1871 BLANK PAGE 1872
A. They said, "You set off for Prizren." They said, "Go on. When they're full up, off you go."
Q. Well, how did you and the other drivers know where to go?
A. They said -- beforehand they said, "Fill up the trucks and then go to Albania." They told us.
Q. All right. And did you then begin to drive towards the Albanian border?
A. We set off from Malisheva to Rahovec, Xerxe, Pirana, Prizren.
Q. Along the route, were you stopped along the way?
A. Yes, they stopped us at Ostrozub. The Serbian army stopped us at Ostrozub, about ten kilometres from Malisheva.
Q. And what did these soldiers do when they stopped you?
A. They stopped us and asked for money from us.
Q. What language did these men speak?
A. Serbian.
Q. Did you give them any money?
A. They forced us to give them some. I had about 500 marks, and I was forced to give them to them.
Q. After you gave these men some money, did you continue to drive towards the Albanian border?
A. They held us up about 20 minutes and then we set off.
Q. And did you continue to drive towards the Albanian border?
A. Yes. We continued on toward the Albanian border.
Q. Along the way, did you see any planes dropping any bombs?
A. No. Rain was falling. We didn't see anything. 1873
Q. Along the way, did you see any battles taking place or hear the sounds of a battle?
A. No. I didn't see anything like that.
Q. Mr. Tac, were you able to drive as far as the Albanian border that evening?
A. We couldn't get to the border that night. We went as far as Zhur.
Q. Now, is Zhur a village close to the border of Albania?
A. It's about six kilometres away. I don't know exactly, but six or seven.
Q. All right. Why did you stop --
JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Saxon, while they were driving to the Albanian border, was there any Serb police or army with them?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. They -- they weren't with us along the road.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. Proceed.
MR. SAXON: Thank you, Your Honour.
Q. If there were no Serb forces driving with you along the road, why did you continue to drive towards the Albanian border?
A. There wasn't, but they told us to take these people straight to Albania. So we were forced to take them. There was nothing else we could do.
Q. Mr. Tac, why did you stop in the village of Zhur?
A. When we came to Zhur, the road was closed.
Q. When you say the road was closed, do you mean that the road was -- 1874 was full or jammed, or what do you mean by "closed"?
A. It was full of trucks and buses. You couldn't -- you couldn't continue. It was just absolutely full. And we came up against this truck and had to stop ourselves.
Q. So the road between Zhur and the boarder was full. So you couldn't go any further; is that right?
A. We couldn't go any further, uh-huh, so they had to walk.
Q. When you stopped in Zhur, did you say anything to the Albanians in your truck?
A. Yes. We told them, "Okay, friends, we have reached Zhur. We can't go any further. We'll have to wait for two days. Can you get off and go on by foot towards Albania?"
Q. And how did the people in your truck respond to that?
A. They said, "Where are we?" "We're in Zhur." "Is the border far?" And I said, "It's six or seven kilometres, no further than that."
Q. And then did the people in your truck leave the truck?
A. "All right," they said, "Thank you for taking us this far." And they got off and got out of the truck.
Q. Was there any discussion then?
A. No. "Thank you for bringing us this far. You brought us as if by plane." And we said goodbye and we said, "Safe journey," and we went one direction, they went in another. And we said, "God willing, you'll be all right," and we went back.
Q. When you say, "We went back," what did you and the other drivers do? 1875
A. We were 12 trucks and we returned to Prizren again.
Q. Were you stopped along the road before you got to Prizren?
A. Yes. The police stopped us in between Zhur and Prizren, along the road.
Q. When the police stopped you at that time, did they ask you anything?
A. They asked us, "Where are you going?"
Q. And how did you respond?
A. We told them that we are those people whom you ordered to take the people to the border, so we are going back home now.
Q. And what response, if any, did the police make to you?
A. The police told us, "Go to Prizren and let everybody know that you are there."
Q. Where specifically in Prizren did you have to go?
A. We went -- at the entrance to Prizren, all of us went and reported that we were back.
Q. When you say "we reported," who did you report to?
A. The police.
Q. All right. Then at that time, when you reported to the police in Prizren, what, if anything, did the police in Prizren tell you and the other drivers to do?
A. After we reported there, they said, "You should go back to Malisheva and get another wave of refugees."
Q. And did you then drive back to Malisevo to pick up more people?
A. No, we did not go. We said to them, "We don't have fuel, so we 1876 can't go." They held us up there for about two hours.
Q. And after about two hours, where did you --
A. After two hours, they let us go, and we set out for our own homes.
Q. And did you and the other drivers return to Mamusa at that time?
A. Yes, we returned to Mamusha, all of us.
MR. SAXON: I'd like to ask the assistance of Mr. Usher again. If we can place the first map that was shown to Mr. Tac a few minutes ago, if we could place that map back on the ELMO, Exhibit 51.
Q. Mr. Tac, you see I've put the same map on the projector next to you, and if you would, I'd like to ask you to help us out, please, to explain the route that you took from Malisevo to the village of Zur that evening. Could you pick up the green marker that's on the desk in front of you and could you draw a line to show the route that you took from Malisevo, going towards the border with Albania, to the village of Zur on the 2nd of April.
A. Yes.
Q. All right. Thank you for that.
MR. SAXON: Your Honour, at this time I would tender Exhibit 51 for admission --
JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Saxon, could he give us an estimate of that distance?
MR. SAXON:
Q. Approximately how many kilometres would it be to drive from Malisevo to Zur, Mr. Tac, if you know?
A. I can't give you an accurate figure, in fact. 1877
Q. About how long did the drive take you on the evening of 2nd April?
A. We didn't have -- we were not in a state of mind to see, to watch the time. Maybe it took us about two hours, I would say.
Q. Very well.
MR. SAXON: At this time, if there's no objection, I would tender Exhibit 51. May I have the Court's indulgence, please.
[Prosecution counsel confer]
MR. SAXON: Your Honours, at this time I have no further questions. Thank you.
JUDGE MAY: Thank you. Yes, Mr. Milosevic.
Cross-examined by Mr. Milosevic:
Q. [Interpretation] Let's start from the end, the end of what Mr. Tac has just been saying. Malisevo was full of refugees, you said; is that right?
A. Yes, that's right.
Q. In your opinion, were those refugees able to be put up somewhere there in Malisevo?
A. They were outside. When I saw them, they were gathered in the middle of Malisheva. There was no place they could go to.
Q. That means it was logical that somebody should take them away from that place, where they had nowhere to go, nowhere to be put up, to be evacuated somewhere, to be taken away to safety somewhere; is that right?
A. I didn't understand that.
Q. They wanted to take refuge somewhere from that place. They didn't 1878 have anywhere to go to be put up there, did they?
A. They didn't tell us that we are going somewhere. The police told us to go and pick them up and take them to Albania. The refugees didn't say anything to us themselves.
Q. And what did the refugees say to you?
A. Nothing. They just got on our trucks, and we drove them in the direction of Albania.
Q. A moment ago you said that they didn't have anywhere to take refuge and to be put up in Malisevo. That's what you said a moment ago.
A. Yes. I said what I did. I mean, I spoke about the people I took to the place. I don't know what happened to the others. The others were left behind.
Q. All right. You helped them leave Malisevo, take them away. And you said that they weren't able to take shelter anywhere or be put up anywhere in Malisevo because there were so many of them. So do you consider that you helped those people?
A. Of course I helped those that I took in my truck, but I don't know what happened to the others that were left behind.
Q. I'm talking about the ones that you took with you. You helped them. You helped them --
JUDGE MAY: He's agreed to that. He's agreed to that.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. Second, you said that you weren't escorted by either the army or the police en route while you were taking away the refugees you helped.
A. Yes. We were not escorted, I said, up to Pirana. The police 1879 escorted us up to Pirana. After Pirana, we were alone. Then in Malisheva, the police appeared again and then we left for the border.
Q. Where did you say the police appeared again? Where was that?
A. Xerxe, Rahovec, again in Malisheva. The police and the army were there.
Q. Yes, but you left Malisevo and took the refugees that you helped. You took them off. And the police stayed in Malisevo, according to your own explanation. Yes or no.
A. Yes.
Q. And when you arrived after, as you yourself said, two hours journey to Zur, was it raining all the time?
A. Yes, it was raining.
Q. Did you stop off anywhere along the road for somebody to get out for any of their needs, requirements, to get some water or things like that?
A. We stopped only in Ostrozub where the army stopped us. After that, after Ostrozub, we didn't stop anywhere else.
Q. Didn't the refugees ask you to stop for them to be able to see to some of their needs?
A. No. No. Who saw to their needs then? We had just to move in the direction of the border, and we stopped nowhere along the route.
Q. Were the refugees hurrying to get there as soon as possible or was it only you who was in a hurry because of your truck?
A. They were sleeping while we were driving. They didn't know where we were driving them. They had no idea. 1880
Q. Didn't they hear what you heard yourself because they were right next to you? So if they told you to drive them off towards Zur or Albania, how come the Albanians didn't hear that? How do you explain that?
A. I didn't understand. Sorry.
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Can you tell him to repeat, please?
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. In Malisevo, you were told to take them off towards the border, to drive them towards the border; is that right? Yes or no.
A. In Malisheva, the police and the army told us, "Drive straight to the border. Take these people there." And this is what we did.
Q. What about the people you were driving? Did they hear that? Did they hear the same thing you heard, what they told you, or were they far away from you? Were you told that in secret or were the people present too?
A. I was in my cabin. I was driving. They were behind. I don't know if they heard this or not. They told us driver to do that -- drivers to do that.
Q. All right. But a moment ago you said that the others didn't know about it, didn't know where they were going. Now you say you don't know if they heard or not where they were being taken. So did they hear or did they not hear? Which of the two is it?
JUDGE MAY: He can't -- he can't answer -- wait a moment. Wait a moment. Wait a moment. He can't answer for them. Now, it appears not very much turns on this. 1881
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right.
JUDGE KWON: Just a second. Mr. Tac, you said earlier that when you took the refugees to Zur, they said to you -- they asked you, "Is the border far?" And you said, "It's no more than six or seven kilometres." And the people said to you, "Thank you for taking us this far." And you --
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] They thanked us for having brought them so far.
JUDGE KWON: Doesn't it mean that they knew already that they were heading to the Albanian border?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know if they knew or not. We just told them that, "This is Zhur, and from here, the border is about six, seven kilometres," and I don't know what happened to them after that.
JUDGE KWON: Okay. Go on, Mr. Milosevic.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes. That's where I was going to continue.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. You said you stopped off after Zur because the road was closed; is that right?
A. Yes, that's right.
Q. It was closed because there were many other vehicles that were on the road which were standing there in front of you; is that right?
A. Yes. Yes, because of the other vehicles, buses, trucks. We had to stop there too. 1882
Q. So you stopped at the end of this column?
A. Yes, we stopped at the end of the column.
Q. Why didn't you wait for the column to move forward?
A. We didn't know when the column would start to move forward. We didn't have time to wait there for two days. If we -- if -- we told the refugees, "If you don't want to walk, we can drive you," but they said, "Okay, we will walk."
Q. All right. So you didn't have time to wait for the column to start moving forward.
A. Maybe we had time, but this is what we told them. "Can you walk?" And they said, "Yes," and they left.
Q. All right. Did you or did you not have time? You said you didn't have time to wait, so that you told your passengers, the people on the trucks, that they should go on, on foot.
A. We had time, but they said we would have to wait a long time here, so they set off on foot.
Q. Who decided that they should set off on foot? Did you decide that or did they decide that? Did you decide to tell them to get off and go and continue their journey on foot or did they think it would be better for them to continue on foot? Which of the two is it?
A. We ourselves, all we drivers gathered together, and we said, "Okay. Can you get off and continue on foot?" And they said, "Okay," and they continued on foot.
Q. And then they thanked you for bringing them thus far; is that right? 1883 BLANK PAGE 1884
A. Yes. Yes.
Q. You said a moment ago while you were testifying, "We told the refugees that they couldn't go any further and that they should get off the trucks and continue their journey on foot." That's what you told them, according to your own testimony. Is that right?
A. We told them, "You would have to wait a long time here, and you could set off on foot," and they did.
Q. All right. So that means they set off on foot because they accepted your proposal to do so; is that it?
A. Yes, on foot. It's true; they set off on foot.
Q. At your suggestion?
JUDGE MAY: No. We've been over this.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right. If we've come to that observation, I don't mind. I can go on. But let me go back to the beginning now. I wanted to clear up this matter first, what we've just heard.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. Mr. Tac, were you ever in hospital up until now?
A. Yes.
Q. How long did you spend in hospital?
A. Twelve days.
Q. When did you leave hospital?
A. This was in 1994.
Q. I'm asking you about these recent weeks. Were you in a hospital recently, in the past few weeks? 1885
A. No, I haven't been.
Q. So since 1994, you haven't been to hospital; is that it?
A. No, I haven't been since then.
Q. All right. According to information that I have here, throughout the war, in the village of Mamusa, it was completely quiet. Is that right? Is that correct?
A. Mamusha, during those days, between 24th of March and 2nd April, it was quiet, and then we stayed in the village there. It was not quiet then, but then later on it was.
Q. There were two checkpoints set up by the police on both sides of the village, and life was quiet in the village; is that true? Is that right?
JUDGE MAY: He said that, apart from the times which he's described in his evidence.
THE WITNESS: There was no checkpoint at Mamusha.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. Not in Mamusa. I said near Mamusa, not in Mamusa. There weren't any in Mamusa.
A. I didn't go anywhere after 2nd of April. I didn't see any checkpoints. I was at home.
Q. Do you remember that the locals, during the war, kept an unexploded rocket, air rocket? Did you see that air rocket? They kept it in Mamusa. Missile, sorry. Missile.
A. No, I didn't see this. No bombs fell on Mamusha, and I didn't see anything. 1886
Q. You live in the northern part of Mamusa and you have your own private shop in the house in which you live; is that correct?
A. No, we don't.
Q. Apart from farming, are you a truck driver?
A. Yes. Yes. I drive my own truck.
Q. You said that the village, up until the war, was inhabited 90 per cent by Turks and 10 per cent by Albanians and that that's how it remained after the war as well, that the population structure is 90 per cent Turks, 10 per cent Albanians. Is that right?
A. Yes, that's right. The same. That's right. The same after the war too.
Q. So that means that nothing has changed compared to before the war, nothing has changed in the village of Mamusa since before the war?
A. No, nothing has changed. It's the same. Nothing has changed.
Q. According to my information and the figures, up until the war, the whole village of Mamusa lived in a normal way, as loyal citizens to Serbia, and I also have information that you would go out to all the elections that took place from 1990 to 1997. Is that correct?
A. For myself, I didn't go to the polls. I don't know what the rest did.
Q. Do you know that the locals from Mamusa went to the polls regularly, regardless of the fact that you say that you yourself didn't? Are you aware of that fact?
JUDGE MAY: He says he doesn't know.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] 1887
Q. All right. In the village, there is a primary school, and the director of that primary school was Abdul Tac, a Turk; is that correct?
A. Yes, Abdul Tac. That's right, a Turk.
Q. Are you cousins or related in any way?
A. No, we're not. We're fellow villagers.
Q. The director of the clinic in the village is also a Turk; is that right?
A. Yes, a Turk.
Q. And the director of the post office too, also a Turk; right?
A. Yes, he's a Turk.
Q. Director of the chicken farm, Refki Mazik [phoen], also a Turk; right?
A. He died. Refki died a long time ago. And the farm doesn't work; it doesn't exist.
JUDGE MAY: It's 11.00. We're going to adjourn now. Mr. Milosevic, no doubt you will explain the relevance of those last few questions after the adjournment.
Mr. Tac, we're going to adjourn, as I said, for half an hour. During the adjournment, don't speak to anybody about your evidence and don't let anybody speak to you about it, including members of the Prosecution team.
Let me add this before we adjourn: We will sit this afternoon until a convenient time for a break, about a quarter to 4.00 or so, and thereafter we'll hear the submissions on the written statements before adjourning at half past 4.00. 1888 Half past.
--- Recess taken at 11.00 a.m.
--- On resuming at 11.30 a.m.
JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Milosevic.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. You asked what the relevancy of my question was. The thing is that in normal life with normal interrelations and an indubitable display and exercise of human and political rights that was enjoyed by Turks in Kosovo and Metohija.
Do you remember that, just before the aggression, that Prizren was twice visited by representatives of the Turkish embassy, who talked to Turkish political parties both from Prizren and Mamusa and that at that time mutual satisfaction was expressed between -- with the relations between the authorities and the members of the Turkish minority? Do you remember that?
A. Tell me the question again. I don't know. I'm not a politician. I'm a villager. I'm a peasant. I don't know about these things.
JUDGE MAY: Do you know about a visit to Prizren by representatives of the Turkish embassy just before the war?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. I don't know anything about this.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. And do you remember certain members of the KLA from Mala Krusa, Pirana, Samodreza, and Studencane who hid for a while at your place?
A. I don't know about this. I had no connection with the KLA. I 1889 don't know anything about this.
Q. Are you asserting that not a single time before the war were there any members of the KLA who found shelter at your house, from the villages I mentioned?
A. No, there wasn't. There weren't. Not at my place, and I haven't seen any in the village.
Q. And do you remember the time when just after those members of the KLA were there, the police made a search of a part of your village? Do you remember that?
A. You mean the KLA was in the village and the police searched? No. I never saw anything like that. The police often came, and I am a peasant, and I was in the fields and at home, and I never saw things of this kind.
Q. And who were those Albanians whom you mentioned as being killed, those four Albanians? Do you know their names?
A. They are from the village of Mamusha. Three Albanians and four Turks. The villages of Mamusha.
Q. And do you remember that on the 11th of April, and that was a Sunday, the 11th of April, when you were in Mamusa, according to your own words, do you remember that that day the members of the Turkish ethnic community from the village of Mamusa and from Prizren organised in Prizren a rally to convict -- condemn the aggression of NATO, and it was attended by 15.000 citizens?
JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Saxon.
MR. SAXON: I apologise for the interruption, Your Honour. Just 1890 so that the record is clear and that the witness is not confused, he was never asked about the events of the 11th of April during --
JUDGE MAY: No. So it's something else. Mr. Tac, you're being asked about the 11th of April, and it's said that there was a --
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
JUDGE MAY: -- a meeting there or a rally. Can you help us with that? What happened?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There was no rally in Mamusha, but the police forced us to hold a rally. They forced us. They sent us to Prizren. And if we wouldn't go, they would burn our houses. We couldn't do anything else. What else could we do?
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. Mr. Tac, 15.000 people were at that rally. Are you claiming that all of them were forced to go there? And they were mainly Turks.
A. There were not 15.000 in Mamusha. Those from -- in Mamusha, there were 5.000, 6.000. We were forced and sent by force to the rally, and otherwise we would have had our houses burnt.
Q. I said from Mamusa and Prizren. And the rally was held in Prizren, and almost the entire Mamusa attended. Are you claiming that that was not so?
A. We were all there. We were all there but by force. By force we were sent. We had either to go or they would burn our houses. What else could we do? We had to go. I didn't want to go, but they made me go.
Q. So you participated in that rally against NATO on the 11th of 1891 April because you were forced.
A. Yes. Of course we were forced. There's nothing else I could do. I had no other way out.
Q. And how many people were there at that rally, in your opinion, because you attended?
A. I don't know. There were a lot, but I saw -- I saw --
Q. Nothing can be done by force.
A. Nothing can be done by force.
Q. Do you remember that Adem Koc addressed the rally, among others? He was president of the local commune in your village and also a representative of the Turkish Democratic Party, a Member of Parliament in the Municipal Assembly of Prizren?
A. I didn't know that he was a representative of Mamusha. Perhaps he spoke. I was at a distance. I never saw him.
Q. And you had never seen him. You're saying you'd never seen him?
A. Yes. He lives in Mamusha, but I had no idea he was the chairman of the local village. I don't know.
Q. And do you know that, at the same rally, Sadik Tanjoll also addressed the rally? He was president of the Turkish Democratic Party of Yugoslavia, an attorney-at-law.
A. I don't know who spoke. We were a long way away. We were at the edge. What they said, what they did, I don't know who they were.
Q. And do you know who Zenel Abedil Kures is? Have you ever heard of him? He's also a Turk.
A. I know that he's a Turk, but I don't know what he said. I'm not 1892 interested in this. I'm not a politician. I'm a peasant. I mind my own business.
Q. You must know that he was -- that Mustafa Bakir was headmaster of the primary school Zenel Abedil Kures.
A. I don't know.
Q. Do you remember that he addressed the rally?
A. Perhaps I spoke. All sorts of people spoke. But I'm not interested in who spoke, and I don't know.
Q. And do you remember that Sokol Kushe [phoen], an Albanian, made a speech there? He's a director of a cultural institution in Prizren.
A. I don't know who he is. I don't know. I don't know him at all. I don't know.
Q. Do you know Franjo Prenglusha, also an Albanian, also a deputy of the Municipal Assembly?
A. I don't know any of these people.
JUDGE MAY: I think this topic is exhausted. The witness says he doesn't know who spoke.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. All right. I won't ask him any more about the Turks who addressed the rally, but I do wish to ask him, in this connection, if he remembers that the transport from Mamusa to Prizren was organised by private hauliers from the village of Mamusa, namely, Mamusha Tours and Birlik. Does he remember that?
A. What was organised? To go where?
Q. Transport to Prizren, to the rally. The hauliers were your own 1893 from Mamusa. The Birlik enterprise and Mamusha Tours. Do you remember that?
A. We were with our own vehicles. I don't know. I was with my own truck. All the people, everybody was with their own vehicles.
Q. So you went in your own vehicle to the rally, where you went under duress?
A. Yes, by force.
Q. And do you remember, sometime in mid-May, or more precisely, on the 13th of May, when the president and members of the Executive Board of Kosovo and Metohija came to Mamusa with a trailer truck of humanitarian aid containing food and other essential products, both for Mamusa and other villages with the Turkish ethnic minority, sometime in mid-May?
A. [Previous translation continues]... that.
Q. That was a big event. Your entire government visited.
A. I've never seen that. I never left my home. I don't know what happened.
Q. All right. Do you know anything at all about the 30th of May; that is, after that, the KLA kidnapped the president of the local commune and a deputy to the Assembly of Prizren, this Adem Koc person I already mentioned, and Morina Mahmet, who were held for questioning for several days in a basement in the village of Celina. Do you remember that?
A. No, I don't know that. I don't know that.
Q. But you know those people and you know they were kidnapped? Yes or no.
A. No, I don't. I don't know. I've never heard of that. 1894
Q. And do you remember that one of the most wealthy people had all his trucks confiscated?
A. [Previous translation continues]... that. I don't know. What time? At what time was that?
Q. Before the aggression. Do you remember that?
A. Before the aggression, I was in Turkey. I don't know about that.
Q. When did you come back from Turkey to Mamusa?
A. I came back in January 1999.
Q. But that happened precisely at that time. How come you don't know about it?
A. When I returned home, I never heard of that.
Q. And are you aware that even before the aggression, and even now, the KLA took money to finance its terrorist organisation from the citizens of the village of Mamusa, that it racketeered the people of Mamusa?
A. I don't know. They never took any money away from me. I haven't heard about that.
Q. And are you aware that during the war the work organisation Liria, from Prizren, opened a shop in Mamusa to supply the locals with essential products? Do you remember that?
A. We had our shops in Mamusa, and we still have the same shops.
Q. I'm saying that during the war, Mamusa was supplied in the way I described. Do you remember that? Yes or no.
A. That I don't know. I don't remember that.
Q. And do you remember the wounding of a Turkish woman, Suzana Taskra, during the bombing? 1895 BLANK PAGE 1896
A. You mean in Mamusha village?
Q. No. In Prizren.
A. No, that I don't know. I know nothing about any other place.
Q. She worked at the TV station, broadcasting in Turkish.
JUDGE MAY: He says he doesn't know about that.
A. I don't know.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. And do you remember that in the Turkish language, Radio Pristina, Radio Prizren, Radio Mitrovica, Radio Gnjilane broadcast in the Turkish language? Do you remember that?
A. We didn't have electricity, and we heard nothing during the war.
Q. You never listened to the radio and you never watched TV?
A. No. I said we didn't have power.
Q. All right. If you didn't watch television or listen to the radio, do you remember that there were newspapers in Turkish, such as Tan, Cergetush [phoen], Bai Cevrin, Esin, and Sofra?
A. I don't know. I don't read papers. I am a farmer. Those who read know.
Q. Do you remember the Sofra newspaper, published in Mamusa in the Turkish language?
A. I knew that it came out, that paper was published, but I don't read. I said, I don't read.
Q. You know that they were published, but you didn't read them; is that what you're saying?
A. I don't read newspapers, but I know that such a newspaper was, and 1897 still is.
Q. And do you remember that the Turkish Democratic Party had its own offices in the centre of Prizren? Were you a member of any party?
A. I have never been a member of any party, so I know nothing about this party. I am a farmer. I mind my own business. I work. I don't care about parties.
Q. And have you heard of the death of an entire Turkish family on the 7th of April, the Gash family; mother, father, and four daughters? They were Turks. They were not killed in Mamusa. They were killed during the bombardment somewhere in town. Have you heard of that family?
A. Where were they killed? I don't know that. I never heard of that.
Q. Have you perhaps heard that the Turkish journalist Sarife Turgut, a correspondent of the ATV television, a Turkish television, described the rescuing of a 2-year-old girl who was saved by Dr. Andric from Pristina? Do you remember that event? There was a special programme on Turkish television about that.
A. I'm not aware of that.
Q. You know nothing about it?
A. Nothing. Nothing at all.
Q. And do you know anything about, after the arrival of NATO troops in Kosovo, the 7-year-old daughter of Orana Kasma, from Prizren, was kidnapped and a very large ransom was demanded?
A. That I don't know.
Q. You know nothing about it? And do you know about the rape and 1898 killing of a married Turkish woman, Ajsa Altiparmak, again after the arrival of NATO troops, and that was done by KLA terrorists?
A. No. I have never heard of that.
JUDGE MAY: Mr. Milosevic, you've put these matters very fully. He says he doesn't know. There seems little point going on putting incidents about which he is not aware. So perhaps you'd move on to another topic.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, you are probably right. As you see, the witness doesn't know anything about what had been going on at the time.
JUDGE MAY: Have you got any more questions about his evidence?
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Of course I do.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. Is it true that in the village of Mamusa itself -- please listen carefully. In the village of Mamusa itself, on the critical day which you discussed a moment ago, that a large group of armed KLA terrorists from the villages of Studencane, Mala Krusa, and Pirane opened fire on the patrol of the MUP of Serbia, harming even innocent passersby?
A. Where was that event you are talking about? I don't know. What place was that? I don't know. In Mamusha, we have never had such an event. We have never had a clash between the KLA and the police. I don't know what you are talking about here.
Q. I am talking about what you have just mentioned, that several people were killed in Mamusa.
A. The Serb army killed them. Nobody else did. 1899
Q. You said a moment ago that you don't know who had killed them, that you didn't see that, you just heard of it. So how do you know that Serbs killed them?
A. You said -- you said these people were killed, but they were not killed in the roads, in the streets somewhere. They were killed in their very homes.
Q. And how were they killed?
A. That night we were at home. On the next morning, they were found. Their bodies were found in their own homes. And we buried them on the 28th of March, on the Bajram day.
Q. How did they die? How were they killed? Were they killed by a bomb, a bullet, a stone?
A. By the bullet, not by the bombs. We didn't have bombs in Mamusha. By arm -- by gunfire.
Q. You are now saying that they were killed from firearms, and a moment ago you said that you had never heard any shooting in Mamusa, whatsoever. So how could they have been killed by firearms?
JUDGE MAY: Now, just a moment. The time that he was talking about was before the -- before there was trouble in the village. What he said was there was no bombing on that day or fighting.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Let me note that he first said that he had never heard any shooting whatsoever, and a moment ago he said that people were killed during a shoot-out.
JUDGE MAY: It's not my --
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] So both cannot be true. 1900
JUDGE MAY: It's not my recollection that he said he heard no firing on the night of the 27th of March, which is the night we are dealing with.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] That's the critical day that I'm talking about.
JUDGE MAY: Yes.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] And I'm saying -- I claim that they were hidden in his house. Part of the KLA members were in his house, in hiding.
JUDGE MAY: Very well. Let the witness deal with that. Mr. Tac, what he said is that members of the KLA were in your house. Is there any truth in that?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, there isn't any truth in that. If they were in my home, we would have all been killed. But we didn't have any KLA members in my home.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. Does he know that the Albanian terrorists burnt the Serb village of Novak, only four kilometres away from Mamusa, with 80 Serb houses? Do you know about that?
A. I don't know. I wasn't in Novak. Perhaps they were burnt, but I was not there. I never went there.
Q. All right. Did you go to Prizren?
A. Yes, I did. I went to Prizren.
Q. Did you see that a tombstone of Nari Rexhalebia [phoen] was demolished in Prizren? Did you see that? 1901
A. It wasn't destroyed. It's still there.
Q. It wasn't damaged at all, not even damaged?
A. No, it wasn't destroyed. It's still there.
Q. Did you see the Turkish fountains in the yard of the mosque in the Tahban settlement destroyed?
A. No, I didn't see it. I wasn't in that area. I don't know about this.
Q. Do you know that the Osman Efendi mosque in Novo Brdo was completely destroyed? Did you hear about that from anyone, for example?
A. Where is that? Isn't that a church? I have never been to Novo Brdo. I don't know where it is. I don't know where Novo Brdo is.
Q. All right. Did you hear about the fact that, in Prizren, people were sacked? Now, I'm talking about now, after KFOR, that Turks were sacked from their jobs, and their name was Xhala Jash [phoen], Fikrija Nush [phoen], Mehi Bekazaz [phoen], Nurik Malta [phoen], Jaku Plav, Mustafa -- from the Mustafa Bakija primary school, as well as Jakusha Mamushe [phoen]. Do you know about all of them or any one of them who were fired from their jobs?
A. No, I don't know. I don't deal with schools. I am a farmer. I don't know anything about this.
Q. Did your children go to school?
A. Yes, in Mamusha.
Q. Which language was tuition? Was it in Albanian when they went to school?
A. It was in Turkish. They didn't go on to studies. They went on to 1902 be farmers and went to school in Turkish.
Q. So you had a school in the Turkish language. Do you know that there were in fact six schools in the town and in the village of Mamusha itself with tuition in Turkish? Are you aware of that?
A. There were not six schools. There was only one.
Q. In Mamusa?
A. There is one school in Mamusha. There were no -- aren't six schools. It's not a town. It's a village.
Q. Yes. I said one in Mamusa and the rest were in Prizren. Do you know about four secondary schools in your municipality where pupils were taught in the Turkish language as well?
A. I don't know, but my children didn't go. I don't know what goes on there. I just don't know.
Q. All right. And do you know about doctors, Turkish doctors, Bulent Krilje, Dr. Isak, Muxhada Kovic [phoen], Resmije Shata, Dr. Valkan [phoen] and others, all of them Turks, all of them working and offering treatment to patients? Have you heard of them?
A. I don't know these doctors. Perhaps they work in this way, perhaps they don't. I don't know.
Q. Do you know about Judges, Sas Kofiki [phoen], and Skender Musbeg, those two Judges? Have you heard of them? They are also Turks.
A. No, I don't know. This is the first time I've ever been in a court. This is the first time I've ever testified. And I don't know these people.
Q. What about Abdul Tac? Was he the headmaster of the primary school 1903 in the village of Mamusa?
JUDGE MAY: We've been through this once already. I don't think we're getting anywhere. Now, let's move on to another topic.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. Do you know that in Prizren two Turkish drama theatre companies were functioning, with performances all over Yugoslavia and in Turkey and in Germany too? Have you heard of those?
A. No. I don't know. I -- I've never had any chance to go and see these theatres. I've never been there. I don't know whether they've been in Yugoslavia and in other countries. I don't know.
Q. Do you at least know about the village of Mamusa and the cultural and arts society Askferki that functioned there in your own village? Do you know about that? In Turkish, the Turkish Cultural and Arts Society. Have you heard of that one?
A. Yes, it is there and it's still there today, and it's working again.
Q. Do you know of any Turks who were members of the government of Kosovo and Metohija, members of the Executive Council, as it was called, of Kosovo and Metohija?
A. I don't know.
Q. One of them, a man, Zenel Abedil Kures --
JUDGE MAY: He doesn't.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'm asking him whether he's heard of Zenel Abedil Kures. He was a minister there and a Turk. He must have heard of him. 1904
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. Have you heard of him, Witness? No?
A. I don't know.
Q. Have you heard about a lady, also a Turkish lady, Bude Hasaru?
JUDGE MAY: This is -- this pointless. This is a pointless cross-examination. You have really put your case on this topic very fully. Now, have you got any other matters you want to ask him about his evidence?
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, all this has to do with his evidence, but he doesn't seem to know anything about anything that went on except the fact that he helped a group of Albanian refugees to get out of Malisevo.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. Do you know about Adem Koc, Sadik Tanjoll, Zenel Abedil, Muhammed Ustaibar [phoen], Ilija Micamil [phoen], Hasan Merdan? Do you know of any of those individuals? They're all Turks.
A. Adem Koc is from the village of Mamusha, but for the others, I've never heard of them. And what they say, I don't know.
Q. And do you know about Mahmet Morina and Haim Shala, those two names? Also two Turkish gentlemen kidnapped by the KLA.
A. I don't know about this. I imagine that they're somewhere in Serbian prisons. I don't know who kidnapped them.
Q. Why do you think they would be in prison in Serbia? They were loyal citizens of Serbia and didn't come into conflict with the authorities at all. 1905
A. This is what they say in their families, that sometime they'll emerge alive from Serbia.
Q. A Turk appeared who was in prison in Serbia. Is that what you're saying? What was the name of this one Turk?
JUDGE MAY: We're now getting a very long way from the indictment in this case. Mr. Milosevic, speaking for myself, unless you have some relevant questions to do with this witness's evidence, I shall suggest to my colleagues that we bring your cross-examination to a close.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. Do you know that refugees, the refugees that you speak about in Mamusa, asked the authorities to assist them to leave the area in which they were in jeopardy? And you took part in that assistance.
A. I don't know about this. We opened our doors to them at night, and they had come to save their lives and that's how it was.
Q. When did you give your first statement with respect to your testimony, and who did you give that statement to?
A. I didn't know these people. It was one year ago.
Q. And who did you give the statement to?
A. They came to the village of Mamusha and they asked who took the people to Malisheva, and we spoke up and we gave our testimony. There were eight of us.
Q. Who came?
A. I don't know. I didn't know them. I don't know who they were. They were from UNMIK or somebody.
Q. Were they Turks or Albanians or did they belong to some other 1906 ethnic group?
A. They were from UNMIK. They weren't Turks. They spoke English or something.
Q. You wrote in your statement that they asked you whether you knew anything about the bodies of dead people who were transported in trucks. Who asked you that?
A. I don't know about the bodies. I transported people who were alive. I don't know about this other case.
Q. Yes, but who asked you about that, about those dead bodies? Who asked you about that?
A. These UNMIK people, or I don't know who they were.
Q. What did they in fact ask you?
A. "How did you go to Malisheva to carry all these people?"
Q. Yes, but with respect to the dead bodies, they asked you something about that.
A. I don't know anything about dead bodies. I don't know anything about this business.
JUDGE MAY: Let's move on to the next point.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. Well, you said, in response to the question whether you knew anything about dead bodies: "I said that I was not mixed up in anything like that and have no information about that." That's why I'm asking you: Who asked you that particular question?
JUDGE MAY: He said the people from UNMIK. Now, let's move on.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have no more questions. 1907 BLANK PAGE 1908
MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, thank you for giving me the floor. I don't have many questions, but Mr. Slobodan Milosevic insisted upon one point, and that is to be found in the last sentence of the statement which Mr. Sakir gave on the 10th of June, 2001. And I should like -- I haven't got much, but I would like to have that sentence presented to you, Your Honours, and the statement, because I have several questions in that regard.
JUDGE MAY: Can we have copies? Questioned by Mr. Tapuskovic:
Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Sakir, first of all, let me start off by asking you the following, something you talked about at the beginning of your testimony. You said that your village was quiet, that there were never any conflicts there - you used the word "conflict," I believe - and that these people came to your village to take refuge.
A. Yes.
Q. Did you hear from them or anybody else that in other places, in other villages, there were conflicts?
A. If they didn't have any conflicts, they wouldn't have run away from their homes and come over to us.
Q. So conflicts between the KLA and the army; is that it?
A. That I don't know, but there were problems there. There were conflicts. They came to us.
Q. Thank you. Did members of the KLA ever come to your village?
A. No. I've never seen them. I don't know.
Q. But you said previously, in paragraph 3 of your statement that Mr. 1909 Sakir gave on the 10th of June, 2001, in that third paragraph, it states the following:
The KLA did not have a stronghold here, but they did come from time to time. There was no stronghold here, but they did visit from time to time.
That is what you say in your statement, that they came from time to time, in your statement of June 2001. Is that what you said or not?
A. [Previous translation continues]... say that. No, I didn't say that they have come to our village, no. I haven't seen them.
Q. Can you explain, then, how come this sentence exists in your statement, the statement you made at that time?
A. That I don't know. I never said that KLA came to Mamusha village.
Q. All right. Thank you. On the 27th, the event took place which you have described to us here.
A. Yes.
Q. On that day, the army or the police - it doesn't matter - searched houses; is that right?
A. We left our homes, we went outside, they searched, then we went back home.
Q. And all the houses were searched. Nothing was stolen from your house, but it had been ransacked; is that right?
A. Yes, it was ransacked, but they hadn't taken anything away.
Q. Does that mean -- you know that they said that they were looking for weapons, just weapons, and as they found no weapons, did they take 1910 anything else from the house or not?
A. I don't know what they searched for. We never had any weapons, nor do we have today. But I know that they searched. That is all I know.
Q. Thank you. You said that there were casualties and that you buried them the next day. Do you know the names of any of those people from your village who were buried on that particular day?
A. I don't know the names of all of them. I know the names of the Turks, but I don't know the other four. I don't know the names.
Q. You also spoke today about the fact that you know, but you didn't see it, that a Serb tank was overturned there. You heard about that but didn't see it. That's what you told us today.
A. I didn't see it with my own eyes at that moment. On the next day, on the 28th of March, at about 10.00, when the forces came to pull that over with a crane, we saw it. We saw them passing by.
Q. Do you know why the tank overturned? Was it hit perhaps? Did anything hit it or was it overturned for some other reason?
A. Nothing was there. The street was very narrow, but nothing happened. It was because of the very narrow street, and the tank was too large for that street.
Q. On the day that you drove the truck for two hours and were not accompanied by the police, you arrived at Zur, you came across the column of vehicles that had been stopped, that was stationary?
A. I am not clear about this question. What do you want me to say?
Q. I'm just repeating what you yourself said, that you arrived at the column that was standing still and that you couldn't go forward, and this 1911 was after two hours of driving. Is that right?
A. Yes. Yes, that's right.
Q. And you then suggested that they continue their journey on foot, and that's what they in fact did; is that right?
A. Yes, that's right.
Q. There was no army or police anywhere en route from that point where they started out on foot; is that right?
A. They were the Ostrozub army troops.
Q. Yes, I understood that. That's why I didn't ask you. But you drove for two hours, arrived at the point you stopped at, from which you couldn't continue further, and that was the spot where you made your suggestion to them. What I'm asking you now is: At that particular spot, there were no police or army, were there?
A. I didn't see any police or army troops.
Q. Thank you. You went back to your village and stayed there. Did you ever hear that in Kosovo a bomb had dropped of any kind, which was not from -- which did not come from a weapon owned by the Serb army?
MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, I'm coming to an end, Your Honour.
A. I don't know where that place was. I have no idea.
Q. Yes, but what I'm asking you is: Was there any NATO bombing or not?
A. In my village, no. I don't know about other villages.
Q. Did you hear about other places, whether it happened in other places? 1912
A. Maybe there has been in other places, but I don't know who did the shooting.
Q. You said a moment ago that you had no electricity in the village; is that right?
A. Yes, that's right. We didn't have electricity.
Q. Do you know why, why you didn't have any electricity?
A. That I don't know. How could I know?
Q. Do you know that many powerplants had been hit and they were the supplies and source of your electricity? Everybody knew that, that they had been hit.
A. The powerplant in Kosova was not destroyed. I don't know what you are saying here.
MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you. Thank you, Your Honours.
Re-examined by Mr. Saxon:
Q. Mr. Tac, I'd like to ask you to help us clarify a few points that were raised during the cross-examination.
You were asked a few questions about the statement that you gave in the year 2001, particularly regarding a paragraph early in your statement, the third paragraph, and I'm going to read to you what the statement says and then I'm going to ask you a question about it. The third paragraph says the following:
"Until March 1999, there had not been too much trouble in the village. Serbs would come and search, looking for people, maybe KLA. There was no stronghold here, but they did visit from time to time." 1913 Now, Mr. Tac, my question for you concerns the word "they" that you used -- that is used in your statement in the last sentence that I read to you. When you said, "but they did visit from time to time," by "they," were you referring --
JUDGE MAY: No. Who was he referring to?
MR. SAXON:
Q. Who were you referring to?
A. I have never seen any KLA members. I meant the police and the army, who often came to the village. But I never saw any KLA members.
Q. You also --
JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Tapuskovic.
MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] That sentence reads precisely as follows: "The KLA did not have a stronghold here, but they came occasionally." So the KLA is mentioned in this sentence as not having --
JUDGE MAY: It's not what the English says. No doubt we can have it looked out in due course. But the point has been made. Anything else, Mr. Saxon?
MR. SAXON: Yes, Your Honour.
Q. The accused asked you whether you knew whether the refugees staying in Mamusa had asked the authorities to assist them, to use his expression. The refugees in Mamusa, or at least some of them, came to Mamusa in their own vehicles; is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. Could those refugees who arrived in Mamusa with their own vehicles have used their vehicles to go to the border if they had chosen to? 1914
A. First of all, they told them to go with your [sic] cars.
Q. I appreciate that, but that wasn't really what I was asking you about. My question was very simple: Could the refugees have simply gotten into their vehicles and gone to the border had they chosen to?
A. No, because they were sent in our cars. But then the commander who -- it came to the mind of the commander, and he said, "How did these people get here in the first place?" And we told him they had come with tractors and cars and horses and carts. And they said to us, "Okay. Now they can go and get their own cars."
Q. Before members of the Serb army arrived in Mamusa on the 27th of March, could the refugees staying in your home and in other homes in the village, could they have left the village and gone to the border if they had wanted to?
A. No. They were inside the village. I don't know what was in their minds. They came to us, to our houses, and there they were.
Q. Let's move forward to the 2nd of April, when the police came to Mamusa and you left Mamusa that day, in a line with other trucks, escorted by the police in the beginning. Did you know what you were going to do that day?
A. No, we didn't flee from -- we didn't leave -- flee the village. They forced us to go out onto the road to go to Malisheva.
Q. And when you went out onto the road and began to drive, did you know what you were going to do that day?
A. We were driving. You mean where we were driving to?
Q. Did you know why you and your neighbours had been ordered to get 1915 their trucks and to drive along the road to Malisevo? Did you know why you were told to do that?
A. Yes. To go and fetch refugees from Malisheva.
Q. And did you know where you were going to bring those refugees?
A. To the -- to Pirana and then -- then Shipka told us to go on to Rahovec and in that direction, so we set off in that direction.
Q. Before you got to Malisevo, did you know what you were going to do with the refugees who you were going to pick up there?
A. Yes. We knew that we were going to fetch them and take them to Albania.
Q. Mr. Tac, how did you know that?
A. The police told us. "You've got to go and fetch refugees and take them to Albania."
Q. When you got to Malisevo and you saw this large crowd of refugees there, did any of the refugees there tell you what had happened to them?
A. No, they didn't. The refugees told us nothing.
Q. When the refugees boarded your truck in Malisevo, did you ask any of them whether they wanted to go to Albania?
A. They got in, but we didn't talk to them. They -- we just closed the trucks and they told us, "Set off for the border."
Q. Why didn't you ask any of the refugees if they wanted to go to Albania or not?
A. We were afraid for our own sakes as well, quite apart from them.
Q. Can you describe how the refugees looked who boarded your truck? Were they happy, laughing? 1916
A. No. They were weeping. They were -- they were very, very upset.
Q. When you arrived at the village of Zur and you stopped the truck and you asked the refugees in your truck whether they could walk to the border and the refugees got down from the truck, were the refugees -- how could you describe the refugees at that time?
A. They were all weeping. And then we embraced them and we said, "Safe journey. God help you." And there was nothing else we could do, and then we went back.
Q. Just one last question. You remarked that your village was quiet between the 24th of March and the 2nd of April. By the word "quiet," do you mean no conflict, no armed conflict?
A. There was no armed conflict apart from on the 27th, but we didn't have any conflicts of any kind.
Q. On the night of the 27th, you described how houses were burning. Do you recall that?
A. Yes, I remember.
Q. A few minutes ago, you said that the persons who died that evening died from gunfire. Do you know -- do you have personal knowledge whether those persons died from the flames in their homes or from gunfire or both, if you know?
A. They weren't burned. They died from bullets.
MR. SAXON: I have no further questions. Thank you. Questioned by the Court:
JUDGE KWON: Mr. Tac, have you ever said to the investigator or the Prosecution that you cried as you saw the refugee people getting on 1917 your trucks?
A. Yes. Yes. I cried too.
JUDGE KWON: Why did you cry?
A. Because I felt sorry for these brothers of mine. Where were they going? What would happen to them? It pained me.
JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Tac, you have told us that the journey from Malisevo to Zur took about two hours.
A. Yes.
JUDGE ROBINSON: For most of that time, you and the refugees were entirely on your own. There was no police escort, no army escort. Did it not occur to you that you might have been able to escape, you might have deviated, you might have directed from the course and not go straight on to Zur and ultimately to Albania?
A. No. I never thought of anything of that kind.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Why not?
A. Well, they told us to send them to the border. That's what the police said. There was nowhere else we could take them.
JUDGE ROBINSON: All right. Thank you.
JUDGE KWON: But the refugees themselves said to you to set off to the border; is that right?
A. The refugees didn't say this. The police said this.
JUDGE KWON: Let me try the transcript. Just awhile ago you said that the refugees, "They got in but we didn't talk to them. They -- we just closed the trucks and they told us, `Set off for the border,'" while 1918 Mr. Saxon asked you questions.
A. That's right.
JUDGE KWON: Who are "they" --
A. Yes, that's right.
JUDGE KWON: So the refugees said to you to set off for the border?
A. No. The refugees didn't say this. It was the police and the army who told us to take these people straight to the border.
JUDGE KWON: Yes. Thank you.
JUDGE MAY: Mr. Tac, that concludes your evidence. Thank you for coming to the International Tribunal to give it. You are free to go.
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
[The witness withdrew]
JUDGE MAY: The statement will be exhibited.
THE REGISTRAR: Prosecution Exhibit 52.
JUDGE MAY: And I shall ask the legal officer to have the translation clarified of the third paragraph in the statement, which is not clear and is obviously important; it should be.
MR. RYNEVELD: If it please the Court, I propose to call the next witness, Mr. Hazbi Loku.
While we're waiting for the witness to come in, I will be proposing to show the witness a bundle of documents. In order to save time, I wonder whether we can have those distributed in advance so that I can ask the usher to present them to the witness in order. The summary should give an indication as to about when I propose to do that. 1919 BLANK PAGE 1920
JUDGE MAY: Would the registrar please assist.
[The witness entered court]
JUDGE MAY: Yes. Let the witness take the declaration.
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
JUDGE MAY: Yes. Take a seat.
WITNESS: HAZBI LOKU
[Witness answered through interpreter] Examined by Mr. Ryneveld:
Q. Mr. Loku, I understand, sir, that you are 41 years old and that your ethnicity is Albanian, a Kosovo Albanian, and you are from the village of Kotlina in the municipality of Kacanik. Is that correct?
A. That is correct.
Q. Do I also understand correctly, sir, that you are presently married and with four children?
A. Yes, that's true.
Q. And by way of background, very briefly, you attended the Skopje Teaching Academy in Macedonia while you were teaching, and you became a teacher in 1981; is that right?
A. Yes, that's right.
Q. And then, sir, I understand you became the primary school principal of the village of Kotlina in 1994.
A. Yes, at the end of 1994.
MR. RYNEVELD: Yes. Mr. Usher, could I ask you to show the witness what has been entered in these proceedings as Exhibit 3, map 12. 1921
THE INTERPRETER: Would the witness draw closer to the microphone, please.
JUDGE MAY: Mr. Loku, could you come closer to the microphone so the interpreters can hear.
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
MR. RYNEVELD: Now, Mr. Usher, if you could show that to the witness first, and then once he's had a look at it, we can put it on the ELMO.
Q. Do you see the map there, sir?
A. Yes.
Q. All right. Now it's going on the overhead projector. I'm going to ask you to take the pointer, if there is one in front of you -- there you go. And could you point out where, approximately, your village of Kotlina would be on this map if you see it there.
A. The village is not marked on this map, but I think I can show you where it is because I grew up there. There it is, about there.
Q. All right. You're pointing now, just for the record, to what appears to be a pink sort of mark underneath the "A" of "Ivaja" and above the "O" of -- the second "O" of "Globocica"; is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. And how far would you say that is from Ivaja, sir?
A. Our village is a neighbouring village to Ivaja. About four kilometres away. We're a next-door village, centre-to-centre about four kilometres.
Q. All right. 1922
MR. RYNEVELD: Might be the witness now be shown, please, a new map. That's part of the package that I've just provided. I might say, Your Honours, this will be the first of a series of maps from the second portion of the indictment. You will note that we have been talking about deportation sites and you have a bundle of maps for that. This will be one of a bundle of maps which we anticipate presenting under the killing sites, and I'm in Your Honours' hands as to how we want to deal with them. Do we want to deal with them separately like this or would you eventually like us to have, as we did with Exhibit 3, have the exhibit with maps numbered? Because we can do that.
JUDGE MAY: The latter course is more convenient --
MR. RYNEVELD: I thought it may be.
JUDGE MAY: -- if they're kept together, yes.
MR. RYNEVELD: The trouble is, of course, with the previous bundle I was able to put them in through Mr. Spargo, but we didn't get these maps put in as a bundle through Mr. Curtis. So we'll find another way to do that, if we may.
JUDGE MAY: Yes. They'll need some sort of number meanwhile.
MR. RYNEVELD: Yes. I propose that we simply call this then Exhibit 53, map 1, and we'll sort it out from there. Am I right about that, Madam Clerk?
THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit 53, map 1.
MR. RYNEVELD: Thank you. Might the witness be shown this map. That can go straight on the ELMO. Thank you.
Q. Just have a look at it, Witness. Do you see your village of 1923 Kotlina marked on this particular map?
A. Yes.
Q. Could you use that pointer, please, and tell the Court where that is.
A. The village is here, my village.
Q. Okay. Yes. And that's sort of a star where it's marked "Kotlina," and there's two --
A. Yes. Yes.
Q. And do you see Ivaja to the north of that?
A. Yes, in the north. In the west is Gllobocica. The west [sic], Lac.
Q. All right, sir. Now, sir, is it also correct that you did your normal Serb compulsory military service in the JNA when you were 21 years old, in 1980?
A. Yes, that's correct. During 1980, 1981 I did my military service.
Q. And what -- was there a particular unit that you were attached to at that time?
A. You think during my military service?
Q. Yes.
A. Yes. I was doing my military police service in the former Yugoslav army.
Q. Okay. Now, sir, I'd like you to turn your mind to the month, the early part of the month of March 1999. We're skipping right to there. You've been asked and you've pointed out the village of Ivaja on the map, and you've indicated that that was a neighbouring village. Did something 1924 happen in respect to the neighbouring villages, including Ivaja, on or about the 8th of March that you can recall and tell us about today?
A. Yes.
Q. What happened?
A. In the morning of 8th of March of 1999, in the vicinity around my village and the adjacent villages, we could feel the shells dropping by and explosions. We could see that something was going on there. The population were anxious to see what was going on.
Q. Did they?
A. Yes. The firing never stopped during all the day. After the shelling, there were other shots coming from different arms. This lasted for three days. We heard the noise in the village. We were afraid, and we took shelter in a place at the end of village, even though there too we didn't feel very safe. But out of fear, we couldn't stay at home. So we felt safer there than at home. And we wanted to see what we should do under the circumstances. There was panic prevailing all over.
Q. Just stop there, if you would, please, sir. I want to back up a little bit. You're jumping ahead of us.
You've talked about the 8th of March first, and you've told us that you could hear shelling. Did you at some point --
A. Yes.
Q. -- go to the neighbouring village of Ivaja to find out for yourself what had happened?
A. I went to the neighbouring village of Ivaja at a later phase, two or three days after the 8th of March. I think it was 11th or 12th of 1925 March.
Q. And when you got there, what, if anything, did you see?
A. You think [as interpreted] in Ivaja?
Q. Absolutely. You've just told us you went there. Now I'm asking: When you went there, i.e. Ivaja, what did you see?
A. When I arrived in Ivaja, I saw houses destroyed, burned. Some of them were still in flames and smoke. Some were ruined because of the tanks that had passed through the village streets. I saw the village mosque also destroyed and ruined. I saw cattle dead, lying on the streets. I saw that half the school building was ruined and burned. This is what I remember.
Q. Do you know whether or not -- what you noted about the mosque, what of the mosque was destroyed?
A. The mosque was destroyed and burned, the building and the roof, the minaret. The minaret was also destroyed. It was half destroyed. It had capsized.
Q. Now, sir, before we leave the village of Ivaja in our description of events, I'm going to ask you what, if anything, you knew of why it was that the village of Ivaja may have been the subject of this shelling.
A. Around the village of Ivaja, there were the KLA troops, those who tried to protect the population from the worse that might befall them, and I think that the residents of that village managed to escape the worst.
Q. Now, sir, you've told us that you went back a few days later, but I'm going to now try to deal with the time period in between. You've told us about hearing the shelling on the 8th, you've told us about seeing the 1926 results of that shelling on the 11th or 12th. I now want to direct your mind to the 9th of March, that is, the following day after having heard the shelling. What, if anything, happened to your village?
A. The same thing happened, also in the morning. We heard shells dropping in my village. Shells were coming from a distance. We could see the Serb positions from which the grenades -- the shells came, in a place called Kashan, and from that place our village was very visible, most of it, at least. So the shells came from that direction as well as from the east, the north. The same anxiety prevailed. People didn't know what to do. They didn't know if they were attacked from one side or if something worse was going to happen to them, if the troops were coming to the village. So some younger people who were braver than the others, they went out to see what was happening. There are two roads, one leading to Kacanik, the other to Globocica, and the population wanted to run away.
Q. Why did they want to run away? What were they afraid of?
A. They were afraid of the Serb military forces, because some months ago we were seeing what was happening all over Kosova, and in those places where the population was defenceless, everybody knew what they fared.
JUDGE MAY: Mr. Ryneveld, it's 1.00. Is that a convenient moment?
MR. RYNEVELD: Absolutely.
JUDGE MAY: We'll adjourn now. Mr. Loku, would you remember in this adjournment and any other there may be while you're giving evidence not to speak to anybody about it until it's over, and that includes members of the Prosecution team. Could 1927 you be back, please, at half past 2.00.
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.
--- Luncheon recess taken at 1.00 p.m. 1928
--- On resuming at 2.30 p.m.
JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Ryneveld.
MR. RYNEVELD: Thank you, Your Honour.
Q. Mr. Loku, just before the lunch break, I had directed your mind to the incidents in your village on the 9th of March, and I believe you had just told us that -- words to the effect that people of your village were deciding that they were going to leave. Can you pick it up from there, please, and tell us -- you told us, I think, that younger men went to go and scout out to find out what was happening. Did they come back and report?
A. Yes. Some of them returned to the village, those who had been on the road to Kacanik. They returned and reported that Serbian forces were coming from that direction and the road was blocked. They said that they had been shot at by the Serbian army.
Q. As a result of that information, what, if anything, did you and/or the rest of the villagers decide to do?
A. The entire population, we were all on the village street, and seeing that it was blocked on that side, we decided to set off in the direction of the border towards the village of Gllobocica, and that's what we did.
Q. So -- I think you told us earlier there were two roads. One road was blocked and the other road that was open was the one to the border; is that right?
A. Yes. At that moment that road was open, so the population headed towards Gllobocica. 1929
Q. What happened next?
A. The population, including women, children, and the elderly, headed for the border. And we knew that the entrance to Gllobocica was being patrolled by Serbian forces, so we younger people, that is men from 17 to 50, were scared because we were sure that they would divide us from our families. So we thought it would be safer for us if we went into hiding round the village. So we separately - and we didn't go with them - the women, children, and the elderly went on, and elderly people, women, and children carried the ill.
Q. Did you find out whether or not they were able to go all the way or did something stop them from going all the way?
A. Those of us who had scattered or, rather, had hidden in the vicinity of the village - and we thought that we had found a safer place - still kept watch of the road towards Gllobocica to see whether our women and families would be able to pass. And I saw with my own eyes from the place where I was hiding that the women, as they approached a neighbourhood called Dreshec, which they had to pass through to get to the border, were shot at by a hail of bullets from Serbian forces which were in Gllobocica. You could see this neighbourhood.
Q. I'm sorry. Just finish your sentence. You could see the neighbourhood, yes. You could see this neighbourhood from your hiding place; is that right?
A. Yes. Yes. You could see that neighbourhood. I could see it.
Q. All right, sir. Now, you've told us --
A. I would see the people being stopped. 1930
Q. All right. You told us -- you used the expression "Serb forces." When you say that, what kinds of Serb forces did you see?
A. I saw tanks, Serbian tanks. I saw the Serbian army and the Serbian police. These were the Serbian forces.
Q. Were they separate or were they together or were they all in this neighbourhood of Dreshec, or what can you tell us about that?
A. The Serbian forces, after stopping the population and not allowing them to proceed to Gllobocica, the populous no doubt knew that they were drawing near, and so they went off and hid in the neighbourhood. And half an hour later, tanks made their presence felt in that neighbourhood and could be seen from a distance. And we saw police and soldiers starting to raid that neighbourhood. Although it was empty and didn't have anybody living in it, they started to loot and to burn that neighbourhood as a whole.
Q. Can I ask you to stop there, sir. You're just slightly ahead of where I wanted to be. You've told us about the women and the children and the elderly being stopped by Serb forces. You went on to explain that that was tanks, the army and police. I'm going to ask you, if you would, please: When you say "army" and "police," I'm going to ask you to look at Exhibit 18 and tell us whether any of the uniforms of the army and police you saw are depicted in Exhibit 18, and if so, which photographs? Again, use the pointer, if you would, please.
MR. RYNEVELD: Could we show this on the ELMO now. Thank you.
Q. First of all, the soldiers. Did you see what uniforms, if any, they were wearing, and if so, what is the closest on Exhibit 18? 1931 BLANK PAGE 1932
A. The soldiers were wearing uniforms of this colour, more or less green, with lines on.
Q. And for the record, you're now pointing at Exhibit 18, photograph number 9; is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you see any other uniforms there, sir?
A. Yes. There were also police uniforms, dark blue with stripes, mainly blue, number 6.
Q. All right. Number 6. Thank you very much. Thank you. Sir, I interrupted you at a point when you said that you also saw tanks and you saw looting and houses being damaged. Could you pick it up from there and tell us: Was that still the same day, the 9th of March, that you saw this?
A. Yes, it was on the same day.
Q. Tell us what you saw.
A. In this neighbourhood, the police and the army started to act together and went among the houses, and shortly afterwards, smoke rose. They were looting, taking things that they fancied. This was only a neighbourhood of the village of Kotlina. And then the same forces headed for the centre of the village.
Q. I'm going to stop you there. Just so that we're very clear, this neighbourhood that you're now talking about, was that the same neighbourhood of Dreshec that you mentioned earlier or a different neighbourhood?
A. It's the same neighbourhood of Dreshec. That was completely 1933 burned.
JUDGE MAY: So we can follow, this is all Kotlina, not Globocica; is that right?
MR. RYNEVELD: Well, I'll ask the witness that, but that's my understanding, yes. It's a neighbourhood of Kotlina on the way to Globocica, is my understanding.
Q. Have I got that right, Witness, that Dreshec is a neighbourhood of your village of Kotlina, and that's the direction that you would take leaving Kotlina to go towards Globocica?
A. Yes.
Q. I see. Thank you. Now, once you saw what happened in Dreshec, the neighbourhood of Kotlina, you said they went towards the centre of town. What town are we talking about? Is that Kotlina?
A. Yes. They went on to the centre of the village, to the main part of the village where the school is and the shops. In the village centre, other forces had arrived from the direction of Ivaja, and they had been looting everything.
Q. When you say "other forces," do you know what kind of forces we're talking about?
A. Forces that had entered the centre of the village. I was unable to see them, but I could see them moving towards the village, because I was in hiding and could only see the neighbourhood being looted and burned.
Q. Do you know -- well, all right. Just continue on. What happened next? 1934
A. Throughout the day, there were incessant gunshots, so before dusk they stopped and we gradually went back towards the village to see what had been happening. We went back to the village and, at the same time, our families, women and children, followed us and we saw everything destroyed: Doors burned, windows broken. There was a shop near the road which had been run down by tanks as they went through the village. There was no electricity. And indeed, even before the offensive, we had had no electricity. It was terrible. Everybody was looking for their nearest and dearest. We waited all night for people to come back, people who had fled.
Q. Were there any missing? I'm sorry to have asked you that, Witness, but I have to ask it.
A. Yes, people were missing. The next morning, the OSCE came to the village with -- this was on the 10th of March in the morning. That was when they came. We -- we all realised that they had been there. And Milaim Loku, my brother, was one of the missing. And another villager called Emrlah Kuqi. They didn't come back. And we asked the OSCE to find out whether the Serbian forces had captured them or taken them with them or something like that. But nevertheless, a few days later, they didn't know anything about them and they hadn't been taken prisoner. So I and others started to search round the village, thinking that we might find them. Maybe they had been killed, because they just didn't turn up.
Q. Did you in fact find them?
A. Yes. In the course of our search, after six days, I found my own 1935 brother. He had been killed. He was in the village stream.
MR. RYNEVELD: Can the witness be given a Kleenex, please.
Q. Would you like a glass of water, Witness?
JUDGE MAY: Can you go on, Mr. Loku, or would you like a break?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know.
JUDGE MAY: We will adjourn for five minutes.
--- Break taken at 2.46 p.m.
--- On resuming at 2.55 p.m.
JUDGE MAY: Are you all right now, Mr. Loku? Are you able to go on?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I will try.
MR. RYNEVELD:
Q. Well, sir, let's move on to another topic then. I think you told us that on the 10th of March, the OSCE arrived. Is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. And how long did they stay?
A. They stayed in the village until the 23rd, if I'm not mistaken. The 23rd of March. Yes, it was the 23rd.
Q. And during that period of time, sir, what generally were the conditions in your village?
A. During this period, we all felt safe. We stayed in the village. We slept better. Even though there was no electricity, they came with their cars to the village at night and kept their headlights on so that there was light in the village so that we could sleep in peace with our children. 1936
Q. And to your recollection, they left on the 23rd of March; is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. Did something happen the next day, the 24th of March, to your village?
A. Yes, something did happen.
Q. Tell us about that, if you would, please.
A. On the morning of that day, the village was subjected to shelling. There was panic again among the population. Most of the villagers thought that the OSCE would come back. They didn't realise that they had gone, not to come back. We realised that shooting had started.
Q. When you say "shooting started," where was the shooting coming from and what kind of shooting are you talking about? Are you talking about gunfire or shelling from some other source?
A. The village is situated in a deep valley. It's a mountain village, and about 150 metres above the village, above the school, a tank appeared. We saw the tank drawing near to the village. And after it, soldiers and policemen were coming.
Q. How long did the shelling go on?
A. The shelling didn't last long. From dawn, at about 6.00 until 7.00, they didn't fall on the village but around the village. And then the shelling stopped, and they started firing from the tank. Not from the barrel of the tank but from weapons that were positioned on top of the tank and other forms of gunfire.
Q. And where were those shots being directed at? 1937
A. These shots were directed at the direction of the houses of the village, that is, they hit above the houses. There is a great stone in the village, and they shot at this stone, around the village in order to strike terror in the people.
Then when we had lost hopes in the return of the OSCE monitors and we could hear the approaching tanks, all the young people who were scared to stay on had left the village because they wanted to escape to a better and safer place. Whoever managed to leave, left. A cousin of mine and myself, we were separated from our families and went to the southern part of the village. Most of the people had left from that way. It was a deep stream running by. We stopped at that stream. There was a hill and a mountain there. We stopped there to see what was happening. It was very late.
Q. I'm going to stop you there for a moment. We'll get back to that point.
When the shelling on your village happened, did you see any return gunfire come from the village back towards the people that were attacking? In other words, did the villagers shoot back?
A. No, the villagers didn't shoot back. Not a single shot was fired by the villagers. We all knew that the villagers didn't have any weapons.
Q. All right. I'll take you back, then, to the point where you and a cousin went into hiding, I think you said on the south part of the village; is that right, or did I get that wrong?
A. Yes. We went to the southern part of the village. There is a raised hill there from where you can see most of the village. 1938
Q. And from that vantage point, sir, what did you see? Tell the Court what you saw.
A. From that vantage point, we saw the police and the military forces that had surrounded the village, mostly from the northern part. They not only fired from the tank, but they had spread out in the village and were approaching while they were firing all the time. So some of the houses that were on a higher place near the mountain, I saw in those houses some young people who, because of the fear of the fire spreading up, they were approaching these houses. They were about 50 metres away from these houses, but they didn't make it to the houses because they were captured by the Serbian forces. They were gathered in a meadow near the house, and there they were kept, surrounded. They were mistreated and they were told to tie their hands behind their heads.
Q. Did you see any elderly men or women or children?
A. Yes.
Q. What, from your vantage point, did you see them doing?
A. The Serb police and army together, they acted together, in concert. So they entered every house and ransacked them, driving the inhabitants out, although in the meantime most of the inhabitants had already left their houses and had gathered in the centre of the village. The police and the soldiers who were there, they separated the elderly people from the wives and the children. They told them to lie on the ground with their face down, and the women and children were separate. They searched the women and the children and took away whatever valuable possessions they had on them. They went in and out of every house. Even 1939 those people who had not yet left their houses, they asked them to leave. And so this went on.
Q. All right, sir. I'm going to stop you there to get a couple of details, if I can. We'll continue with the narrative in a moment. You've told us that you had seen a tank.
MR. RYNEVELD: Mr. Usher, could you show the witness Exhibit 17.
Q. Exhibit 17, sir, are four pages of what appear to be vehicles. Would you quickly look through all four pages and tell us whether or not any of the vehicles that you saw that you call tanks are depicted in any of the photographs comprising Exhibit 17. Just look at them all first and then tell us if there are any.
A. Yes. The tank is here. This is what I saw that day, number 6.
Q. All right. Thank you very much.
A. The tanks were of this type that I see here, number 6.
Q. Thank you. How many tanks did you see from your hiding place?
A. From my hiding place, I saw one of the tanks stopping above the village, the others continuing their way towards the village. The village was -- the road was curved. Two or three, I think, continued their way towards the village and entered the school yard. Apart from the tanks --
Q. Go ahead.
A. -- there were also armoured cars. I don't know what their name is. Pinzgauers, I think.
Q. Did you see any vehicles in the selection of photographs comprising Exhibit 17 - that's four separate pages - that you would call Pinzgauers? 1940
A. Yes. This type here, number 7.
Q. And how many of those did you see?
A. Number 7. This kind. There were two or three. There was also another type.
Q. All right. Shuffle through the photographs and tell us if you see the other type you want to tell us about.
A. Yes. Of this here, number 1, this type. They were large like tanks, almost the same, but they didn't have long barrels.
Q. And these were all together, the tanks and the Pinzgauers and these vehicles that look like photograph 1 of Exhibit 17, they were all together on the 24th of March, near your village?
A. Yes.
Q. Let's move on, sir. You were then about to tell us, or you did start telling us about the men and the women and the children being separated and the men being told to put their hands behind their necks. The people that were telling them to do that, did you see what they were dressed like, in other words, the Serb forces? What kinds of Serb forces did you see?
MR. RYNEVELD: And perhaps Exhibit 18 may be of some assistance.
Q. First of all, tell us what you can recall, sir. Were there police?
A. There were police and army forces together.
Q. How did you know there were police there? Was there any insignia telling you that they were police?
A. The army forces had green uniforms with some stripes. The police 1941 had blue uniforms with some stripes but with blue predominating. And on the back they had "militia" written.
Q. Now, did you see some elderly men at any point from your observation?
A. Yes. From my vantage point, I could see the women and the children staying in the middle. They were closer to the place I was hiding, and I could see better. There weren't many men. About 20 of them, I think. Elderly men who had remained with the women. I saw all of them were lying down face down. They were surrounded by the police.
Q. Did you know any of these elderly men by name?
A. Yes. I knew each and every one of them. They took Idriz Kuqi. He was about 55 years of age. He was wearing a white fez hat. And then they headed him towards the mosque of the village, and he never returned any more to the group of people.
Q. I hesitate to ask this but I'm going to anyway, sir: Did you subsequently see Idriz Kuqi later, after this incident?
A. Yes, I saw him later.
Q. Where and under what circumstances?
A. After the occupation, Serb forces left. Idriz Kuqi's body was found in the yard of the house of Liman Loku. He was shot dead in his yard near the toilet. He was shot in the head.
Q. Now, just before I leave this area, sir, and move on, from your hiding place --
JUDGE MAY: Just see -- did you see that body yourself, Mr. Loku?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, I didn't see it myself. 1942
MR. RYNEVELD:
Q. Did somebody tell you about seeing his body or did you personally see the body?
A. Idriz Kuqi's body, I saw it with my own eyes. And not only his body, but also I saw other bodies, dead bodies.
Q. All right. Now, just backing up for a moment, when you were watching what was happening to the villagers from your hiding place, you were able to see that with your naked eye, were you?
A. Yes. Yes. All the time I saw it with my naked eye.
Q. Did you have anything else with you that enabled you to see better?
A. My cousin and I who were there, we had binoculars that we used for shooting, for hunting, and they helped us to see better what was going on. The vantage point wasn't that far, so it enabled us to see what was happening.
Q. Now, sir, I've asked you about the men, the elderly men, and you said that Idriz Kuqi was taken away. What, if anything, did you see happening to the women and children?
A. The women and children, as I said, they were surrounded by the Serb forces. Then at -- about two or three, I think. Two trucks came from the direction of Lac, a lower direction, and they boarded the women and the children on these two trucks. The others who couldn't get on because there was no more room, they asked them to follow the trucks on foot, threatening them always with their arms butts.
Q. When you say "with their arms," you don't mean the arms sticking 1943 BLANK PAGE 1944 out of their bodies, you mean weapons when you say "arms" or --?
A. No. I mean the police who were keeping the crowd of women and children at gunpoint and following them.
Q. I see. That's what you mean by "arms." All right. How many women and children would you say were gathered of whom two lorry loads were able to be taken away? How many were there?
A. I would say approximately 400 of them, because ours is a small village. We are about 500 people. One hundred were males. The others were women and children. Three hundred fifty, I would say, 400.
Q. All right. Now, these two lorries full of people followed by the rest of them on foot, which direction did they go?
A. They went in the direction of Lac village, Kashan, in the direction of Kacanik. This is where that road leads to.
Q. All right. And do you know if villagers were driving those military trucks or was someone else driving those trucks? Are you able to say?
A. Repeat the question, please.
Q. I'm sorry. Do you know who were driving the trucks? Was it the villagers?
A. The trucks belonged to the Serb army.
Q. All right. Now, after those trucks left, what, if anything, happened to the men that had been captured and not taken with the other villagers?
A. Those who were taken earlier in the forest nearby after the population left, these people, with their hands behind their necks, in a 1945 line, were taken to the mountain overlooking the village. They were taken to the mountain. They brought them near two big holes. They had dug two big holes, because the villagers some years ago had dug for water there, and they were still there, dry but very deep.
Q. I realise this is a very painful matter for you to have to recount, sir, but I'm going to ask you to do your best, please.
A. There were about 20 people that were being led towards this forest. Most of them were young. They brought them to these holes. Certainly they didn't know what was going to happen to them. The first who came to the holes, they threw them into it, three or four, I think. Then everything happened. It was a nightmare.
Q. I understand.
A. I could hear the shrieks.
JUDGE MAY: Mr. Loku, just try and tell us, if you can, what happened. You saw all this, did you?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. I saw everything with my naked eye. I could hear their voices, screaming.
JUDGE MAY: And what happened to them?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] They were maltreated in various forms and ways. Some of them were begging, hoping that they would let them go. After half an hour, every one of them was thrown in the holes.
MR. RYNEVELD:
Q. Did something happen shortly after they were all thrown into these holes?
A. After that, the police returned to the village. At the same time, 1946 I saw the houses going on fire.
Q. Yes. Just before you saw that happen, sir, we've got these boys or men being thrown into the holes. Did you see anything else in relation to the holes after the men were thrown into it? Did something happen shortly thereafter?
A. Yes, it did, but a little while later.
Q. I see. All right.
A. I was all the time seeing the houses in flames, and then afterwards I heard a very powerful explosion, and from these holes I saw smoke coming up, which then I understood that nothing was left of them.
Q. All right. Now, I'm just going to show you a couple of photographs at this point, sir.
MR. RYNEVELD: Might the witness be shown what has been marked, I believe, as reference number K1040A. Show it to the witness, please, before you put it.
All right. Now that you've seen the photograph, sir, could we put that on the overhead projector.
Q. Now, sir, you've told us that the village of Kotlina, that there was a mountainside with two holes. Looking at this photograph, what can you tell us? Is that the village of Kotlina we're looking at in this photograph?
A. Yes, that's the village itself.
Q. There appears to be a mountain in the background, and there is superimposed a red arrow pointing to what appears to be a -- well, a hole in the trees there. What can you tell us about that? Are those the 1947 holes?
A. Yes.
Q. Thank you.
MR. RYNEVELD: Can the witness be shown a photograph of K --
JUDGE MAY: Exhibit number.
MR. RYNEVELD: Oh, yes. Are we at 54?
THE REGISTRAR: Prosecution Exhibit 54.
MR. RYNEVELD: The next will be this photograph, Your Honours, and the reference number is K2271.
THE REGISTRAR: Prosecution Exhibit --
MR. RYNEVELD: 55?
Q. Sir --
JUDGE MAY: They look to be, on the photograph, they look like caves, in fact, but is that wrong? Am I looking at it the wrong way?
MR. RYNEVELD: The witness can explain what these are, Your Honour. They were, as I understand it, well holes that had been dug. Then we have an explosion, which enlarged them. This would be after the explosion, of course. This is a photograph the witness brought with him, so we'll have him explain it.
Q. Would you look at this photograph, please, sir, Exhibit 55. Did you bring a smaller copy of that photograph with you from your village of Kotlina when you came to testify?
A. Yes.
Q. Is this an enlargement of the photograph you personally brought?
A. Yes. 1948
Q. His Honour asked whether or not these are caves, or what can you tell us about these holes? I believe you told us earlier they were dug by someone; is that correct?
A. Yes, that's right. They were dug to find water, because they're above the level of the village and they were to carry water to the houses. But the villager was unable to find water and they were just left as they were.
Q. Is it your evidence that these young men, about 20 of them or so, were thrown into these holes?
A. Yes. I saw it with my own eyes. They were all thrown in these holes.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Can he say how deep these holes were?
MR. RYNEVELD:
Q. Sir, have you seen these holes after the explosion?
A. No, I didn't myself go to the holes.
Q. Do you know how deep those holes were before the young men were thrown in? Had you ever looked at those holes before to see how deep they were?
A. No. No, I don't know. I never saw them either before or afterwards. I know that they were there.
MR. RYNEVELD: I propose to move on and then return to the final issue, if I may.
Q. Now, sir, these young men that you saw being thrown into these holes, were any of them KLA members, to your knowledge, or any of them combatants, or were they civilians? Are you able to tell us? 1949
A. They were all civilians from the village. Among them there were three high school pupils. They were caught as they were escaping from their houses to save their lives.
Q. Now, sir, I'll get back to those people in a moment. You told us that at about the same time as you saw these bodies being thrown into the holes, you saw houses being burned in the village. Now, did the Serb troops and police eventually leave the village of Kotlina that day?
A. Yes. Late in the evening when darkness had fallen, they withdrew, leaving the village in flames. All the houses were on fire, all the cow sheds; everything.
Q. And did you and some of the other villagers who had gone into hiding try to do something in relation to the animals?
A. Yes. After the Serbian army and police withdrew, my cousin and I went straight back to the houses because you could hear the screams of animals being burned alive. And others also went back to look for the members of their families among the houses. They didn't find anything, but they freed some animals. And so we gathered in the village.
Q. In the course of trying to free animals that were trapped in buildings, did you find any other villagers who had not survived?
A. Yes. When I was -- I was in the yard looking at the body of Idriz Kuqi in the house of Liman Loku, it was a two-story house on fire. One other villager found the lifeless body of Vesel Vlashi, also an elderly man. He had been a cleaner at the school. He had been a member of my staff. He -- he was dead and his body was starting to burn. And they pulled him out into the yard and left the two of them together. 1950
MR. RYNEVELD: I might direct Your Honours' attention at this point to Schedule L. The first name and last name in Schedule L have just been referred to.
Q. Was there a third person who was found and who later died, sir?
A. Yes, there was. There was elderly man, 70 years old. His name was Zymer Loku. He was found seriously wounded with his right leg cut off and bullets in his body. It was in vain to give him help, and he died shortly after midnight.
Q. Pause there.
MR. RYNEVELD: Schedule L, fourth name from the bottom of that group.
Q. Moving on if, I may, because I'd like to finish in ten minutes if I can, sir. I understand that after seeing all this happening, later that evening you left Kotlina; is that right?
A. Yes, that's right. After all that horror, all that burning, I didn't know where my family was, whether they had been killed or what had happened to them. We didn't know what to do. We others decided to leave the village, and we walked all night and crossed the border into Macedonia.
Q. How many of you had remained behind and how many of you left that night for Macedonia?
A. There were about 50 of us who had gathered there.
Q. And you in fact did get to the Macedonia border by walking all night, the next morning. Where did you cross the border?
A. We passed the border during the night of the 24th, 25th of March, 1951 towards 6.00 in the morning when we entered the village of Jazhinca, which is on the border.
MR. RYNEVELD: Very quickly, Mr. Usher, if we could show the witness Exhibit 3, map 12 again. And while that's coming out, I'm going to ask a couple more questions.
Q. Sir, while you were in Macedonia, did you meet up with other villagers from Kotlina?
A. Yes. We were all in Skopje or Tetovo.
Q. And did you find out what happened to those men who had been thrown into the holes, apart from what you saw?
A. On that night when we set off to cross the border, three elderly people remained in the village. Rexhep Loku had three missing sons. Zymer Loku, who was also missing a son. And Damir Kuqi, who also was handicapped and couldn't walk. They remained behind.
Q. Now, look at the map, if you would, please. You've looked at this map before. For the record, Exhibit 3, map 12. Is the route you took walking out from Kotlina, is that on this map? There are some blue lines with arrows. Is your route depicted in this map?
A. The blue path from Kotlina to Gllobocica is the route whereby the population, the women and the children, tried to go. And the road by which I and others passed -- crossed the border, got through Goranca, and we came out a different place.
Q. And the route that the women and children took, is that shown on this map?
A. Yes, it is shown. 1952
Q. Did you -- I'm sorry. Maybe I misunderstood what you said. Could you, with your pointer, show the Court which route that the women and children took when they were driven away in those two lorries?
A. The children -- no. Now I'm talking about 9th of March when the women tried to go to Gllobocica. But on the 24th, they went on the road through Lac and up to Kacanik. Here on the right is the road they followed on the 24th of March.
Q. And the route you personally took on the evening of the -- I guess it was the 24th of March and the early morning of the 25th of March, was that directly to the Macedonian border? Is that shown? You may have answered this, and I may not have understood you correctly.
A. We, rather, went through the mountains, not on the roads. We crossed the border illegally, in some danger. And we don't know how we got through, but we went through the mountains.
Q. All right. Just a couple more quick questions, sir. To your knowledge, was your village ever bombed by NATO?
A. No. No, never.
Q. Did you ever hear that your village was bombed by NATO?
A. No. After we reached Jazhinca - it was the morning of the 25th of March - they told us that NATO had intervened in Kosova, and we were so pleased. And we thought if they had intervened earlier, perhaps these people would have been saved. We were pleased that NATO had intervened, because we knew that many other people were in danger.
Q. Sir, eventually you left Macedonia and you returned to your village; is that right? 1953
A. Yes. I returned to the village --
Q. And when you got there --
A. -- towards the middle of August.
Q. Thank you. When you got there, what can you tell us about the condition of the village you returned to? What did it look like to you? And I have some photographs you brought with you to show you.
A. When we returned to the village, the village was destroyed, just as we had left it that night. Everything was devastated and burned.
Q. All right. Now, you brought some photographs with you to The Hague; is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. And --
JUDGE MAY: Mr. Ryneveld, I'm going to interrupt. We have to have this argument tonight. We can't sit beyond half past 4.00. Would it be convenient to deal with the photographs in the morning?
MR. RYNEVELD: Certainly. We could do that, because I have some other photographs to deal with as well.
JUDGE MAY: [Microphone not activated]
MR. RYNEVELD: Yes. I probably would take another five to ten minutes to complete this, and this might be the best time to break.
JUDGE MAY: Yes. We're going to adjourn now. Mr. Loku, would you be back, please, tomorrow morning, to conclude your evidence, at half past 9.00. We'll adjourn for five minutes.
[The witness stands down]
MR. RYNEVELD: Thank you, Your Honour. 1954
--- Break taken at 3.43 p.m.
--- On resuming at 3.52 p.m.
JUDGE MAY: Mr. Nice, we've just been handed, as we came in, an additional document, an additional response. I should say that we've read all the pleadings on this issue to date and, having had them in writing, we must ask everybody to be brief in oral submissions, at least you and the amicus. With that in mind, you've each got ten minutes.
MR. NICE: Your Honour, thank you. The latest document, which is filed today and for which courtesy copies have been provided, explains one or two substitutions of names for names and in its schedule brings the earlier schedule up to date.
If I can invite the Chamber to look at the schedule briefly, it will see what has been set out there is the following: In the left-hand box -- I'm sorry. These have not found their way yet to the interpreters' booths. If there are some further copies, may they be provided straight away. And until they come, I'll speak even more slowly than I always do. The left-hand box contains facts that may be described as the highest common factor of the statements viva voce or proposed via 92 bis and listed on the right-hand side. And so what is true for what is set out in Orahovac or Rahovec is also true for Prizren, and so on. Your Honour, with that pattern in mind, I need deal no further with the document beyond saying this: As the Chamber may know, I think a second mission to complete the attestations required for 92 bis statements is under way at the moment, and of course further statements will become available should they be admitted in due course and will have to be 1955 BLANK PAGE 1956 subject to further applications pending the outcome of this hearing today. The Chamber is, I hope, assisted by not only the amici's brief but our now two documents, and I don't desire to repeat anything said there, but simply to make the following general and, I hope, helpful observations to guide the Chamber in what we venture to suggest will be a difficult task for this Chamber to perform.
There is a hierarchy in the form of evidence that comes before this Chamber, each of which form of evidence may attract different weight and take different amounts of time to be given.
At the top of the hierarchy, of course, is evidence given by full examination-in-chief, followed by the fullest of cross-examination. Second, if it should ever become necessary to consider it, is evidence where the evidence in chief can be given by adoption of a signed summary in order to save time, followed by full cross-examination. It's not something I think that's been tried very much or at all here, but given the tension between proper length of trial and proper examination of evidence, it's something that we might all want to have in mind as a reserve possibility.
Third in the hierarchy, if we allow for that second alternative, is the 92 bis proposal, and of course 92 bis statements, even if read or summarised to the Court, save an enormous amount of court time. Finally, there may be before the Chamber in one form or another statements read or summarised by others, for example, in the OSCE reports of the kind that the accused has been cross-examining on, human rights reports, and others. And indeed, the Chamber knows it was the 1957 Prosecution's proposal to summarise evidence by its own investigators' reports, a matter to which we would have invited the Chamber in due course to return.
The timetable for this trial was fixed by the Trial Chamber without particular input or discussion from the Prosecution but with regard, no doubt, to the estimates of time that the Prosecution gave to the evidence it would lead. Those estimates, however, were made on the basis of expected non- or low participation by the accused, and it may be inevitable that the present timetable may have to yield to change given, one, that the estimates were based effectively on no cross-examination, which at least doubles the time each witness takes; and two, that the very proper involvement of the accused in the trial is resulting in the raising of issues which may both extend evidence to be given viva voce or indeed add to the evidence which must be led to deal with the matters the accused raises.
I have to make it plain that this Prosecution is willing to have as much evidence led as -- live as is possible, and indeed I must inform the Chamber that witnesses generally are anxious to give evidence live and typically unhappy to learn that their evidence may be given simply in the form of any written statement.
But with all that background in mind, it is our duty to provide the Chamber with every means possible expediting the trial. We take the view that the Trial Chamber could properly adopt an inclusive approach and to decide the issues about 92 bis statements with an inclusive approach in mind. And I refer back not only to the various hierarchies of evidence 1958 but in particular to the possibility that in due course, particularly when it's heard OSCE witnesses or indeed when it's considered Dr. Ball's report tomorrow, it may conclude that some attention to the analysis of witnesses by others is desirable and appropriate, both because those reports of others have weight in themselves, enable a Trial Chamber to check its tentative conclusions against other material, and also because that other material will assist the Chamber to decide where and when it needs to look further for evidence.
And so those are the background matters and the approach we invite the Chamber to take. And with all those matters in mind and because I'm not going to repeat what is set out in our briefs or in the schedule to the brief, we invite the Chamber to say that all these statements that have been listed, whatever it is, 31 so far but with more to come, properly fall within the present 92 bis Rule which permits admission in whole or in part the evidence of a witness which goes to proof of a matter other than the acts of the accused as charged in the indictment, and that by doing so, this will assist in the fair determination of issues without in any sense diminishing the fairness of the trial. We repeat that we are entirely content to call any or all of these witnesses if the Chamber, in the difficult decision and discretion it has to make and exercise decides that that should be the case, but we would say that should such other witnesses be called live, that should in no way be at the expense of any of the time otherwise available for other parts of our evidence which still require the time originally contemplated for them and indeed may, for the reasons I've already given, require more 1959 time.
So, Your Honours, in summary, those are our submissions on 92 bis and I don't know if I can help you further certainly at this stage.
JUDGE MAY: No. Thank you.
MR. WLADIMIROFF: Your Honours, the Trial Chamber noticed that the amici filed a brief in order to seek guidance on the issue to assist the accused to make up his mind on the issue itself. Now, let me start to say that we perfectly well understand the idea of the Prosecution to seek the filing of the statements. It has been said a minute ago again. If such filing is necessary, it will certainly speed up things. And having said this, it seems to the amici that the first test here is the necessity of the offer of the Prosecution to file statements instead of live evidence in court.
The criterion of necessity raises an issue with the positive factor (a) listed in paragraph (i) of section (a) of Rule 92 bis. The Rules at least consider (i) to be a positive factor when the written statement is of a cumulative nature in that other witnesses have given live testimony of similar facts. This, of course, could or would conflict with the criterion of necessity.
A sensible approach seems this: If live evidence is capable to prove the issue at hand, the question raises whether further evidence is necessary. If the Trial Chamber is satisfied with the oral evidence so far, the test of necessity is not met.
The second issue is the concern of the amici about parts of hearsay evidence in the written statements. Here we reiterate that the 1960 written statements were not given under judicial supervision and that the reliability is not tested. The role of the Presiding Officer does not cover this matter.
The use of written statements is not unique. In other jurisdictions, like in civil law systems, it's daily practice. But in those systems, Judges make a distinction between statements taken by investigators and those taken under judicial control, that is, in most cases by an investigating Judge. When the Trial Chamber, being professional Judges, does not see an obstacle here and therefore accepts the filing of written statements, the amici respectfully suggests to the Trial Chamber not to consider those parts of the statement that passes hearsay evidence.
The third issue is the right of the accused, under paragraph (e) of section 4 of Article 21, the right to examine the witnesses against him. This indeed, Your Honours, is a crucial basic right of an accused. The Statute does say -- does not say anything about limitation and circumstances, so the question is whether this right is absolute. In the Aleksovski case, the Trial Chamber held that the exercise of the defendant's fair trial rights may, depending on the circumstances, be tempered by other concerns such as the need for equality between the parties.
It seems not necessary to examine all the ins and outs of all the fair trial rights. Here we are dealing with the right of the accused to examine witnesses against him for the very reason that the accused should, in this respect, be equal to the Prosecution. This is a one-way equality 1961 and not, as the Prosecution seems to interpret in their brief, a vice versa equality. The fair trial rights in the Statute are meant to provide the accused and no one else a fair trial. Leaving aside the general assertion of the Prosecution that they are entitled to fair trial rights as well, we believe that this is not the issue here from the perspective of the Prosecution. Their rights to cross-examine witnesses are not at stake.
Whatever is the case, it is unlikely that the Rules of Procedure and Evidence can simply override the basic rights of this basic right of the Statute. This understanding of Article 21 of the Statute in relation to the Rules is, in my opinion, one of the leading principles of the decision of your Trial Chamber, though in a slightly different composition, in the Sikirica case, as cited in our brief. So the reasoning of Rule 92 bis may derive from a perspective that does not conflict with the rights of the accused under the Statute. The factors as listed under paragraph (i) under section (A) of Rule 92 bis may be such a perspective.
Now, what if such factors conflict to each other? This seems to be the case in the present case since the accused objected to the use of written statements. This objection is a negative factor as listed under (b) of paragraph (ii) of section (A) of Rule 92 bis. The applicability of this negative factor, however, may depend on a proper showing or demonstration on the part of the accused that either the nature or source of his statements are unreliable or that its prejudicial effect outweighs its probative nature. 1962 The amici, Your Honours, are not in the position to argue this factor simply because we are not in any way instructed. The accused, however, did so far not specifically -- did not specifically give any thought to the issue. I can only say that on one hand there seems not to be a prima facie case for one of these arguments as raised in the Rule itself, but on the other hand, we have heard the challenges of the accused to the evidence given by live witnesses on the issues covered in the written -- in the written statements.
Balancing these interests, the amici suggests for the reasons of consistency that in that case of conflict, the negative factors override the positive ones, and this would result in not accepting the filing of the written statements.
That brings me to the fourth issue, whether the substantive nature of the information contained in the written statement would potentially constitute proof of a critical element of the Prosecution's case. The Prosecution is right when it argues that proof of the crime base does not go to the acts and conduct of the accused himself, but --
THE INTERPRETER: Mr. Wladimiroff is kindly requested to slow down. Thank you.
JUDGE MAY: You're being asked to slow down.
MR. WLADIMIROFF: Excuse me, Your Honour. But those facts presented in the written statements, however, do indirectly go to the matters that are linked in the indictment to acts and conduct of the accused. That is a matter for your Trial Chamber to consider. 1963 Different to the Prosecution arguing a broad interpretation of the term "critical element," the amici believe that such interpretation would be inconsistent with the fair trial rights of the Statute. It would turn the right of the accused to cross-examination of witnesses against him into a meaningless feature. Matters that are related to the heart of the matter as described in the indictment should not be excluded from cross-examination, and that's another issue for your Trial Chamber to consider.
Finally this: The consideration of the Prosecution as set out in the paragraph 18 of their brief, namely, that a short but inadequate trial would deny both the Prosecution and the international community the right to a fair trial seems not to be valid to the amici. I already dealt with the relation between the Prosecution and the fair right -- fair trial rights guaranteed to the accused. It's obvious that non-parties in the proceedings, like the international community, do not have a right to a fair trial as guaranteed under the Statute.
Let me conclude with this: The timetable is an important matter under the consideration of the Trial Chamber, but a timetable should not override the ins and outs of the fairness of a trial. These are our submissions.
JUDGE MAY: Thank you. One solution, Mr. Wladimiroff, may be this: to admit the statements under the Rule because they don't relate to the acts and conduct of the accused, but to require the witnesses to appear for cross-examination, in that way ensuring that where there are important issues, the accused has the ability to test the evidence. 1964
MR. WLADIMIROFF: That seems a very fair way to get out of the problem indeed, yes.
JUDGE MAY: Thank you. Mr. Milosevic, the issue which we're addressing is this, as you know, whether -- there are at the moment 23, I think, witness statements which we have seen. Some more have been since served. We're not concerned with those at the moment. We are concerned with the 23 witness statements. They all relate to the evidence which is being given or to events in the evidence which is being given, and the Prosecution are asking us to admit those statements as evidence without cross-examination.
The Rule provides that they can be admitted but that the -- that one of the matters which has to be considered is whether there are other factors which make it appropriate for a witness to attend for cross-examination, and we have to consider whether, when the issues are contested about which the witnesses give evidence, it's right that the witnesses should appear for cross-examination.
Yes.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, I will, within the ten-minute time limit that you have given me, present my views too. First of all, there are no undisputed facts which the opposite side wishes to point to, because the whole indictment is questionable, or rather, false. So I do not accept anybody's testimony unless the witness appears here, although we cannot speak of the equality of arms of the two sides here at all, because a few days ago you yourself explained to me 1965 that you refused to enable me to be set free, and I think that that decision by the Trial Chamber is against the law and I think that your friends are duty-bound to complain in that regard. With respect to Prosecution witnesses, I should like to remind you that the international covenant on political, human, and other rights, Article 14, guarantees the right to cross-examination of the witness, and that exists in the American Convention, the European Convention, the African Convention, and it is also guaranteed by your own Rules and Regulations of this illegal Tribunal. So it is public interest which demands that witnesses appear. Written statements are completely unreliable, especially because of their sources, the sources from which the written statements come, because all these written statements come from environments in which all the witnesses are in the hands of the same killers who disseminated bloodshed for several years in Kosovo and Metohija.
Secondly, I wish to draw your attention to the following, and that is that the five conventions guarantee a right to a public trial. Therefore, you cannot have a public character of a trial unless you enable witnesses to appear here in Court and to be subjected to cross-examination. You have the Universal Declaration, Article 10 of that declaration, Article 14 of the International Pact, then you have Article 6 of the European Convention and Article 8.5 of the American Convention, Article 5 of the American Declaration, and so on and so forth. So exceptions from public debate is only when it comes to law and order in the courtroom and public morals and law and order. 1966 Therefore, I insist upon the fact that we clarify this point fully, and we cannot accept anybody's written statement. And what we have just heard from the witnesses that have gone by so far, we see how much contradiction, how much false facts they operate with, how much mounted and rigged explanations they have, what a lot of manipulation there is between them and this false indictment. Therefore, if there is anything that must not be allowed, at any cost, is that some invisible witnesses appear here on the basis of whose statements - and we don't know who wrote the statements or what stands behind those statements - be allowed to go forward and to try a case on that basis.
I am being accused here of the most horrific crimes that anybody can be accused of, and now what they want to do is to do this on the basis of some sort of secret witnesses and written statements. I think that this is - how shall I put it? - an absurdity. This is an absurd demand which cannot be accepted in any way, especially not with the explanation given here that they take up too much time. Because if one would follow that logic, and according to this false indictment, the only thing that stops all this rigged-up trial here is my presence here and the examination of witnesses and what I'm saying here. So that when we're talking about cross-examination, I have the right to cross-examine the witnesses, to test their credibility, to test the circumstances of the evidence in chief, and a series of other matters. Let us go back to the first question, and that is to stop me exercising my right, the right that you yourselves have prescribed through your Rules and Regulations. So this is not a concession on your part; it 1967 BLANK PAGE 1968 is a right that has been written down, the right of a person to be able to defend himself. I don't want to enter into the illegality of your Tribunal here, but even as an illegal Tribunal in Court yourself, you have prescribed that very right yourselves; and on the other hand, you make it impossible physically for the accused standing before you to avail himself of that right, because there is no possibility whatsoever for me to communicate with the witnesses, to examine the witnesses, to talk to my associates, to consult people and amass facts and information which would topple all your rigged evidence which the witnesses are putting forward in conformity with the false indictment.
Do you know that thousands of citizens contact my associates to challenge what they are hearing here? How can you imagine that under conditions of this kind, where I'm working from 7.00 in the morning until 6.00 in the afternoon, 6.00 p.m., losing so much time, sitting here -- I am flooded with material. I have just received this Patrick Ball material, who I hear from the Prosecutor is to be called tomorrow. The lady has provided me with this list just a moment ago, and it contains a hundred pages for me to read. How can you imagine that it is possible for me to exercise my right, the right that you have prescribed yourselves, the right physically -- I am being physically stopped from exercising my right, and then you claim that this is a fair trial and that there is equality of arms between the two parties.
JUDGE MAY: Mr. Milosevic, you wouldn't have been in this position if you had read the material before. I don't know when Patrick Ball's report was disclosed to you, but I have no doubt it was some time ago. So 1969 if you had read it before, you wouldn't be in this position.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] That again is not true. You, as an institution here, dealing with what you deal with, you have trials that go on for several years for a concrete event linked, for example, to one locality - who knows where - whereas you here are presenting a false indictment which charges me, accuses me and my state and my nation for three wars in thousands of localities, presenting tragic events from that war individually, so as to mask an answer to the main question: Why war, why terrorism, why the crime against Yugoslavia, and why the NATO aggression? And then what you're doing now, in the thousands of different localities, over three wars, you are shortening in comparison to the other cases that you're dealing with here and trying here. And then you want to show that all this is just. Why didn't you get through all those other cases in one day? But you've been keeping people here for years. Why don't you let all those Serbs and Croats and Muslims, why don't you set them free, if you have proclaimed from the other side of the well that it is I who am responsible? Why don't you let all these other people go home, then, because you now have been given the opportunity of proving everything you wish to prove here with me here --
JUDGE ROBINSON: [Previous translation continues]... to be clear as to your position on these statements. There are two possibilities: Firstly, the statements will not be admitted at all; secondly, the statements may be admitted but with the right to cross-examine. You have stressed your right to cross-examine, and it is in that regard that I'm seeking the clarification. If the statements were to be admitted but you 1970 would have the right to cross-examine, would you have a problem with that?
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] There can be no compromise. A witness who has something to say must come here and say it, testify here in Court, and then be subjected to cross-examination, and not to have somebody write a statement for him and then I am going to examine a phantom statement here in Court of some individual who is prepared and who has rigged all this and serves the function of this false indictment. So my stand is categorically clear: Until the witness comes here into the Court and fulfills the right and guarantee to a complete cross-examination, we are not able to accept his testimony as any evidence or proof, and that is the case in every normal court. Of course, I don't know what it is like for your particular Court. But I think that my position there is quite clear and quite categorical. Witnesses who appear in Court --
JUDGE ROBINSON: It's quite clear to me.
JUDGE MAY: Yes. Thank you, Mr. Milosevic. Mr. Nice, one minute.
MR. NICE: Four minutes, I think. Mr. Tapuskovic is on his feet.
JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Tapuskovic.
MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I should like to draw your attention to one point, and it is an important one. What Slobodan Milosevic said a moment ago with respect to Patrick Ball, that he received the document only today, it was not until today that this document was served. It was not translated into Serbian until today. The 1971 document was not translated into Serbian, nor did the Trial Chamber make a decision in that regard.
JUDGE MAY: It was produced, I have no doubt, in English, so at least two of the amici would have been able to read it.
MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] But it should have been translated, and we did not receive a translated copy, and I think the decision was made that disclosure should follow these lines. You were not asked -- all vital documents should be disclosed and submitted in both languages.
JUDGE MAY: The languages of the Tribunal. Yes, Mr. Nice. Can you help us about that?
MR. NICE: Certainly. The original version of Dr. Ball's report was provided months ago in English. It was resupplied last week, in answer to the accused's request following a question of mine to the Chamber, in English. It was first provided in B/C/S, in Serbian, as soon as it was available. It's a long document and it took a long time to be translated, given the other priorities that the CLSS have and that they determine, not us. It's been made available for translation at the earliest possible moment, but of course it doesn't fall for the priority that documents that have to be translated enjoy. So he's had it for months in English and last week in English as well. Can I, in a couple of minutes, make just a few other points, because I was very short in opening.
JUDGE MAY: Two minutes.
MR. NICE: Certainly. Thank you. 1972 The observations are entirely inappropriate and unacceptable of the accused about how witness statements are taken, will have to be subject to evidence and methodology, in our respectful submission, in due course. The amici's observations about the sufficiency of live evidence should nevertheless take account of the reality that if one were to call 80 live witnesses, where 800.000, it is said, have been transported or moved or whatever, then one is calling something on the basis of 1 in 10.000. We are aware and the Chamber is no doubt aware of the obvious need to have as many witnesses as possible where a sampling is of those sort of fractions. Hearsay is specifically covered in the Rules of the Tribunal and doesn't in itself exclude 92 bis. The right of cross-examination has been specifically dealt with in the provision of the ruling that allowed for 92 bis when the Chamber in Plenary Session allowed for it, and likewise taken into account were all the conventions to which the accused has referred. Therefore, they don't in themselves automatically allow him to have these witnesses before the Chamber. I very respectfully would observe that if this particular accused's mere opposition leads to a finding that then the evidence has to be in some form before this Chamber, although we personally have no objections at all, the Chamber has, of course, to have in mind the effect elsewhere.
JUDGE MAY: No, but there's been -- it's not a question of mere opposition. There has been detailed cross-examination on the points, which have been put into issue.
MR. NICE: Well, I'm making the point with other cases in mind. 1973 Were the course to be adopted of the witnesses coming to be cross-examined, we would press the Chamber to say that certainly a summary of what the statements contain should be made available first, as a matter of record, or alternatively, the statements should be read out in full, if that wouldn't take too long.
So, Your Honour, those, I think, are all the matters that I desire to raise by way of reply. And certainly we invite you to consider not just the two alternatives that His Honour Judge Robinson referred to but the three alternatives that remain for consideration, because it's our duty, in the interests the brevity of the case, to do that. Our position remains as it always has been.
JUDGE MAY: Yes. Thank you. We'll consider these matters and give our ruling in due course. We'll adjourn now until half past 9.00 tomorrow.
--- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 4.29 p.m., to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 12th day of March, 2002, at 9.30 a.m.