³⁹⁷⁵

Wednesday, 1 May 2002

[Open session]

[The accused entered court]

--- Upon commencing at 9.32 a.m.

JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Ryneveld.

MR. RYNEVELD: Thank you, Your Honour. At the outset, before we call our first proposed witness for the day, we, on the 29th of April, provided a letter for distribution to all parties, indicating the next 28 witnesses that we proposed to call. I might say that the first two, Mr. Isufi and Mr. Kabashi, are 92 bis witness proposals for whom we already have permission by the Trial Chamber to call as 92 bis. There then follow a number of witnesses, numbers 3 through 18 on our list, but for two of them which will not require that ruling now, that we have not yet received ruling to proceed, and I anticipate at the rate at which we hope to go, we will actually get to some of those witnesses who are here today and ready to start testifying. And just alerting the Court that we're going to require a ruling before we can actually call those witnesses.

Also, over the weekend, a review reveals that number 3 on our list, Shaqiri, there appears to be a problem in that the witness gave two statements, only one of which has been bis'ed. So until that matter is resolved, we'll go -- we'll skip number 3 so that we can resolve that technical issue and go number 1, 2, 4, 5. So first will be Isufi, then Mr. Kabashi, then we'll skip Shaqiri, and in the event the Court permits 92 bis for Haradinaj and Gerxhaliu, that should probably do for today. I ³⁹⁷⁶ just thought I'd give you that indication that we've got some rulings to obtain before we can proceed, after the first two witnesses. With that preliminary matter, I would propose to call Perparim Isufi as our first witness.

[The witness entered court]

JUDGE MAY: Yes. Let the witness take the declaration.

WITNESS: PERPARIM ISUFI

[Witness answered through interpreter]

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

JUDGE MAY: Thank you. If you'd like to take a seat.

MR. RYNEVELD: Thank you, Your Honour. Examined by Mr. Ryneveld:

Q. Now, Mr. Isufi, I understand, sir, that you are 22 years old and you are at this moment unmarried. Is that correct?

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone on, please. We can't hear anything.

[Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

[Trial Chamber confers]

JUDGE MAY: Apparently it will take a few minutes to sort out the problem. We shall wait.

Mr. Ryneveld, I don't think there's anything we can usefully do.

MR. RYNEVELD: No. The only thing I might indicate --

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, Mr. Ryneveld, please.

MR. RYNEVELD: Thank you. The only thing I might suggest is if the Court wants to find the location of the next village on the map while ³⁹⁷⁷ we're waiting. Anything to save a few minutes.

Exhibit 83, page 6, on the right-hand column, you'll see number 14, and about an inch to the left of that number 14, you'll see an orange sort of marking with Mazgit, and that, I understand, will be the community that this witness will be talking about. Other than that, I think I should wait until we have the go-ahead to proceed.

JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Ryneveld.

MR. RYNEVELD: Thank you, Your Honour.

Q. Witness, can -- oh, you'll have to put the headphones on. Can you hear me, Witness?

A. Yes.

Q. All right. Mr. Isufi, do I understand correctly that you are a 22-year-old, unmarried Muslim of ethnic -- Albanian ethnicity, living in Kosovo?

A. Yes, that's correct.

Q. And did you live in the village of Mazgit, in the municipality of Obilic, in March of 1999?

A. Yes, I did.

Q. And what was your occupation at the time? What did you do?

A. At that time, I didn't work.

Q. Did you go to school?

A. Yes, I used to go to school.

Q. Now, did you give a statement to officials from the ICTY on the 10th of May, 1999?

A. Yes, I did. ³⁹⁷⁸

Q. And subsequently, did someone read -- or give you a copy in Albanian of that statement on the 2nd of February, 2002?

A. Yes.

Q. Did you have an opportunity to read over that statement and agree that that was -- that the contents of that statement were true and accurate to the best of your belief?

A. Yes, that's correct.

Q. And at that time, you swore a solemn declaration before a presiding officer of this Court, indicating that it was true to the best of your knowledge and belief; is that correct?

A. Yes.

MR. RYNEVELD: Might that statement now be tendered as an exhibit in these proceedings, Your Honours.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. We'll have an exhibit number.

THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit 117.

JUDGE KWON: Excuse me?

THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit 117, Your Honour.

JUDGE KWON: Can I see the registry?

[Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

MR. RYNEVELD: Thank you. If it please the Court, I propose to read a very brief summary of what is contained in the statement. Your Honours, according to the statement, on the morning of the 27th of March, 1999, the witness and his family were forced to flee their home, and half of the women and children fled the village and went to Pristina, due to the mobilisation of the Serb forces around this village. ³⁹⁷⁹ That afternoon, the Serbs started to shell the village of Mazgit. The remaining villagers fled to the village of Bariljevo. The witness spent the night in Bariljevo before returning to his village. At noon the following day, the witness could hear automatic gunfire and shells falling, and he therefore fled and headed for Pristina, with the remaining women and children. En route to Pristina, a vehicle containing three men dressed in blue camouflage police uniforms pulled up. They appeared to be heavily armed with automatic weapons, and they opened fire on the group, killing four of the women. The balance of the group ran the rest of the way to Pristina. In his statement, this witness describes the incidents en route in some detail. The witness describes in his statement that a few days later, he heard from a passerby that the police were forcibly expelling people and that a number of Albanian people were being killed. The witness and his family left and were then directed by police to walk around the city with many others. The column, which, in his estimate, by that time numbered in the thousands, were eventually directed by police to the Dragodan train station in Pristina, where they were ordered to get on an overcrowded train. They had no idea where they were going and were not allowed to get off the train. The witness saw many Serb police and army. He noted that the Serbs set fire to two houses on each side of the train. He then describes more about what happened and indicates that they arrived near the border early the next morning, when the people on the train were told to disembark and walk up the tracks to the Macedonian border. ³⁹⁸⁰ That is a very brief summary of the witness's statement, but Your Honours have the full statement tendered as Exhibit 117. Thank you.

JUDGE MAY: Thank you. Mr. Milosevic.

Cross-examined by Mr. Milosevic:

Q. [Interpretation] Why did they, as you say - the Serbs - start shelling your village on the 27th of March?

JUDGE MAY: It's not for the witness to say; it's for those who were doing the shelling.

Did you see any reason for shelling of your village that day?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes; only because we were Albanians. That's the only reason.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. And what time did this happen?

A. It was about 3.00 in the afternoon.

Q. And how many inhabitants, on that occasion in your village, were killed?

A. You think on the 27th of March, when the shelling started?

Q. Yes. Yes.

A. No one was killed that day.

Q. Well, a moment ago you said that they shelled the village to kill the Albanians, but nobody was killed.

A. They shelled the village, but one hour before they did that, the children and the men left, and only young men and a few young -- a few men, adults, remained in the village. And we too left to Bariljeve after ³⁹⁸¹ the shelling started, and that day, I repeat, no one was hurt or killed.

Q. So you claim that the soldiers shelled an empty village in which there were just a few people and that they did not know that the village was empty, in fact; is that it?

A. I don't know if they knew that the village was empty, but they started shelling at around 3.00, as I said.

Q. And why did the police in February of that same year, close to your village, as you say, at 800 metres, set up a checkpoint? Do you know anything about that? Do you know the reasons for that?

A. No, I don't know the reason for that.

Q. And did, as you say, the Serbs, up until 1999, or rather, those developments which you're describing now, maltreat anybody from your village, or kill anybody?

A. No. Until that time, no.

Q. Why, then, do you say in your statement that your relatives and you were afraid that the Serbs would first abuse you and then kill you?

A. I said because we were afraid, since we saw that the situation was deteriorating with every passing day, and we saw checkpoints set up in close vicinity to the village.

Q. And did you see any members of the KLA in the vicinity of the village?

A. No, I didn't see. There wasn't any, in fact.

Q. And when did you see the KLA for the first time?

A. It was very late that I saw them. In fact, I saw them only on television. ³⁹⁸²

Q. And where did you see them first off television, live?

A. In March 1999.

Q. And where did you see them on that occasion?

A. In Llap area.

Q. And when was that? I mean, you said it was March, but when in March?

A. I don't remember the exact date.

Q. Roughly, in relation to what you were saying about the 27th of March. So you saw them before the 27th of March. How many days before?

A. About ten days before that.

Q. So ten days before -- you saw members of the KLA ten days before the village was shelled; is that right?

A. Yes.

Q. How many of them were there?

A. There were only two.

Q. And what kind of weapons were they carrying?

A. I don't know. I never looked at them properly.

Q. Were they far away from you?

A. I saw -- I told you that I saw them only on television.

Q. I'm talking about the two you say you saw some ten days before the village was shelled.

A. Yes. That was how it was, ten days before that.

Q. Well, that's why I'm asking you. How far away were they from you when you weren't able to see what weapons they had?

A. I saw them only on television, I said. I didn't see them armed. ³⁹⁸³

JUDGE MAY: You said that you saw two in the Lap area.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

JUDGE MAY: The question that you were asked is: When did you first see any KLA off television, live? And you said: In March 1999.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. That was on television. I never saw them with my own eyes.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. All right. This is quite clear. Let's go on. When did you hear of the KLA? When did you first learn about the KLA?

A. It was rather late when I first heard of them.

Q. What does that mean, "late"? When? Approximately when?

A. At that time, March.

Q. Was that over television too?

A. Yes.

Q. Very well. Now, you say in your statement as soon as you saw the Serb policemen, you started getting ready to flee from the village. Is that correct?

A. Yes.

Q. But before that, you said that the policemen had a checkpoint for quite a long time in your neighbourhood. Is that correct?

A. Yes.

Q. If you were afraid of the police, why didn't you run away when you saw that they had a checkpoint there?

A. Because we just didn't think that they would go on to commit these ³⁹⁸⁴ crimes.

Q. When you ran away from the village, nothing had happened yet. How did you know, then, that somebody would commit some crimes, as you had put it?

A. We knew because we just knew that, from day to day, they started to kill the population.

Q. I am asking you: How come you knew? And your answer is: We knew because we knew. Can you tell me: How did you know, when nothing had happened?

JUDGE MAY: Well, I think he's given the best answer he can. And we know that the shelling did in fact start. So it's not really going to take us much further to argue about why they left.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. May, what you said just now, "We know that the shelling did in fact start," that is very questionable. We can only say that the witness has been asserting that the shelling had started, but we do not know that it started.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. That's his evidence, that the shelling started. You asked him: Why did you leave? And his answer was they knew trouble was coming. And in fact, according to him, trouble came. So there's not much point going on, little point going on, asking this line of questioning.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] That's precisely why I'm putting this question: How did you know that they would shell the village? They were there for so long, so many days, and they didn't do any such thing.

Q. How did you know that they would start shelling? ³⁹⁸⁵

JUDGE MAY: I don't think there's any further point going on with this.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We didn't know, but -- we didn't know that they were going to shell until the moment when they started.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. So you did not know that. And previously you said that you had known that it would happen. On that day, the 27th of March, in your village, apart from the local villagers, were there any other people there as well?

A. No. Only us local people.

Q. In your statement, you say that half of the women and children left the village already in the early morning hours and went to Pristina. Is that correct?

A. Yes, that's right.

Q. Why did they do that?

A. Because they were scared.

Q. What were they scared of?

A. They were scared of your forces.

Q. But the forces had been there for months and weeks before that.

JUDGE MAY: We're going round the same point. His evidence is that they were scared and they had something to be scared of and that shelling started. It's a waste of time to go on asking him why they were scared. He's told you.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] ³⁹⁸⁶

Q. Were you with them on the way to Pristina?

A. Yes.

Q. Is it correct that only men stayed back in the village?

A. Yes.

Q. And were the men armed?

A. No, they were not.

Q. When you arrived in Bariljevo, at the village of Bariljevo, you claim that you walked into an empty house. Is that right?

A. Yes.

Q. What did you do there?

A. Nothing. We only stayed there that night. We stayed there the night of 27th of March.

Q. When you say that you only spent the night there, was it all of you who had set out, these women, that is, and you together with them, you spent the night of the 27th of March there?

A. Yes, those women were there too.

Q. And this house in Bariljevo, how far away is it from your village?

A. I don't know exactly, but about five or six kilometres.

Q. Five or six kilometres? Well, you said that you had set out from the village at least an hour before the alleged shelling started, that the shelling started at 3.00, so you left at 2.00 at the latest. Is that right?

A. Yes.

Q. So as for the entire afternoon all way up to the evening, from 2.00 until the evening, you had passed only five kilometres? ³⁹⁸⁷

A. Yes, that's right.

Q. And who made you in charge of taking the women and children to Pristina?

JUDGE MAY: The first question is: Was he in charge? Were you in charge of taking the women and children to Pristina?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, I wasn't in charge.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. It was my understanding that you were. Who was in charge of doing that?

A. There was nobody in charge. We just set out that day for Prishtina.

Q. So you were the only man who went to Pristina together with the women and children, as part of that group?

A. Yes.

Q. And all the rest remained in the village in order to take care of the cattle?

A. Yes, that's right.

Q. So how many men stayed back in the village in order to take care of the safety of the cattle?

A. Eight or nine of them.

Q. Tell me: How high was the embankment that you walked down when you left the asphalt road?

A. You mean when we climbed up onto the embankment?

JUDGE MAY: So it's clear, Mr. Milosevic, we are now on the next day. ³⁹⁸⁸ Is this right, Mr. Isufi? You returned after the first shelling, you returned the following day to the village?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

JUDGE MAY: But then, according to your statement --

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for the Presiding Judge, please.

JUDGE MAY: According to your statement, there was then another shelling of the village; is that right?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

JUDGE MAY: And the statement says the men in the village had decided -- "The men of the village had decided that if we were attacked again, I would be responsible for getting the remaining women and children to Pristina and that the men would stay within the village for as long as possible to make sure the cattle were safe."

Is that right?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

JUDGE MAY: So on that second day, you were responsible, were you, for getting the women and children to Pristina?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, that's right. They left me to go with them.

JUDGE MAY: And then the shelling started. Were you in the village then, when the shelling started on this occasion?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, not then. I wasn't.

JUDGE MAY: In any event, you and the women and children, a group of about 20, then set off towards Pristina; is that right?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. ³⁹⁸⁹

JUDGE MAY: We come to the time when you left the road and came down the embankment that the accused is asking you about.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Milosevic.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. So this second time when you went to Pristina was actually on the next day?

A. Yes, it was the next day, that Sunday, 28th of March.

Q. The 27th, in the afternoon, you went to Pristina. That's what you said. Is that right?

A. No. It was the 28th.

Q. You went to Pristina twice; the first time on the 27th, in the afternoon, and the second time on the 28th. This is in accordance with your statement and it's also in accordance with what you've just been saying; is that right?

JUDGE MAY: No. That's not fair to the witness. He said on the first occasion they went to Bariljevo and that's where they spent the night. Then they came back to the village and the next day they set out for Pristina. That's what his statement says and that was his evidence.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. But the next day, somebody made you responsible of taking care of the women and children, taking them to Pristina. That's what you said only a short while ago.

A. I wasn't ordered to do this, but I took this upon myself, and we set off for Prishtina. ³⁹⁹⁰

Q. Yes, but a short while ago you said that you were responsible for taking the women and children to Pristina.

A. I wasn't given a duty, but I was the only person left to do this.

Q. Why were you the only person, when you say that there were seven or eight other men there as well, as you had put it?

A. Well, I was the youngest.

Q. That means that all the others had some more important business to attend to; right?

A. No. No, they didn't have important jobs to do. They were only sitting at home and looking at the situation and seeing what was going on, like on other days.

Q. Since you went on the first day to Pristina and you covered only five kilometres, then how did you decide --

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Milosevic, you musn't misrepresent the evidence. He didn't go to Pristina the first day.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, but the intention was the first day to have the women and children go to Pristina; however, they didn't make it all the way to Pristina. Right? So that is my question.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. How did they decide to go back rather than continue their journey to Pristina?

A. No, we didn't decide to go back, but we went straight to Prishtina.

Q. I don't really understand you.

A. We continued on the road straight to Prishtina. ³⁹⁹¹

JUDGE KWON: Mr. Isufi, in your statement, page -- it is page 2, and third paragraph, at the end of the paragraph: "When I reached Bariljevo, I stayed in an empty house. This house had already been looted and the occupants were no longer there. The only members of my immediate family that were in Bariljevo was my brother, Arben, and myself." And you said:

"All the other members of my family had fled to Pristina an hour or so before the shelling started."

Did the other members of your family go to Pristina or not?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, they did, one hour before the shelling.

JUDGE KWON: Were they different people from those who took care of the next morning?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm sorry, I didn't understand the question.

JUDGE KWON: Some members of your family had fled to Pristina on 27th of March; is it right?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

JUDGE KWON: Were they not the same people as those who took -- who took with you to Pristina the next day? Are they different people or the same people?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, they were not the same people. They were different people.

JUDGE KWON: Yes. That seems to be the confusion of the accused. Please go on. ³⁹⁹²

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, obviously there has been some confusion, but I'm not the one who caused it.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. You did not return to your village from Bariljevo; you continued your journey to Pristina. Is that right?

A. Yes, that's right, on the 28th of March. It was a Sunday.

Q. And who was it that returned to the village again? Was it only you or was it everybody together?

A. I said we didn't return to the village as of Sunday.

Q. I don't understand. You left on the 27th of March, you spent the night in Bariljevo, and then you proceeded to Pristina. On the 28th of March, again you went from your village to Pristina; is that right?

A. Yes. We left for Prishtina from our village.

Q. So on the 27th and on the 28th of March, you were going to Pristina from your village; is that right?

A. No. I didn't go to Prishtina on the 27th of March. I went to Bariljeve. I went to Prishtina on the 28th of March.

Q. When did you return from Bariljevo? You said that you spent the night in Bariljevo.

A. We returned on the next morning.

Q. Together?

A. Yes.

Q. So these very same people that you went with to Bariljevo returned with you to the village and then the next day, again, you and these same people went to Pristina. Did I understand you correctly? ³⁹⁹³

A. Yes, you did. That was how it was.

Q. Well, a short while ago, in response to Mr. Kwon's question, you said that these were not the same people, and on the first day, it was one set of people that went and, the second day, it was a different set of people, and now you are claiming that it was the same people. What is correct: What you said a short while ago to Mr. Kwon or what you are saying to me now?

A. The correct answer was the one I gave to Judge Kwon. On Saturday, my family and others left. But on Sunday, it was those women and men that we returned from Bariljeve to the village.

Q. And then these same people went to Pristina again, together with you?

A. Yes.

Q. These same people who had left the previous day.

JUDGE MAY: We have taken this as far as we can. Let us move on to another topic. You were talking about what happened on the journey to Pristina. It may be as well if we went on from there rather than going round and round on the same point.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, we can move on because a major contradiction, discrepancy, is obvious here in these statements.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Let's go back to this embankment that you've been describing. You said that this embankment constituted a major danger.

A. Yes.

Q. And why was this embankment a major danger? Could you please ³⁹⁹⁴ explain that?

A. Because it was the main asphalt road, Prishtina-Mitrovica, near that place.

Q. And you say that on that road you didn't see anybody.

A. No. When we went to -- on the way to Mitrovica, yes, but to Prishtina, no.

Q. But you say that, afterwards, a car appeared.

A. Yes. Once we crossed the main road, asphalt road, we went to that embankment, and then on the side road leaving to Obiliq, we saw that car approaching.

Q. So the vehicle was not driving along the road that you had already passed?

A. No, it was not.

Q. It was my understanding from your statement that when you were watching the road, you didn't notice the vehicle, but then it got closer to you at a great speed. Is that right?

A. Yes, that's right.

Q. So was the vehicle driving along the asphalt road or some other road?

A. It was driving on the main, asphalt road.

Q. A little while ago you said that the vehicle was not on the asphalt road, the main road, but that you saw a vehicle on a smaller byroad.

A. Yes. From that side road, then they turned and came to the road where they were leaving. ³⁹⁹⁵

Q. But this great speed that they were moving at, this was on the asphalt road. That is what your statement says.

A. Yes.

Q. And when did they cross onto the side road and return to the main road? What actually happened?

A. They came and stopped when we crossed the asphalt road.

Q. And how far away from you were they?

A. When they came out of the car, it was night [as interpreted]. It was -- we were afraid.

Q. How far away from you were they?

A. You mean when they came out of the car?

Q. Yes. You were fleeing, you were afraid. How far away from you were they?

A. We were very afraid, but they let us go on, on our way.

JUDGE MAY: No. Mr. Isufi, could you just concentrate on the question: How far away were the men, when they got out of the car, from you?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] They were very close to us.

JUDGE MAY: Can you give us an idea of metres or something of the sort?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Maybe 15 metres away, not further. Fifteen or twenty, approximately.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. I understand that you -- in your statement, you explained how you crossed the road, that you didn't see them, and that afterwards, they ³⁹⁹⁶ appeared on the road. Is that correct?

JUDGE MAY: Now, we've been through this. Mr. Milosevic, this is the way the time is taken up, through repetition. He's explained. Now, we've got to the stage where the men were out of the car, they were 15 to 20 metres away from him. I suggest you move on from there.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Did you run as you were fleeing from them?

A. We started to walk faster, in fact.

Q. You said that these people were wearing masks.

A. Yes.

Q. What did those masks look like?

A. The usual masks.

Q. You mean what you pull over your head; is that it?

A. Yes.

Q. With slits for the eyes and mouth, or no slits for the mouth?

A. I'm not sure I could see them, if there were any slits, because I was very much scared.

Q. And you said that they had baseball caps.

A. I didn't understand the question.

Q. Well, when speaking of them, you said that they had baseball caps.

A. Yes.

MR. RYNEVELD: Your Honours, as you know, I don't like to interfere. However, if the witness is going to be challenged by something he is alleged to have said in his statement, it ought to be accurate. I don't know whether it's a matter of translation in the copy that the ³⁹⁹⁷ witness -- that the accused is looking at, but in fairness, the witness does not have a statement in front of him, and there are a couple of points that are put to him now that he is alleged to have said that I can't find in the copy of the statement.

JUDGE MAY: Let's get it straight. One is the baseball cap, which in the statement refers to a peaked-type cap. What was the other point?

MR. RYNEVELD: There's a reference to masks.

JUDGE MAY: He agreed with the masks.

MR. RYNEVELD: But it wasn't in the statement.

JUDGE MAY: Certainly not in the statement.

MR. RYNEVELD: No, but it was said -- it was said that it was -- that it was in the statement. These are the kinds of things that --

JUDGE MAY: I don't think it was. I mean, it was put, of course, in a misleading way.

MR. RYNEVELD: That's my point.

JUDGE MAY: Let us get the description from the witness now. Mr. Isufi --

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Just one moment, please.

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Milosevic, we need to clear this up. What were these -- you tell us now: What were these men wearing?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] They were wearing police uniforms.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. And what did they have on their heads?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] They were -- some of them had masks.

JUDGE MAY: Did they have any sort of hats on?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I didn't see them wearing any hats. ³⁹⁹⁸

JUDGE MAY: Can you do anything more to describe the type of mask it was?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The ones you put on your -- over your head.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. Yes, Mr. Milosevic.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Just a question before I go on. You say some wore masks. How many of them wore masks?

A. I saw one of them wearing a mask. The others, I wasn't able to identify.

Q. I'm not talking about identifying them, but what did the others wear?

A. The three of them had worn police uniforms.

Q. And a moment ago, when asked by Mr. May, you said that they wore masks on their heads. I'm asking about their heads now.

A. I said masks.

Q. And you said that they didn't have anything else on their heads, in response to that same question; is that right?

A. No, they didn't. No, they didn't have anything on their heads.

Q. That means that I was wrong when I mentioned the baseball caps; right?

JUDGE MAY: He said they didn't have anything on, so there's no point going on with it.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Let me read you what I received from ³⁹⁹⁹ you. I didn't write this. It is a database of the International Crisis Group, and then all the rest of it is what the opposite side provided me with as being a witness statement with the facts, and it says, at the bottom, and it is page -- a page that has been marked 0305163. At the bottom of that page, there's a paragraph, which reads as follows: "I travelled with a group of 20 persons from Mazgit to Pristina. When we crossed the road at Orlovic, nearby a white Passat stopped, and it was moving at great speed. Three men got out of the car, wearing blue camouflage uniforms with black masks, baseball caps," and so on and so forth.

Therefore -- have you found that passage?

JUDGE MAY: What is this statement, Mr. Milosevic? We haven't got it. We've got a reference to a peak-type cap.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It was what was supplied with the statement from the International Crisis Group, and it was handed over together with the witness statement.

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Ryneveld, no doubt that's a separate statement which you disclosed to the accused.

MR. RYNEVELD: Undoubtedly. We've disclosed everything regarding this witness, but this is not contained in the 92 bis material, but it's been disclosed to the accused, yes.

JUDGE MAY: So what is put to you, Mr. Isufi, is this: That in a statement you made to the International Crisis Group, you describe the men as wearing blue camouflage uniforms with black masks and baseball caps. Can you -- in a moment, Mr. Tapuskovic. I'm asking the witness a ⁴⁰⁰⁰ question.

Can you help us as to why you said that or whether there's an inaccuracy or something of that sort?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I didn't say with caps.

[Trial Chamber confers]

JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Tapuskovic, what is it?

MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please, Mr. Tapuskovic.

MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] The statement that Mr. Milosevic is referring to is under the number of 003163, and it has been disclosed. It was disclosed a long time ago. The amicus has it, and it is something which exists in the Prosecution documents.

MR. RYNEVELD: Absolutely, Your Honour. I have a copy of that document here.

JUDGE MAY: So there's no mystery about this, you are under an obligation to disclose all the statements which you have which are relevant to what a witness has said. As far as the Court is concerned, you only serve on the Court, produce to the Court, the relevant documents which are to be admitted into evidence. This particular document is one which you've disclosed under your duty to do so; it has nothing to do with the document which you've disclosed to us. I'm just going to confer.

[Trial Chamber confers]

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Ryneveld, you can disclose to us in due course -- I don't suppose you've got copies of that statement now, but we'll have it and we'll have it as an exhibit. ⁴⁰⁰¹

MR. RYNEVELD: Thank you, Your Honour. I was going to recommend that I do that. The document is clear. We can provide it during the break.

JUDGE MAY: Yes, if you would.

[Trial Chamber confers]

JUDGE MAY: Yes. Now, what we're going to do, Mr. Milosevic, is this: We're going to have this statement put into evidence. It will be an exhibit, this other statement. We've heard the discrepancy which you've referred to, and you can move on to the next point.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Just before I do so, one more question, please, as I don't know the procedure here. When you have two statements or several documents, now, if I point out a contradiction, do you enter it into evidence as an exhibit, or do you take separate decisions on when you're going to do that?

JUDGE MAY: It depends entirely on the circumstances. If a statement is exhibited, then of course it becomes part of the evidence and you will be able, in due course, to point out any discrepancies. If there are discrepancies of importance and the statement isn't before the Court, you can ask that it be put before the Court. That's your right, to ask that it be exhibited. So far in this case, I think I'm right in saying that if there have been important discrepancies, various statements have been exhibited during the course of the evidence of the witness.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] So they're included whenever there has been a discrepancy of some kind. I merely wish to emphasise that every statement which speaks about incompatibility, or rather, the ⁴⁰⁰² falsehood of the testimony, is relevant. But let me move on.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. You said, therefore, a moment ago, that you were escaping, that it was night-time, and that you weren't able to see clearly or to notice the details. Is that right?

A. What date are you thinking of?

Q. I'm talking about that alleged appearance of the three men in a car. That's the event I'm referring to, the one you have been talking about. You say you were fleeing, it was night - that's what you said - and that you weren't able to see the details. Is that correct or not?

A. No, this is not right. It was not at night. It was halfway through the day. It was about 12.00.

Q. I don't understand anything, then. A moment ago, the witness said that it was night-time.

JUDGE MAY: That is right, but -- just a moment. It may be that there's a problem about the transcript, which we'll need to look into, or the translation. You see, Mr. Isufi --

THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter corrects herself. It was he said, "I was afraid, I couldn't see." It was not night but it was misunderstanding.

JUDGE MAY: Very well. Yes. What time of day was it? Tell us again.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It was midday.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. When I asked you about the masks and caps, you said that you were ⁴⁰⁰³ afraid, terrified, and that you couldn't say exactly -- you couldn't give us the details exactly. Is that right?

A. That's right, except at that moment I just looked and then we started running.

Q. So as you were in that state, you were afraid and running and had your back turned to them, you said a moment ago that you couldn't give us the details, how then did you happen to notice this whole series of details that are written down in this paper that I quoted a moment ago? You said black masks, baseball caps, knives, rifles, bombs, all sorts of details which can be imagined on somebody's uniform. So you saw all those details, did you?

A. Yes, I saw these things.

Q. All right. Very well. I just have a few more questions. In your statement, the one you gave on the 10th of May, which was quoted at the beginning, you claim that you left Pristina, having decided to leave town after consulting with some people. Is that correct?

A. Yes.

Q. That is on page 6 of your statement, paragraph 2. Well, all right, let's not lose time. But you confirm that that is so, do you? Now, please answer my next question, which is linked to that, when you said that that was so. So after consulting some people about it, you decided to leave town. In the statement you gave to the members of the International Crisis Group, you state that you left Pristina because you were thrown out of your accommodation, your lodgings, when five members of the MUP ordered you to leave immediately. Now, tell me what is the ⁴⁰⁰⁴ correct version: What it says in your statement, which you have just confirmed, or this second thing that is contained in what you -- in the statement you made to the International Crisis Group? Which of the two is correct?

A. The truth is that on Sunday we went, and on the 30th we -- the next day, we left Prishtina because they had started to expel the citizens of Prishtina and throw them out into the city streets.

Q. I'm asking you very specifically which of these two of your statements is correct. I'm not asking you about what you think about the population of Pristina, the citizens of Pristina, but you are testifying to what happened to you. And according to these two statements, what happened to you was two things: Either the first contained in the statement or the second in the statement of the International Crisis Group. Which is correct; the first or the second?

A. What I said is exact.

JUDGE MAY: No. Help us with this: Did members of the MUP order you to leave your accommodation?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. They started to throw out groups of people out of Dragodan, out of the neighbourhood where we had been. They started to expel them in the direction of Prishtina city centre.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. I asked you just to confirm what you said in your statement of the 10th of May.

JUDGE MAY: It's difficult for a witness, particularly if he ⁴⁰⁰⁵ hasn't got the copy of the statement in front of him, to be able to answer a question like that. If he had the statement, yes, but he hasn't. Now, what he said is that he was told -- he was talking about leaving and he wasn't told to leave by members of the MUP.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. May, I don't understand why, if the witness is telling the truth, he has to have a written statement, because the truth is one; it is a single truth. He is testifying about what happened to him. Why would he need a written statement to remember his testimony? He knows what happened to him, I assume.

JUDGE MAY: Look, he has -- you are asking him: Which statement is right? You then read out a section of two statements. It is liable to confuse a witness when you then ask which of the statements is right. That is the point. He hasn't got a copy of it. Now, unless you've got something else about this particular point, we will move on. You must bring your cross-examination to a close by the break because you will have had much more than the usual time.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I will bring it to a close by the break. There's no problem there.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. So regardless of the statements, a moment ago you confirmed - and I'm asking you again whether it is right that you decided to leave the town after having consulted some people. Is that right?

A. No, that's not right. On the 30th, the police started to throw out the populous into the town of Prishtina.

Q. Are you conscious of the fact that a moment ago, when I asked you ⁴⁰⁰⁶ whether it was right that you decided to leave town after consulting some people, your answer was: Yes, that is correct. Now you say: No, that is not correct. What is the truth: What you said five minutes ago or what you're saying now?

A. What I say now is true.

Q. Why, then, five minutes ago did you say that what -- in response to my question that that was correct if you say that what you're saying now is correct?

A. It's true that the police started to expel the populous and pointed them towards the train station.

Q. In your statement, you wrote it differently, and I'm just drawing attention to that major discrepancy, and I have no further questions.

JUDGE MAY: Yes.

MR. RYNEVELD: Thank you, Your Honours. I've just had delivered copies of the document, which you may wish to have tendered as, was it 117A? But I do want to point one thing out, and that is that the document which has been disclosed to everybody, according to our duty, is as a result of a questionnaire taken in the camps. This particular one was taken on the 3rd of May, 1999. But it must be pointed out that these questionnaires are not signed by the witness or even acknowledged by them in terms of whether or not they're accurate. It's a questionnaire that people fill out, and the witness doesn't have an opportunity to see what's written. So on that basis, it's not truly a statement but it is a record of what someone says this witness once told them. On that basis, I would provide this to the Court. ⁴⁰⁰⁷

JUDGE MAY: Thank you. Yes, Mr. Tapuskovic. Any questions?

MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, we have no questions for this witness. Thank you.

JUDGE MAY: Any re-examination?

MR. RYNEVELD: No, thank you, Your Honour.

[Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

JUDGE MAY: Yes. We'll have an exhibit for this one.

THE REGISTRAR: This one will be 117A, Your Honour.

JUDGE MAY: I'm not sure that I agree. If this is the system that these exhibits are getting A and B, the way we've always done it is they're labelled sequentially. So perhaps over the adjournment we could go back, re-number the facts as Judge Kwon had it as it was the other day, and we'll re-number these ones so we'll come up to whatever the appropriate number is.

Mr. Isufi, that concludes your evidence. Thank you for coming to the International Tribunal to give it. You're now free to go. We'll adjourn for half --

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

JUDGE MAY: We'll adjourn now for half an hour.

[The witness withdrew]

--- Recess taken at 11.02 a.m.

--- On resuming at 11.34 a.m.

[The witness entered court]

JUDGE MAY: Yes. Let the witness take the declaration. ⁴⁰⁰⁸

WITNESS: EMIN KABASHI

[Witness answered through interpreter]

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. If you'd like to take a seat.

MR. RYNEVELD: Thank you, Your Honour. The Prosecution calls Mr. Emin Kabashi.

Examined by Mr. Ryneveld:

Q. Mr. Kabashi, do I understand, sir, that you're 53 years old and that you are a Muslim of ethnic Albanian extraction? Is that correct? Can you hear me?

JUDGE MAY: Try again.

MR. RYNEVELD: Yes.

Q. Sir, do I understand correctly that you're 53 years old?

A. [No interpretation]

Q. And you are a Muslim?

A. Yes.

Q. And are you of ethnic -- Albanian ethnicity and that you live in Fushe Kosove?

A. Yes, that's correct.

Q. Sir, I understand that you hold a Ph.D. degree from Pristina University. Is that also correct?

A. Yes, that's correct.

Q. In what field? What is your Ph.D. in?

A. In the field of literature, Albanian literature. ⁴⁰⁰⁹

Q. Are you married?

A. Yes, I am.

Q. Do you have any children?

A. I have three children; two sons and a daughter.

Q. Now, this place called Fushe Kosove --

MR. RYNEVELD: Your Honours, if we could turn to Exhibit 83. Might the witness be shown that, and could we put it on the ELMO. Exhibit 83, page 6.

Q. Witness, you're being shown on the overhead projector that we call an ELMO an exhibit that is a map of Kosovo, a Kosovo atlas; and on page 6, there appears to be, about a third of the way on the bottom right-hand side, a community with the name of Fushe Kosove. Do you see that?

A. Yes, I see it.

Q. And if we turn the page to number 7 - that appears to be the adjoining page - you see Pristina on page 7?

A. Yes, I see it.

Q. How far is your community, Fushe Kosove, from Pristina, approximately?

A. It is seven kilometres away.

Q. All right. And what municipality is Fushe Kosove in?

A. Up until 1989, when we were deprived of the autonomy of Kosova, it was with Prishtina. As of that time, it is an independent municipality.

Q. All right. Now, sir, did you give a statement to the officers of the ICTY on the 24th of April, 1999?

A. Yes, I did. ⁴⁰¹⁰

Q. And subsequently, sir, were you shown a copy of that statement translated into your language, Albanian, and did you have a chance to read that on the 31st of January of this year, 2002?

A. Yes. They gave it to me and I read it.

Q. And did you at that time solemnly declare that the contents of that statement, as you then read it, were true and accurate to the best of your information and belief?

A. Yes, I solemnly declare that it is correct.

Q. All right.

MR. RYNEVELD: Your Honours, I wonder whether that statement might now be marked as the next exhibit.

THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Prosecutor's Exhibit 120.

MR. RYNEVELD: If it please the Court, I propose -- you have the full statement as 120. I propose to read a very brief outline of what is contained in that statement.

Your Honours, according to my summary of that statement, it appears that on the 25th of March, 1999, there was a lot of movement of Serb police and armed civilians in the street near the witness's house in Fushe Kosove. That evening, a bomb was thrown in his house and there was a volley of automatic gunfire. The witness took other occupants of the house to a neighbour's house for safety.

The following day, the witness returned to his home and found that the windows were broken and the house had been ransacked. His brother found 162 bullet cartridges around his home. The witness was also told at ⁴⁰¹¹ that time that 44 people were killed in the neighbourhood that night and was informed by a neighbour that the police were looking to kill the witness. Shortly thereafter, that neighbour, along with his wife and son, were killed.

Well, the witness and some of his family fled to Pristina, where they stayed for three days, until the arrival of the Serb army and special police, who broke down the front door. He then describes that the army wore dark blue camouflage uniforms with VJ insignia and the Special Police wore lighter blue camouflage uniforms and masks. Both army and police were armed with automatic rifles. They separated the men from the women and children, threatened them at gunpoint and demanded money. The women had their identity cards taken from them and destroyed. The group were then taken to another neighbourhood, where they sought shelter at an Albanian-owned house. The following day, Serb police came to that home and told them to leave, saying, "Get out. You asked for NATO. Go to Macedonia or Albanian. Anyone who does not leave, we will catch and burn. This is Serbia." As they were leaving, the police told him, i.e., the witness, "Get out of here. Go to Albania."

He then describes in his statement they were eventually directed by Serb police through Pristina in a convoy. A tank caused the column to divide into two, and the witness's group were directed to the railway station. En route, the column was stopped at a Serb checkpoint. The police had a list of names, and the witness saw that the list contained his name along with some other people known to him. The witness then gave the police a false identity. He was again asked for money and was told ⁴⁰¹² that if he didn't leave for Albania immediately, he would be killed. Snipers prevented members of the convoy from deviating from the route. The witness arrived at the railway station, from where he could see houses burning and homes being shelled. The witness waited at the railway station for the rest of his family for some three days, during which time he saw people being forced like cattle onto the trains by armed police. He describes that the trains so crowded that some died in the crush. He counted an average of 5 to 12 trains leaving daily, most at night. The witness finally got onto a train to Elez Han and was ordered to walk between the rails to the Macedonian border. He stayed there for six days and nights, awaiting his family to arrive, and noted trains and buses arriving every day with more people. He then explains details of how he did not want to leave Kosovo but was forced to do so by the Serb army and police.

That's a very brief capsulated summary of what is contained in the witness statement that has been marked as an exhibit in these proceedings. Those are my questions. Thank you.

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Milosevic. Cross-examined by Mr. Milosevic:

Q. [Interpretation] Which year did you get your doctorate from the university?

A. In 1989, 23rd of March, when Kosova's autonomy was stripped of it.

Q. You got a doctorate at the department for the Albanian language and literature?

A. In the branch of Albanian literature. ⁴⁰¹³

Q. Where did you work after that, after you got your doctorate?

A. I worked in Drenovc, in the Institute of -- in the Ferronikel plant.

Q. You worked there? I assume that you worked there even before you got your doctorate; right?

A. From 1974, I was prevented to work in the education sector, and that is where I worked for the last ten years, until 1992.

Q. And why could you not work in the education field in 1974, or from 1974? Was this interpreted properly?

A. In 1964, I was a primary school student. In 1974, I was imprisoned in the high school [as interpreted] because I explained Albanian literature to my high school students.

Q. How old were you in 1974? I can't get the math right.

A. I was 24, 25 years old.

Q. Do we understand each other? Are you speaking of 1974?

A. I'm speaking of 1974.

Q. And what were you then? In school? You say you were in school, you were 24 years old?

A. No. At that age, I was a graduated professor of literature.

Q. You say that you were imprisoned because you worked in a secondary school. I assume that these were your pupils and you spoke to them about the Albanian literature and that's why they imprisoned you. Did I understand this correctly?

A. I talked to the children about the authors and works that were forbidden by the regime of that time, the communist regime. ⁴⁰¹⁴

Q. But all the time, in the school programme, there was Albanian language and literature, and also at the university where you obtained your doctorate, there was a department for the Albanian language and literature. Isn't that right?

A. They were Albanian school pupils and definitely had to learn something about Albanian literature.

Q. That is not controversial, but who are these authors whose works were forbidden, Albanian authors whose works were forbidden and you were arrested on account of that?

A. In the indictment of 1974, it was said that I explained to the school pupils about Gjergj Fishta.

Q. And who banned this? Who banned the mention of Albanian authors to pupils?

A. The authorities of the regime of that time, the administration at that time.

Q. At that time, in Pristina, where you worked, or in the province of Kosovo Metohija in general, were there Albanians in all high positions? Yes or no.

A. The Albanians in high position? There were even Albanians in high positions in the Federation at that time, not only in Prishtina.

Q. Does that mean that it was Albanians who arrested you because you spoke about that author who you mentioned just now, Fishta, as you had put it?

A. No. I was arrested by -- because of the communist mentality that prevailed at that time and infiltrated into the culture and literature of ⁴⁰¹⁵ the people, and which replaced national culture at that time.

Q. My question was different: Were you arrested by Albanians?

A. No. I was arrested by the employees of a regime that replaced national ideology with communist ideology.

Q. [Previous translation continues]... understand. These employees of the regime that you mentioned, were they Albanians or not?

A. They were both Albanians and Serbs.

Q. Did you stand trial on any particular counts at that time?

A. After six months of investigation, I was released, but without the right to work any more in education.

Q. Does that mean that you were in prison for six months and that you were then released, without standing trial?

A. Not only in prison, but under very terrible kinds of investigation.

Q. And who was in charge of this investigation? Who conducted it?

A. It was led by the employees of the State Security Service.

Q. Were they Albanians?

A. They were both Albanians and Serbs.

Q. And how many of them carried out this investigation through interviews with you in 1974, during those six months?

A. More than four.

Q. Can you give us their names?

A. No, because I didn't pay particular care to remember them.

Q. But you say that they investigated you for six months?

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Milosevic, we are dealing now with events a ⁴⁰¹⁶ quarter of a century ago. It does not seem to assist this Tribunal to have evidence in such detail about events so long ago. They are nothing to do with the witness's evidence or his statement, which has to do with events, and serious events, in 1999. So will you move on.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, it does have something to do with this, because he talks about measures of repression that were allegedly carried out against him, and also, at that time, practically all high positions in Kosovo and Metohija were held by Albanians, and in Pristina. But I shall move on.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. In your statement, you do not mention with a single word any consequence of the NATO aggression, or rather, the bombing; you just mentioned the date when it started, the 24th of March. Can you say why?

A. In my statement, I talked about the most important -- the most terrible genocide that was visited upon a people, when an entire geographic area was emptied of its population and the population was expelled.

JUDGE MAY: The statement refers to the NATO bombing. This is page 6. "Did not affect residential areas. I saw the bombing of Pristina airport."

Is that right, Dr. Kabashi? "I saw the bombing of the barracks outside Pristina and I saw the bombing of the courthouse and the main police station."

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The central Prishtina prison. That's right, Your Honour. It's accurate. ⁴⁰¹⁷

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. And are you aware of the fact that during the bombing, which lasted for 78 days, 40 per cent of the bombs were precisely thrown on Kosovo and Metohija?

JUDGE MAY: No. That's not a matter for the witness. He deals with events which he himself saw, as far as the bombing is concerned, but fairly shortly after that, he left Kosovo.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. All right. Up until the day you left Kosovo. Do you claim that nothing in Pristina, or, as far as you know, in Kosovo and Metohija, was bombed, apart from those administrative buildings which you mentioned, including the barracks, the courthouse, the building of the Ministry of the Interior?

A. No, I don't know anything about things that were bombed, only those things which I saw with my own eyes.

Q. From your statement, I understand that you are not a member of the KLA.

A. No, you haven't understood it. I was a member of the KLA.

Q. And since when were you a member of the KLA?

A. From the day when you held a speech in Fushe Kosove, and under the -- 1997, on 28th of March --

Q. So you were a member of the KLA. You meant 1987, did you, or was it not properly interpreted?

A. On the 28th of November, 1997, when a teacher was killed in Drenica. ⁴⁰¹⁸

Q. I didn't understand you. A moment ago you said you were a member of the KLA since I held a speech in Kosovo Polje [sic], and that was in 1987. Was the interpretation of that correct or not?

A. I said because of the -- the reason was your speech in Kosovo Polje. From then, I saw that the only way for our people to win their freedom was by means of the gun.

Q. And as far as I'm able to understand, it was then that you joined the KLA, that is to say, in 1997. Is that correct or not?

A. That's right.

Q. And how did you work in the interests of that movement from 1987 to 1997? How did you do that work in that period?

A. Everything that I could within my intellectual and human capacities.

Q. What, for example?

A. I prepared a lot of literature, I read a lot, I read my history, and then I explained to people and I worked out for myself that freedom cannot be taken for granted; it has to be won. And I supported every movement that emerged in Kosova after 1968, when I was imprisoned for the first time, down to 1989, when I was imprisoned for the last time. And all this enabled me to understand, and I made every effort to explain this to others, that only the path of war can bring us freedom.

Q. So since 1967 up until 1989, on several occasions, you were put in prison. We heard about one case at the beginning, but let me ask you how many times you were imprisoned.

A. Not 1967, but 1968. I was imprisoned in 1968, when Albanian ⁴⁰¹⁹ students demonstrated in Prishtina and the streets of Prishtina were covered with blood. At that time, I was in the third grade of high school. I have been imprisoned three times.

Q. In 1974, you said. So in 1968 was the first time, and what about the third time? When was that?

A. 1981.

Q. In 1981. That was after those major demonstrations in 1981. Was it in that connection?

A. Yes, it was in connection with the demonstrations.

Q. And is it true that during the whole of that time, to which your explanations about your imprisonment relate, that during that whole period, the police structures and legal structures and structures of power and authority in Kosovo and Metohija were Albanian, or predominantly Albanian were the vast majority? Is that correct or not?

A. If Your Honour will permit, I will answer -- I will reply to the accused, but this is not a matter to do with my statement.

Q. All right. Let's move on, then. When did you hear for the first time -- when did you hear for the first time of some terrorist actions perpetrated by the KLA?

A. I'm not aware of the KLA having committed terrorist acts because it was not a terrorist organisation.

Q. And how would you call, for example, the planting of bombs in shops, marketplaces, bombs in public places, and the killing of civilians? Were those terrorist acts or not?

A. Civilians were not killed in operations of this kind. ⁴⁰²⁰

Q. You claim, therefore, that in the actions of the KLA, civilians weren't victims, that they were not killed?

JUDGE MAY: We're not going to get very far with this sort of argument. It will be for us to characterise these activities and to determine what happened. This witness can only really give evidence about what he actually knows himself.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. In view of the fact that, as you claim, from 1968 onwards, throughout all those years, and finally, from 1997, you were an active member of the KLA, the policemen that you mention, did they interrogate you unfoundedly with regard to your activities within the KLA, or not?

A. This question is not clear to me. Either that, or the translation is not in order.

JUDGE MAY: No. It's not for the witness to say.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The witness explained and mentioned the names of two policemen who interviewed him with respect to the activities of the KLA in a way which was considered unfounded, and everything that he said gives rise and gives a basis for interrogation with respect to KLA activities. So I think the question is clear. As he was an active member of the KLA, why does he consider that he was not justly interrogated with respect to the activities of that organisation?

JUDGE MAY: It depends what the interrogation was. It's not going to help us to know what the interrogation was, but what you can ask him is what his activities were in the KLA. ⁴⁰²¹ Can you help us with that, Dr. Kabashi? What did you do for the KLA?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If you allow me, Your Honours, I may respond to the accused's question.

JUDGE MAY: Don't bother about the interrogation. The interrogation is irrelevant for these purposes. But can you help us as to what you did for the KLA? You say you were a member.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I can, definitely. I was responsible to help with finding accommodation for the displaced population from the zones where fighting was taking place. Then I was responsible to supply this population and the soldiers with footwear and clothes. Then I was also responsible to take care and to try and find the necessary food supplies for the displaced population and for the soldiers. Then, as far as I could and as far as I knew, I helped in the supply of the military hospitals, those that were and those that were being set up, to supply them with the necessary medicaments, and so on.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. So on the basis of everything that you have spoken about so far relating to your activities from 1968 onwards, are we able to conclude that you were a fighter of the -- an advocate of the anti-Serb policy?

A. I was a fighter of the anti-Albanian policy, against anti-Albanian policy.

Q. And what were the relationships like in Kosovo Polje, where you lived up until 1998, all those years? What were the relationships like there? There were quite a lot of Serbs there, Albanians, and other ethnic ^{4022 BLANK PAGE 4034} groups too, and what were the relationships that prevailed in Kosovo Polje?

A. Up until the day that the accused held his speech in Fushe Kosove, his notorious anti-Albanian speech, the relations in Fushe Kosove, as far as I know, were relations of an ideological brotherhood. As of that time, that is, 1989 onwards, these relations became those of open hostility because of the simple reason that Kosova plain, under the orders and dictate of the mechanisms of the power of the accused, had become the epicentre of the popular revolution.

Q. And can you tell me any position that I made in what you called an anti-Albanian speech I made that was anti-Albanian? Can you tell me what it was that I said that could be characterised as anti-Albanian in 1989?

A. I am not obligated to remember by rote the speech of the accused, but if the Court is interested, I can find evidence to prove this in two places: In the archives of the Committee of the Communist League of the Autonomous Province of Kosovo then and the archives of the Central Committee of the then Serbia.

Q. You say that that speech of mine was anti-Albanian and that it motivated you to undertake the actions that you explained to us. Now, if that is correct, if what you say is true, then you would have to know what it was in that speech that you thought was anti-Albanian.

JUDGE MAY: He says he cannot now remember but refers us to a copy of the speech. We've had references to it before. No doubt in due course we'll get a copy of it. But for the moment, we can't go on over this ground again. Yes. Now, if you move on to another topic. ⁴⁰³⁵

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. All right. You had occasion to see a copy of that speech here. Are you a member of any political organisation at present, Mr. Kabashi?

A. No, I'm not.

Q. And do you know the reasons why, at the end of 1998 and 1999, the police patrolled part of the town you lived in?

A. Either you have not formulated the question properly or you -- you've mistaken the years. It's 1989 and 1999 [as interpreted].

Q. Yes. 1998 and 1999. That's what I'm talking about.

A. In addition to the reason that they wanted to show the muscle of the Serb forces, I didn't see any other reason for that.

Q. You know nothing about any kind of criminal activity for which the police patrolled the town at that time?

A. I didn't work in the investigation that is to know which criminal acts they have committed.

Q. All right, you didn't deal in any investigation. I assume that you went about your professional work, in addition to your KLA activities. Now, do you know, from that 1989 to 1999, how many of your colleagues and your fellow Albanians graduated and received doctorates at the department for Albanian -- for the Albanian language and literature at Pristina University?

A. This is up to the administration staff of the faculty of Prishtina to know. If the Court is interested, I might ask them to give me documents. It is not relevant to my evidence. ⁴⁰³⁶

JUDGE MAY: No. The fact is, we have heard evidence about this, and if you can help us, do; but if you can't, if you don't know, just say so.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, I do not know -- I cannot give you any accurate figures, Your Honour.

JUDGE MAY: Very well.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. And do you know that the Albanian language and literature department at the Pristina University worked in the Albanian language right up until the year 1999, up until the war, actually? Are you aware of that fact?

A. Yes, I'm fully aware of that, but it didn't work in the facilities of the university. But even this, I think, does not relate to my evidence.

Q. All right. Let's move on, then. Were you happy to see the NATO aggression against Yugoslavia take place?

A. I supported and approved the NATO actions because it was taking under protection a people that, on the basis of the plans of the Serb academy, was meant to be displaced and dismembered as a people.

Q. And what plan on the part of the Serbian academy and sciences? You're talking about the Serbian Academy of Arts and Sciences, are you not?

A. I'm talking about the programmes for the extermination of the Albanians. ⁴⁰³⁷

Q. Whose programme? You said the Serbian academy's.

A. Of course I said the Serb academy. One of the programmes is titled "The extermination of the Albanians."

Q. Are you talking about the Serbian Academy of Sciences?

A. Yes.

Q. And which document of the Serbian academy speaks about the extermination of Albanians?

A. It is a document of 1884, until the one that you have implemented. One of Vladan Djordjevic.

Q. Is this a mistake? Did you say 1884, a document of 1884? That's what it says on the transcript and that's what the interpretation was. Did you actually mean 1884?

A. I mean the programme of Vladan Djordjevic, 1884, which has been described by world scientists as the book most full of hate against a people that has ever been written. But Your Honours, I think this is not relevant to my evidence.

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Milosevic, let's move on.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. All right. So did you strive for NATO aggression in your circle, or did you come out in favour of it publicly as well?

A. The manifestation of my support for NATO was public. I didn't have any reasons to keep it secret, for the simple reason that on the day when I was -- when I left Fushe Kosove for Prishtina, I heard the alarm go off about the NATO airstrikes, which saved me from being captured by the Serb police and army forces. ⁴⁰³⁸

Q. At the start of the NATO aggression against Yugoslavia, were there any conflicts between the KLA and the Ministry of the Interior and the army in the area that you're well acquainted with, that is to say, the Pristina area?

A. In the Prishtina area, there were conflicts, but in Fushe Kosove area, there weren't any conflicts.

Q. Do you know whether there were any urban -- whether there was any urban fighting in the Pristina area?

A. During the NATO airstrikes, from the day I left Prishtina to take care of my family, I know nothing. For that, yes.

Q. You claim that somebody attacked your house on that particular day, the day you mention. Now, did I understand you correctly to say that that attack on your house was perpetrated by the police?

A. Yes, by the police and by the local residents, who were drafted on orders as policemen and as army members.

Q. And where were the attackers, the attackers on your house? Did you see them?

A. I saw more than eight of them. Some of them I know personally.

Q. Were they in a vehicle of any kind or were they in front of your house for you to be able to see them directly?

A. At the moment when they threw the bomb at my home, they got down off a vehicle which was often seen patrolling in front of the street, in front of the street before my house. The same vehicle -- they got into the same vehicle and left with it.

Q. So they opened fire on your house and then left; is that what ⁴⁰³⁹ you're claiming?

A. No. Before they threw the bomb at my home, then they shot at the window, thinking that I or someone else from my family will be standing.

Q. But they didn't enter the house?

A. No, they didn't. They had not come to enter the house; they had come to kill.

Q. Do you assume that then they would have entered the house, had they come to kill you?

A. I don't know that. You might as well ask them.

Q. The vehicle that you're talking about, was it an official vehicle? Did you see its licence plates? Did it have any kind of sign on it?

A. At that time in Fushe Kosove and Kosova, it didn't matter to us what kind of vehicles they were. Of importance it was that people in uniforms used to drive in them and patrol around.

Q. And do you know how many policemen and soldiers of the army of Yugoslavia were killed or abducted in 1998 and 1999 by the KLA?

A. No. This was not my field. I was not in charge of any sort of investigations in connection with this problem. This was something that the police dealt with.

Q. And do you know, since you were following what was going on, and I imagine that you were in the very focus of events, both in terms of your education and in terms of the position you held, do you know that only in 1998, over 1.800 attacks were carried out?

JUDGE MAY: He says he doesn't know. Now, you should deal with his evidence. ⁴⁰⁴⁰

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Oh, I will be dealing with his statement, his evidence too.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Do you know how many Albanians were killed before the war started?

JUDGE MAY: No. I'm not going to allow these questions. Just move on to something else.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Have you ever heard of the name of Gashi Osmani?

A. No, I've never heard this name.

Q. And have you heard of Enver Shala?

JUDGE MAY: This is a waste of time going through lists which the witness says he knows nothing of. This is the way in which your time is taken up.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. May, I think that these are very important issues, very important questions. The witness himself has said that he held an important position within the KLA. There is an entire list of Albanians here that were killed by the KLA precisely in Pristina, where the witness had been working. The witness claims that he knew nothing --

JUDGE MAY: Let's ask the witness about this, then: Do you know, in Pristina, dealing with Pristina, of any Albanians who were killed, as it is alleged, by the KLA?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] With some preliminary explanation, Your Honour, if I may explain. I didn't have any kind of function in the KLA. I merely did my duties as a citizen who is fighting for freedom. I ⁴⁰⁴¹ don't know about these things and I was not involved in them, and I don't know how many Albanians were killed by the KLA.

JUDGE MAY: Yes.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Yes, but you said yourself that you're a member of the KLA. Do you consider yourself to be an accomplice, then?

JUDGE MAY: This is totally irrelevant. He said he doesn't know.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Do you know anything about abductions of both Serbs and Albanians in 1998? Several hundreds of abductions. Do you know at least one?

A. These are fabrications of Serbian propaganda which was spread all over the world as a pretext for the military and police operations in Kosova, and at this time the Albanians were fighting for freedom, and the accused had stimulated the KLA to fight.

Q. So I led the KLA to kill Albanians in Kosovo; is that your assertion?

JUDGE MAY: Unless you've got some particular questions to ask this witness about what he said in his statement, we'll bring this cross-examination to a close. It's no good debating these general political points. He said he doesn't know. Now, do you have any relevant questions?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] For me, all these questions are relevant, Mr. May. However, since you insist only upon that which is written in his statement:

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] ⁴⁰⁴²

Q. Well, you said that you went to the neighbouring house, together with your family, after these events.

A. That's right, with eight members of my family I went to a neighbour's house.

Q. Was this neighbour a Serb or an Albanian?

A. He was an Albanian. There were no Serbs in my neighbourhood.

Q. You said that you went to the railway station with a column of other people. It is your assertion that the police had been looking for you, searching for you, and you avoided this only by saying that your name was different. Is that right?

A. I went in this column of people to the railway station after the police had expelled me from my own house, from the house of a friend, and another house, that is, three times within the space of four days.

Q. All right. So it was the police, according to what you have said, threw you out three times. That is one fact. The other fact is that the police had been searching for you - that is your assertion - and every time they threw you out, they could not find you. But they did throw you out. Is this logical, as far as you are concerned, this that you have been saying?

A. I was thrown out twice by the police and once by the army, and the reasoning behind it is -- the reason why the police was looking for me and couldn't find me, that's up to the police to explain, but I'm explaining what happened.

Q. You said that, at the railway station, you waited for three days in order to meet your family; is that right? ⁴⁰⁴³

A. That's right, for the simple reason that my family was very large and was scattered in three places in Prishtina.

Q. So you waited for three days at the railway station in order to get all of your family together. At the same time, it is your assertion that the police was making Albanians board the train and travel. How come nobody made you board a train during those three days at the railway station?

A. To be quite accurate, I waited three days and three nights at the railway station, and my turn came on the morning of the fourth day, when policemen forced me and members of my family into a goods train.

Q. Yes, but in your statement you said that you waited for your family for three days at the railway station. You didn't say that you were waiting in a line at the railway station. You said that you spent those three days waiting for your family.

A. Prishtina was cleansed neighbourhood by neighbourhood and I was waiting for these neighbourhoods to be emptied. And members of my family were expelled two days after myself, and then we were left somewhere where I will call No Man's Land, on the border with Macedonia.

Q. I wanted us to clarify another issue, actually, the question that I had put to you. You said two things in the statement: That you waited for your family for three days at the railway station, and a little while ago, you said that for three days you were waiting in a line in order to board a train. So my question is: Were you waiting for your family for three days or were you waiting in line to board the train for three days?

A. Even if I hadn't been waiting for my family, it was impossible to ⁴⁰⁴⁴ board the trains because of the crush of people who were being expelled by force from Prishtina. Moreover, I am of an age when it is hard to leave Kosova. And moreover, I was waiting in hope that I would be able to be joined by other members of my family, so that we could at least travel together.

Q. Does that mean, what you've said just now, that there were so many people and you couldn't board the train, that you could have -- that had you been in a position to board the train on the first day, you would have done so rather than waited for your family?

A. I don't know. I've never dealt in speculations of this kind. At this time, I wasn't interested in this kind of theorising.

Q. This is no theory; these are two different statements. So were you waiting for your family or were you waiting in line to board the train?

A. I didn't say theory. The interpreter translated the word "pandehma" as "theory," which I will say is suppositions, and at that time I was not dealing with suppositions. Even if I were not waiting for my family, I didn't have the chance to get onto the train, which was so crushed because of all these people who were being forced to leave Prishtina. I think I've made myself very clear now.

Q. Is it your assertion that the police was using force against people at the railway station in order to have them board the trains?

A. [Previous translation continues]... using theory -- not only were they using violence, but -- but one -- if one of the citizens tried to go away and take some sidestreet, the police have killed them. ⁴⁰⁴⁵

Q. Did you see any killings?

A. I didn't see any killings, but I saw a dead person one day after, and I heard the shot, because I was only 200 metres away. And during all the time, the police encircled the station and the surrounding area.

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Milosevic, you've had the hour which you are entitled to. Do you have any more questions of this witness?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I do, but...

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. You did not see a single killing personally?

A. I said I saw the police, I heard the shots, and I saw the person dead, dead persons, not only in the station, but also on the fourth day, early morning, when I boarded the train to leave Kosova from Prishtina to Fushe Kosove, I saw two dead corpses in the vicinity of the railway tracks.

Q. Do you know who had killed these people whose corpses were near the railway station?

A. I don't know. If I knew, I would have mentioned them by name and I would have taken them to the court.

Q. Do I understand you correctly if I say that throughout this time, in 1998 and 1999, you did not know about a single victim of the KLA at that time, or of the NATO bombing, as of the 24th of March onwards?

JUDGE MAY: He's dealt with these matters. We're not going over them again.

Mr. Tapuskovic, have you any questions?

MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. Yes, I ⁴⁰⁴⁶ would have a number of questions.

Questioned by Mr. Tapuskovic:

Q. [Interpretation] Dr. Kabashi, you said that in 1997, 1998, and 1999, as a member of the KLA, you worked on the displacement of persons, Albanians.

A. I mean the people who were displaced from the combat areas. Do I need to repeat this? Finding accommodation for them.

Q. Mr. Kabashi, I have understood that. However, could you tell me: What is the number of persons in respect of these few years that you know about? What is the number of persons who were displaced, who moved to other places, to the best of your knowledge? Does that mean that they were moving away from the places where there were clashes between the KLA, on the one hand, and the army and the police, on the other hand?

A. There were many people in Prishtina. There were many other people in smaller towns. But at that time, in the first phase of the war, there were more people displaced from the Drenica area, and these people came to Prishtina and somebody had to look after them, and I was one of the people with this duty.

Q. Was Drenica, all of Drenica, under KLA control for a while?

A. For a time it was, but the larger part of the population were expelled beforehand by Serbian forces.

Q. Can you tell me about Drenica in relation to all of Kosovo and Metohija: How big is it? Which proportion of the territory does it encompass?

A. I can say Drenica, in relation to Kosova - and we won't use the ⁴⁰⁴⁷ word "Metohija" - is 27 per cent of the territory of Kosova. That's its geographical area. But it's a much smaller proportion of the population.

Q. Can you tell me, while you were in the KLA, that is to say, all the way up until the 25th of March, were you - how should I put this? - in civilian clothing? Did you carry out these duties in civilian clothing?

A. Yes, I was in civilian clothes.

Q. Were there other persons in the KLA who wore civilian clothing and who carried out certain duties for the KLA?

A. Yes, there were.

Q. Did you carry weapons?

A. I didn't have permission to carry weapons.

Q. No, no, no, not when you're in town; when you're out in the field, where there were skirmishes and when you were dealing with the displaced persons, that's what I'm asking you about.

A. On trips, we did have weapons, but we dealt with these displaced people in the towns. We weren't dealing with them in the hills.

Q. Thank you. In relation to your statement, you said that a bomb was thrown at your house. You mentioned the damage incurred. Was anybody hurt, though?

A. Fortunately, nobody died. My elder brother was injured in the forehead and lost blood. But because there was no light at that time, we were stretched out on the floor, and this saved us from the blast. And I had also taken away my children beforehand, one day before.

Q. And the next night you spent in a cellar, 50 of you in a cellar three by three. That's what it says here. Is that right? ⁴⁰⁴⁸

A. We didn't spend the next night but that night, because the bomb was thrown at 9.45. On the same night, not myself but the remainder of the family, and the inhabitants of the neighbourhood - there were over 50 people, and they took shelter in a cellar which was three by three.

Q. Were any of these people injured or hurt?

A. As far as I remember, with the exception of my brother, the others were not.

Q. And can you tell me about that night that you spent in the cellar. Did it have anything to do with the bombing that started on the previous day, the NATO bombing? Did that have anything to do with you being in the cellar?

A. We didn't go to the cellar because of the NATO bombing, but because my family, in the neighbourhood where we lived, were subjected to that bomb I told you, and the shot at my window. During the NATO bombing, we didn't go to any shelters. In fact, we didn't have any shelters.

MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I would kindly like to draw your attention to page 4, paragraph 3 of the English version.

Q. Mr. Kabashi, you said that you had reached Vranjica [phoen], that you spent some time in a place called Vranjevac [phoen]?

A. When I left my home in Fushe Kosove, I spent the first three nights in the neighbourhood which was then called Dragodan, now Arberia, whereas the two other nights, I spent these nights in the Vranjevc neighbourhood which is now called Kodra e Trimave. These two neighbourhoods are adjacent.

Q. Right. But here you said on that day, that's when you were in ⁴⁰⁴⁹ Vranjica [phoen], and that night, there was fighting. Who was fighting during that night in Vranjevac [phoen]?

A. I can't tell you for sure, but as far as I know from the media, you had here a witness who testified that --

JUDGE MAY: Don't tell us about what any other witness said. If you don't know, just say so.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know who fought there.

MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Well, if there was fighting, it had to be taking place between someone, because in the very next sentence, you say: "Four persons were killed and I knew two out of them." Did these persons have anything to do with this fighting that was taking place between someone? Who was fighting? Because you said that there was great panic, that there were a lot of gunshots and explosions. Again you're talking about fighting. "Where there was fighting," you say. And you also say that four persons were killed. So can you say who was fighting?

JUDGE MAY: He just answered that. Now, Mr. Tapuskovic, let's try and finish this witness, if we can, before this adjournment. He says he doesn't know who was fighting.

MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] That's fine. I need only two more minutes. As an amicus curiae, I'm satisfied with this answer, but please, let us now move on to page 6, paragraph 3 of the English version.

Q. Mr. Kabashi, in response to the questions put by the Honourable Trial Chamber, you said that you had seen and heard the bombs that had ⁴⁰⁵⁰ fallen -- you said what you said, right. How far away is Dragodan? How far away is it from the place where the bombs were falling? If my understanding was correct, it was seven kilometres away. Dragodan is seven kilometres away from Pristina?

A. Not from Prishtina; from Fushe Kosove. If you mean the night of the bombing of the State Security of Serbia building in Prishtina, the distance from where I saw -- witnessed the event, as the crow flies, is not more than 500 metres away.

Q. Time is very important, so let me cut things short. Mr. Kabashi, all right. However, you did say that from Dragodan, you saw the bombing of the court! House. How far away is Dragodan from the courthouse?

A. I explained it. As the crow flies, from the place where I was sitting, it is some 500 metres away.

Q. Just one more thing. And then you finally say: "In the neighbourhood of Dragodan, the blast broke windows." Is that correct, the way you had put it here, that the blast broke windows in the neighbourhood of Dragodan and that you realised that from the house where you were?

A. I don't know about other houses, but in the house I was in, the windows of the third floor were broken.

Q. From the explosion?

A. Yes, certainly.

Q. Was this of any significance in terms of your decision to leave Kosovo as soon as possible?

A. [No interpretation] ⁴⁰⁵¹

MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It had nothing to do with that. We were evicted by the army from Dragodan.

JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Ryneveld.

MR. RYNEVELD: Nothing arising. Thank you, Your Honours.

JUDGE MAY: Dr. Kabashi, that concludes your evidence. Thank you for coming to the International Tribunal to give it. You are now free to go.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. I felt it my moral obligation to come here.

[The witness withdrew]

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Ryneveld, perhaps you can give us a list of the witnesses for whom Rule 92 bis submissions have to be made. As far as I can see, on your list of the 29th of April, it is every witness after number 3, including 3; is that right?

MR. RYNEVELD: Yes. Well, 3, as I say, we found we have a difficulty with the 92 bis'ing process, so number 4 would be our next witness that we would propose to call this afternoon. 9 will not be a 92 bis.

JUDGE MAY: Yes.

MR. RYNEVELD: And -- yes, the rest of them, up to 18. So 3 to 18 but for 9, I believe, are the ones that we require rulings.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. So you formally make an application, then, for a ruling on those matters.

MR. RYNEVELD: I do formally make such an application. I'm just ⁴⁰⁵² advised that number 16 may not be coming. We've just found out that 16 is not available. So that's one for which I will withdraw the application at this point.

We anticipate that, up until Friday, number 9 will be testifying on Friday.

JUDGE MAY: Yes.

MR. RYNEVELD: Thank you. Hopefully that assists Your Honour's inquiry.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. We'll consider the matter over the adjournment.

MR. RYNEVELD: Thank you.

JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Wladimiroff.

MR. WLADIMIROFF: In response to this request, Your Honours, the amici have no observation, if that might assist the Court. We have no problem with the request.

JUDGE MAY: Thank you. We'll adjourn now. 2.35.

--- Luncheon recess taken at 1.05 p.m. ⁴⁰⁵³

--- On resuming at 2.36 p.m.

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Saxon or Mr. Ryneveld, whoever is going to deal with this: We're looking at the witnesses 10 through to 18 on the list of the 29th of April, and also 4 to 8. There is one witness for whom we simply don't appear to have a statement, and that is number 13. Do you have 13 on the list? It seems, as far as we can see, to cover a totally different topic.

MR. RYNEVELD: Yes, Your Honour. Number 13 is likely -- excuse me just one moment, if I may.

[Prosecution counsel confer]

MR. RYNEVELD: The reason you do not have number 13 is that the process of 92 bis'ing, if I can use that word, has not yet been accomplished, so we can't submit the statement to the Court in its final form.

JUDGE MAY: But the other statements, you have submitted?

MR. RYNEVELD: That is correct, yes, along with a motion.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. Very well. Thank you. Mr. Milosevic, is there anything you want to say about this? Microphone.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I said, I haven't got the statement of that witness, and I should have. I've asked your secretary -- I asked them this morning, and as far as I was able to understand, I will be provided with one.

JUDGE MAY: We're not going to make a ruling on that one, but as far as the others are concerned, on the list of the 29th of April, numbers ⁴⁰⁵⁴ 4 to 8, 10 to 12, 14, 15, 17, and 18 will be admitted.

MR. RYNEVELD: Thank you, Your Honour.

JUDGE MAY: The witness, please.

MR. SAXON: Thank you, Your Honour. The Prosecution will call Mr. Gani Haradinaj.

JUDGE MAY: There will be an announcement from the registry about the exhibit numbers.

THE REGISTRAR: Correct, Your Honour. There's one clarification that we need to make. The originally-marked Exhibit 116.1 will now be 117 ter, and the previous exhibit marked 117 will now be marked 118.

[The witness entered court]

JUDGE MAY: Let the witness make the declaration.

WITNESS: Gani Haradinaj

[Witness answered through interpreter]

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. Yes, Mr. Saxon.

MR. SAXON: Thank you, Your Honour. Examined by Mr. Saxon:

Q. Sir, is your name Gani Haradinaj?

A. Yes.

Q. Mr. Haradinaj, were you born on the 25th of May, 1956?

A. Yes.

Q. Were you born in the village of Stanovc i Eperm, in the ⁴⁰⁵⁵ municipality of Vushtrri, in Kosovo?

A. Yes.

Q. On the 28th and 29th of May, 1999, did you provide a statement to representatives of the Office of the Prosecutor about the events that you witnessed and experienced in Kosovo in 1999?

A. Yes, I did.

Q. On the 10th of October, 2001, did you provide an additional statement to representatives of the Office of the Prosecutor about the events that you witnessed and experienced in Kosovo in 1999?

A. Yes, that's correct.

Q. And on the 3rd of February of this year, 2002, in the city of Pristina, Kosovo, were you provided with a copy of the statements that you made in May of 1999 and October of 2001, and any relevant attachments, in the presence of representatives of the Office of the Prosecutor and a presiding officer appointed by the Registry of this Tribunal?

A. Yes, I was provided.

Q. And on that occasion, did you confirm that the copies of the statements that were provided to you were true and correct?

A. Yes, I did.

MR. SAXON: Your Honours, at this time, I would offer those statements into evidence pursuant to Rule 92 bis.

JUDGE MAY: Very well.

THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Prosecutor's Exhibit 121.

MR. SAXON: Your Honours, Gani Haradinaj is married and has four ⁴⁰⁵⁶ children. He has lived in the village of Stanovc i Eperm in Vushtrri municipality, in Kosovo, all of his life, and he works at the thermoelectric power station in Obilic as a section manager. In his statements, Mr. Haradinaj describes how in early April 1999, he, his family, and other villagers left their village after Serb forces shelled the village and began to move through it. Mr. Haradinaj tells how he and his family then moved from village to village, from Breznica, to Dumnica e Eperme, to Ceceli, and finally to Studime e Eperme, seeking shelter and protection from advancing Serb forces. Mr. Haradinaj describes the formation of a convoy of thousands of civilians in the village of Studime e Eperme, which started to move in the direction of the town of Vushtrri in early May 1999. The witness describes how this convoy was attacked by Serb forces firing machine-guns and grenades, resulting in the deaths of dozens of civilians. Afterwards, the convoy was directed by Serb forces to the Vushtrri Agricultural Cooperative Farm, where the men were eventually separated from the women and children. The men, including Mr. Haradinaj, were taken to Smrekovnice Prison. Mr. Haradinaj describes the inhumane conditions there and how he was beaten, interrogated, and forced to sign a document saying that from 1998 until the 3rd of May, 1999, he had participated in terrorist acts.

Mr. Haradinaj describes how, on the 23rd of May, 1999, he was taken with other prisoners by bus to the village of Zur, several kilometres from the border of Albania, and then forced to run to the border and cross into Albania. ⁴⁰⁵⁷ Thank you.

JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Milosevic. Cross-examined by Mr. Milosevic:

Q. [Interpretation] My microphone wasn't switched on. Is it true with the Serbs from the village of Velika Reka and Grace, which are located one kilometre to the east and west of your own village, that you lived peacefully with them, without any conflicts, right up until the spring of 1999? Yes or no.

A. Yes. We each minded his own affairs. We didn't have any cooperation per se, but neither did we have any problems.

Q. So the problems began at the same time that the war began?

A. The problems began earlier. They weren't so acute, I would say. With the beginning of the NATO airstrike, the Serbs started their problems to inflict the conflicts [as interpreted].

Q. So with the start of the bombing, the Serbs started with problems. Now, do you consider the bombing also to be a problem?

A. No, not at all. Bombing was something we were looking forward to because we considered it the only salvation for the Albania people.

Q. As a technician, you were employed in the -- in Obilic as section manager, and you worked right up until the 24th of March; is that correct?

A. Can you please repeat the question?

Q. What I said was: You worked as a technician in the thermoelectric powerplant at Obilic, as section manager, and that you worked there right up until the 24th of March, 1999. Is that correct?

A. I worked as a shift manager and not as a technician -- as a ⁴⁰⁵⁸ supervisor, actually. The fact is that I worked there until the NATO airstrikes began, and I went home. Then I had to join my family. I didn't find my family. My family was driven away by the Serb forces, who threw grenades at my house and at the entire village, and the entire population was obliged to flee from there in the direction of Breznice.

Q. So as I understand it, the answer to my question is that you worked, but you were shift leader, up until the 24th of March, that is to say, until the war began. You occupied your work post at the thermoelectric power station of Obilic. While you were at your work post, did you have any problems because you were an Albanian?

A. Yes, we did. All the Albanians who were in key positions were dismissed from those positions and replaced by the Serbs. I was one of them.

Q. How many Albanians worked in the Obilic thermoelectric power plant?

A. I can't give you an exact figure. It's not in my power to do that. But I know that Albanians were made to work only in the most difficult positions, and the responsible ones were given to the Serbs.

Q. Tell us roughly how many Albanians were employed in the Obilic power station.

A. I can't give you an exact figure.

Q. Well, what was the total number of employed workers in the company you worked for? I assume you know that.

A. I was not working in the administration; I was working in the production units. ⁴⁰⁵⁹

Q. What you're saying is you don't know how many people were employed in your company; is that it?

A. I think I was clear in my reply. It's not in my power to give you the figure.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Haradinaj --

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] And I don't even know it.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Haradinaj, how long did you work with the company?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I worked there from 1975 onwards.

JUDGE ROBINSON: It seems to me that you really ought to have even a rough idea as to the number of employees in the company. Can you help us on that?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I would willingly wish to help you, but, frankly speaking, I don't know because it was not part of my duties. I apologise for not giving you an exact figure. I don't want to testify to something which I don't know.

JUDGE ROBINSON: We don't want an exact figure; just a rough estimate.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In my sector, we were roughly 32 or 33. We were dealing with the chemical composition of the water.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, you can continue.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Thirty-three. Were they all Albanians?

A. No, they were not all Albanians.

Q. How many of them would you say were? Half, two-thirds? Roughly, ⁴⁰⁶⁰ at least in your sector. Give us a rough estimate. It was a small sector, numbering 33, roughly.

A. There were two Romas and six Serbs. The others were all Albanians.

Q. A moment ago you said that with the start of the NATO bombing, you left your post to see to your family. So you said a moment ago, in response to one of the questions asked, that when the bombing started, you left your work post to go and tend to your family, take care of your family. And straight after that, you said that you left because the Serbs had let go the managers, one of whom you were. Now, which is right: Did you leave your work post in order to take care of your family or did you leave your work post because the Serbs dismissed you?

A. I think your question was rather long. It will be kilometres long. Please make it shorter and ask it slowly, and one after another.

JUDGE MAY: Let us stop this fencing.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May I continue?

JUDGE MAY: Just a moment. No. Let's try and get a short answer to this matter.

When the bombing started, you left your post; is that right? Just yes or no.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] When the bombing started, with grenades from Velika Reka, and the family went to the mountains, only then I left my post, but it was not because of the NATO airstrike, Your Honours.

JUDGE MAY: Very well. Why was it that you left? ⁴⁰⁶¹

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I had to join my family.

JUDGE MAY: Nobody is criticising you at all. You must understand that. We just want to know what the facts were.

Yes, Mr. Milosevic.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. So you left your work post because of your family and not because the Serbs had dismissed you; is that right or not?

JUDGE MAY: I don't know where this confusion comes in. Was there any question of your leaving your post because the Serbs had dismissed you, at any time?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. I left my post because, as I said, I wanted to join my family after the Serbs had shelled the village, shot at the houses, at other houses, and driven the population out of it.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May we continue?

JUDGE MAY: Yes.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. You claim, as you say, that the Serbs, in the first days of April, without any evident reason or intimation, started bombing your village? Yes or no. Just a short answer.

A. Yes; without any reason, they shelled the village first, then the infantry troops entered, they looted and raided. It was in the early days of April.

Q. So the beginning of April, you say that the Serb forces, for no reason at all, shelled the village. Now, if that was at the beginning of April, as you yourself say, why then did you have to leave your work post ⁴⁰⁶² a week before, on the 24th of March, or let's say the next day, 25th of March, to take care of your family?

A. In the first days of April, we went to the village of Breznice and when we -- we left Breznice and then it was impossible to leave children in the mountains, and so I left my work.

Q. Yes, but I'm asking you about the time, about the dates that follow one another. You say that you left your work post on the 24th of March, when the bombing started.

JUDGE MAY: Where does it say that? I do not recollect him saying that.

When did you -- Just let's ask the witness.

When was it that you left your work? Just a moment.

When was it that you left your work?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I left my -- I left my work sometime round about 12th of April.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. You claim that you left work on the 12th of April. That is to say that until the 12th of April, you worked at the Obilic hydroelectric power plant?

A. I worked at a thermoelectric plant, not a hydroelectric plant.

Q. I didn't say hydro. I said "thermal." I mean, I said the electric plant.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. Let's move on. ⁴⁰⁶³

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. I asked you a question. Until the 12th of April, you worked at the Obilic power station?

A. Yes.

Q. And do you remember that a little while ago you said, in response to my question, that you left your work post when the bombing started on the 24th of March?

JUDGE MAY: I don't recollect it. I think this is simply going to confuse the witness. Just let him tell his story.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] That's precisely the way I am putting questions in relation to his story, and I'm trying to follow what he's been saying. You can look at the transcript.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. So that we get it straight: You left your work on the 12th of February because your village had been attacked; is that right?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's true, Your Honour. However, one explanation: Before I left my work, my family and children had gone further away. They had left the place where we lived. And later, there was no way I could get to work, because this goes in phases, because we moved from various places in various phases.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. In the transcript, in the upper third, it says -- I asked you: "On the 12th of April, you were working at the Obilic power station?" And the answer is, "Yes." And now the answer is that he left work in February. So can we finally come to the date when you left your work? ⁴⁰⁶⁴

A. It doesn't say anywhere in my statement that I left my job in 12th of February.

JUDGE MAY: There is a mistake in the transcript. It's been translated as February. Yes.

Were you working until the 12th of April?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.

JUDGE MAY: Thank you.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] All right. Let us proceed now.

Q. Do you live in Gornja Stanovc [phoen] now as well?

A. Yes, in Stanovc i Eperm [phoen].

Q. For how long was your village shelled?

A. Several times, every now and then.

Q. And during that, what you claimed happened, were there any casualties?

A. There were casualties.

Q. And the population went into the woods?

A. They all left, and only a few old people were left, and this old man, Shaban Manxhiqi [phoen], was taken away and killed.

Q. Who took this old man away and killed him?

A. No doubt the Serbs.

Q. Did you see that? Did you see the Serbs take him away?

A. He was merely found dead.

Q. And on the basis of what are you saying, then, that the Serbs killed him?

A. I can say in full responsibility that the Albanians did not kill ⁴⁰⁶⁵ Albanians, but he was killed by your hand.

Q. On the basis of what you have been claiming, that Albanians did not kill Albanians, you are saying that he was not killed by Albanians, or rather, that he was killed by Serbs; right?

A. In that I didn't see it, I believe that this is the case, and indeed it is.

Q. Apart from this old man who was killed, were there any other casualties in your village?

A. While fleeing from Breznice to Dumnice on the 26th, there were also five casualties then. One of them was Ibrahim Prronaj, 55 years old, and his son, aged 20, and another one aged 20 whose name I don't remember, and a pregnant woman and another girl. They were buried at Dumnice. I saw these casualties myself. They were killed by mortar fire.

Q. On the 26th of which month were you fleeing? You said the 26th.

A. Of April. April.

Q. April. And this mortar fire that killed them, where was it coming from? Who was firing?

A. According to eyewitnesses, the mortar fire came from Lumi e Madh, the village formerly known as Velika Reka, and it was aimed directly at the civilian population.

Q. You are saying according to what eyewitnesses said, but you didn't see it with your own eyes.

A. We only saw the casualties. It is not possible to see where the fire came from because Dumnice and Velika Reka are three to four kilometres apart as the crow flies, but I saw fragments of the shell. ⁴⁰⁶⁶

Q. And do you know anything precisely about these Obilic plants and the KLA attacks precisely by mortar? Are you aware of these events?

A. Would you put the question again? It's not clear to me.

Q. Are you aware of KLA attacks against Obilic, that is to say, the company that you worked for, and also the area beyond that?

A. There were no KLA attacks anywhere near my workplace.

Q. And do you know about attacks from the neighbouring village that came from the KLA? Just say yes or no. I'm not asking you for descriptions.

A. I can't describe it without going into long details.

Q. My question was: Are you aware of KLA attacks coming from the nearby village, the villages in the neighbouring area?

A. What area are you talking about?

Q. Precisely the area where your village is and where your company is. I'm talking about the area you come from.

A. My village and my workplace are ten kilometres apart from one another, and so I can't really provide the answer you require.

Q. Well, in that area, ten kilometres long, between your village and the place where you worked, are you aware of any KLA attacks there?

A. On the road that I travelled from Stanofc to the highway, through Shkabaj, formerly known as Orloviqi, to Obiliq, there were no confrontations between the KLA and your forces anywhere along that route.

Q. Do you know of any clashes in that area between the KLA and our forces, as you had put it? Yes or no.

A. There were no KLA forces in my village. There were no KLA forces ⁴⁰⁶⁷ in my village.

Q. I asked you whether you knew of any attacks in that area of yours, attacks that were launched by the KLA against our forces, and the other way around.

A. I didn't see any, but according to the press and the television, there were attacks.

Q. But you didn't see them. You described the following: Like the other inhabitants of the village, you started leaving Gornja Stanofc [phoen] when you saw Serbs dressed in camouflage uniforms entering your village. Is that right?

A. Yes, I said this, but I should explain that there was no KLA there, and the residents fled, and it was the Serbian forces that drove away the population and not the KLA. That's what it says in my statement.

Q. All right. I understand what you have been asserting. How many houses are there in your village?

A. About 300.

Q. And how many houses were damaged during the shelling that you've been referring to?

A. According to statistics, about 70 per cent of the houses in Stanofc were burnt and shelled.

Q. How far away is the village of Breznica from your village?

A. Between the one end of Stanofc and the beginning of Breznice, there are about four to five kilometres.

Q. So from the end of your village to the beginning, there is four or five kilometres, and you say that, from Breznica, you were watching the ⁴⁰⁶⁸ Serbs looting or torching houses in Gornja Stanofc [phoen]; isn't that right?

A. I think it's written well in my statement, because you can see one from the other through binoculars.

Q. All right. With the use of binoculars, as you say, four or five kilometres away. It can certainly be established on a map how far this is, actually. But you say that you saw all of it from there? You saw the Serbs entering the houses, looting them, burning them, et cetera; is that right?

A. Yes. They looted and then they set the houses on fire.

Q. Could you describe that, how the Serbs looted the houses?

A. Quite clearly. They came with trucks, and your army guarded them and civilians went in and took what they wanted, and then the houses were set on fire.

Q. Who was looting the houses: Civilians or the military?

A. In that they were together, they did it together.

Q. And you claim that from a five-kilometre distance, you saw civilians entering houses --

JUDGE MAY: He said that. He said that through binoculars he saw it.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] And that's true, Your Honour.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. And is it true that two days upon your arrival in Brenica [phoen] or Breznica - I can't get the pronunciation of the village right - that the shelling of that village started? ⁴⁰⁶⁹

A. This question is not clear to me.

Q. You left your village and went to which village?

A. To the village of Breznice.

Q. And when was this village attacked?

A. Two days after we left Stanofc, we left again and then started going up the hills.

Q. And why did you go away after two days?

A. Because Breznice too started to be shelled, from the lower part of the village. The houses started to be set on fire. The same thing happened as in Stanofc.

Q. Did you see these forces that were shelling Breznica?

A. I didn't see the forces, but I saw -- I heard the mortars. I saw the shells dropping in the village.

Q. But you claim, as far as I could see in your statement, that they shelled the village with hand-held mortars is that right, or hand-held launchers?

A. The shells I saw came from the launchers, from the mortars.

Q. Hand-held. Do you know at which distance targets can be engaged from a hand-held launcher?

A. I don't know. Your army knows, you criminal.

JUDGE MAY: Don't abuse the accused.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I apologise, Your Honour.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Can you answer the question?

JUDGE MAY: If you don't know, just say so. ⁴⁰⁷⁰

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. But you didn't see the launchers firing, except that you saw the shells fired from them; is that right?

A. I am not clear. Can you please repeat it?

Q. Well, I'll try to rephrase it. Since you are a layman, since you are not knowledgeable in such matters, how come you know that they used hand-held launchers?

A. Because I can tell the shells coming from the mortars.

Q. All right. And near Breznica, near the village itself, at that time were there any members of the KLA?

A. They were on the move, but they hadn't taken up any positions.

Q. Did you see them in Breznica?

A. Whom? Whom do you mean did I see?

Q. Members of the KLA. You say that they were on the move but they hadn't taken up any positions. Did you see them on the move in Breznica?

A. Yes, I did.

Q. Now, were they fleeing together with you from Breznica?

A. No. They were only escorting the population and returned to their position in Dumnice or elsewhere where they were.

Q. And how far is it from Dubnica to Breznica?

A. I don't know.

Q. Roughly. You're describing the events. You went from Breznica to Dubnica. You just mentioned Dubnica. So it's probably nearby. So how far, roughly speaking, is it from Breznica to Dubnica? ⁴⁰⁷¹

A. Roughly three, four kilometres.

Q. Three or four kilometres. And you say that around the village of Dubnica, you came across the defence lines of the KLA. That's what you claim.

A. I'm not clear about the question.

Q. In your statement, you claim that it was around the village of Dubnica that you came across, as you say, you came across the defence lines of the KLA. Is that right or is it not?

A. After we left Breznice village, we headed towards Dumnice, and then it was when the KLA protected us.

Q. And did you come across the defence lines of the KLA in Dubnica, as you claim?

A. There were forces of the KLA, yes.

Q. So what you have said, you saw the KLA moving in Breznica, and three kilometres further off, in Dubnica, as you say, were the defence positions, as you call them, of the KLA. That means that in that whole area, Breznica-Dubnica, was where the KLA moved around. Is that right or not?

A. It is a very long sentence. I don't know why your sentences are kilometres long.

JUDGE MAY: Look, don't argue with him. He has a point, Mr. Milosevic. The questions are too long. I think the question seems to be: Were the KLA in Breznica and Dubnica? And I think your answer is: Yes, there were KLA there. Is that right?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, that's right, Your Honour. ⁴⁰⁷²

JUDGE MAY: Yes. Now, can we move on.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Well, in Gornja Dubnica on that day, how many members of the KLA were there there?

A. I don't know the figure.

Q. All right. Do you remember whether the members of the KLA were fleeing, or were they opening fire on the members of our forces?

A. There wasn't any clashes among the KLA and your forces. Only the Serb forces fired at the people, at the civilian population, with mortars.

Q. The KLA was just fleeing; it wasn't doing any firing. Right?

A. I think I was clear. There wasn't any confrontations between the KLA and the Serb forces.

Q. And what was the KLA doing? You saw them on the move in Breznica, you came across their lines in Dubnica, three kilometres later. That's right, isn't it?

A. You draw such a complicated picture of the situation that I can't tell. I told you: The KLA was positioned in Dumnice village, and they just kept a vigil on the population.

Q. You're claiming that the KLA, from those positions, didn't do any firing?

JUDGE MAY: That's what he said.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] Excellent. Let's move on.

Q. Was there any shelling of Gornja Dubnica, Upper Dubnica? Where the KLA positions were, that's what I mean.

A. From where, and which forces do you think did the shelling? ⁴⁰⁷³

Q. You say that in Dubnica there were KLA units present. Now, did our forces attack those positions of theirs?

A. They did not attack the KLA positions; they attacked the population.

Q. All right. Then the KLA had its positions in Dubnica. That's where the population was too, the inhabitants. The army or the police or the army and the police did not attack the KLA but they attacked the inhabitants; is that what you're claiming?

A. Yes, they attacked only the population, because they didn't dare attack the KLA. But they fired at the defenceless population.

Q. And they avoided shooting at the KLA, did they?

A. Not they avoided it; their purpose was to inflict damage more on the population.

Q. All right. And where were the civilians rallied in Dubnica? Where did they gather? At what place?

A. Somewhere in the middle of the village or in houses where they could find shelter, or on top of the tractors. When the Serb forces saw them, then they started to fire with mortars.

Q. All right. Now, when the forces attacked the civilians, as you claim, where were the KLA positions at that time? Where was the KLA at that point in time?

A. The Serb forces were on a lower position, the KLA in the middle, the population on a higher ground, and the Serb forces used mortars against the civilian population.

Q. Have I understood this correctly: The KLA was in between the ⁴⁰⁷⁴ civilians and our own forces? Is that right?

A. Yes, as far as I know.

Q. How come, then, if they were in between the civilians and our forces, that they did not protect the civilians?

A. It is easy to guess, because it is known what machinery you had and what weapons the KLA had.

Q. That means that in the valley, there were our forces, and then next came the KLA, and behind the KLA were the civilians; and our forces weren't shooting at the KLA, they were shooting at the civilians, skipping over the KLA. Is that what you're saying?

A. Yes. This is what I'm saying. But I can explain. There wasn't any close-range fighting. They shelled only from a distance, with mortars.

Q. But not at the KLA, but the civilians?

JUDGE MAY: He said that.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's how it is, Your Honour.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] All right. All right.

Q. Now, the ones you mentioned, Ibrahim, Afrim, and Beslim, and the others, were they members of the KLA?

A. Can you mention the names again, because they came very fast. Excuse me.

Q. Ibrahim, Afrim, Beslim.

A. I can swear on my heart that they were not members of the KLA, but they were in the convoy with me. Ibrahim was 65 years old. Ibrahim Prronaj. ⁴⁰⁷⁵

Q. Prronaj, yes. And how far is the village of Gornja Dubnica from Cecilija?

A. It's a distance. I don't know exactly how far.

Q. All right. Not to lose time establishing the approximate distance: Is it true that the KLA headquarters were in that village? Yes or no. Just say yes or no, and we can cut down on the time.

A. I don't know whether you're asking about the base of the KLA in Ceceli or in Dumnice.

Q. I'm asking about Cecelija. Is that where the KLA had its headquarters? Yes or no.

A. The KLA had its headquarters at Ceceli.

Q. And who was the commander of that headquarters?

A. I don't know his name, but I know that he was a head teacher at a school beforehand.

Q. And how many KLA members were there at the time?

A. I don't know the exact figure.

Q. As far as I was able to understand, you spent five days in Cecelija; is that right? Yes or no.

A. Yes.

Q. Now, in the course of those five days, was there any fighting going on between the KLA and our forces? Yes or no.

A. There were no clashes during those five days.

Q. No clashes. Why, then, did the KLA withdraw from the village and decided to withdraw its forces from the area, from the region?

A. You're asking me? During the five days when we were there, there ⁴⁰⁷⁶ were no clashes, but after those five days, then the fighting began, as you say.

Q. Between whom?

A. This question is so awkward. I don't know exactly what you mean.

Q. You say that the fighting began. Between whom? The fighting between whom?

A. As far as I know, I didn't say that combat began; I said there were no confrontations for five days.

Q. And then you said: "And five days later, the fighting began." "After those five days, then the fighting began."

That's what you said a moment ago.

A. I didn't say that combat began, but that after five days we heard that -- we heard that there had been fighting throughout the area. So please do not hurry me. Now ask whatever you like.

Q. Well, I'm just asking you. So throughout that time, you were -- you spent your time together with the KLA; right?

A. Spent most of the time with civilians, with unarmed civilians. The KLA was positioned lower down. It wasn't so close to us.

Q. All right. But I'm asking you now. Let me ask you in a different way. When they decided to withdraw, that is to say, when the KLA decided to withdraw, you decided to leave the region and go from Gornja Studime [phoen] in the direction of Donja Studime [phoen]; is that right?

A. You are complicating this. Donja e Eperm [phoen]? I don't know what you mean. ⁴⁰⁷⁷

JUDGE MAY: You went to another village; is that right?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, let him mention the names of the villages clearly. I don't understand which village he means.

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Milosevic, your time now is coming up, but you can ask two more questions if you want.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, I have many more questions, but as you can hear, the witness doesn't seem to understand a single question. He is receiving interpretation in the Albanian language.

JUDGE MAY: Do you want to ask another two questions?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have 32 more questions, or more.

[Trial Chamber confers]

JUDGE MAY: The Bench will give you ten minutes more.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Now, what direction did the KLA leave in?

A. The KLA withdrew into the hills, for tactical reasons, in order to save the population.

Q. Did they leave the population or did they carry on with the population?

A. No. The KLA, in order to prevent worse from happening, left the population after the population had decided to go downhill, down to the village of Studime and to continue in the direction of Vushtrri.

Q. You said that two kilometres after a certain place on the way to Vucitrn, that you came across some Serb policemen. Do you remember having said that, that part of your testimony? ⁴⁰⁷⁸

A. If possible, could I have the question again?

Q. On the way towards Vucitrn, you came across some Serb policemen. That's what you say in your statement. Moving along in that group that was heading towards Vucitrn.

A. Serbian forces came down from Shala and shelled us, and we fled to Studime e Eperme. We rested for a moment and formed a convoy and decided to go in the direction of Vushtrri. At Studime --

Q. I am skipping over the questions because my time has been restricted. Now, I'm asking you about the event when you came across some policemen, and you say that they did not stop you but they just directed you towards your road to Vucitrn. Do you remember that?

A. This question is very mixed up and unclear. Slowly, please. One by one, I will explain these things.

JUDGE MAY: Don't argue. Mr. Milosevic, it will help us: Which part of the statement are you referring to?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I don't have the statement in front of me, but there is a portion of his statement where he says, "We came across Serb policemen." They did not stop them but directed them towards Vucitrn and the factory farm there, in that direction.

JUDGE MAY: Very well. That's clear enough. Did a group of Serb policemen direct you towards the factory farm?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. Just before going out onto the main Mitrovica-Prishtina road, these policemen pointed us towards the agricultural cooperative, where they gathered us and left us ⁴⁰⁷⁹ in the open air all night.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. You claim that that agricultural cooperative was guarded by civilian policemen; is that right?

A. Can I have the question again, please?

Q. You said that the agricultural cooperative was guarded by the civilian police force.

A. No, I didn't say that in my statement. I said that the police were inside and the army joined them, so there were police and military together, and civilians too. I didn't say that in my statement.

Q. Well, what were the civilians doing?

A. Which civilians do you mean?

Q. Those civilians that you just mentioned, that you said there were police and military together, and civilians too. Those civilians.

A. They only moved back and forth, and at that moment, they weren't doing anything.

Q. And how much time did you spend exactly in the prison in Smrekovnice?

A. Excuse me. Yes, clear. I was in the Smrekovnice Prison from the 3rd of May to the 23rd of May.

Q. So you spent 20 days there. Now, is it true that one of the guards was an Albanian by the name of Agron?

A. Yes. There was a prison warden called Agron.

Q. Was he an Albanian?

A. I didn't know him. I only knew him as Agron. ⁴⁰⁸⁰

Q. Well, was he an Albanian? Even if you didn't know him, you met him.

A. According to his name, he should be an Albanian.

Q. So an Albanian was guarding you while you were in prison.

JUDGE MAY: He said that the guard was called Agron.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] All right.

Q. You claim that in the prison in Smrekovnice, you answered the investigator that you had no knowledge about the KLA and its members. Is that true?

A. Excuse me, Your Honour. The accused is asking such long questions that I can't distinguish one sentence from another. Please give me one plain sentence to answer.

JUDGE MAY: Did you tell the interrogator in the prison that you had no knowledge about the KLA and its members?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. I said in prison that I wasn't a member of the KLA but I had helped them.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. You told him that you had given them money. Is that right or not?

A. I said that I had helped them, and it is indeed true that, within my own resources, I helped them of my own free will, because the KLA was -- it was the KLA that fought for the freedom of Kosova, with the help of NATO and the United States.

Q. That means that they didn't ask you for money; you gave them money of your own free will.

A. Of my own free will, I wanted to help the army of the people. ⁴⁰⁸¹ This was an army that defended people's homes, defended the people. It came from out of the people themselves. So I helped them out of my own free will, without any kind of coercion. It was my own free will. I say it again.

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Milosevic, you've had your ten minutes. Mr. Tapuskovic, have you any questions of the witness?

MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I do have some questions because Mr. Slobodan Milosevic did not touch upon the second statement at all, and I do not wish to abuse the time, of course, but could you just tell me how much time I have at my disposal, because this is a very important statement for the issues you're going to deal with. Some very important things have been left out which are contained in that second statement.

JUDGE MAY: Let's get on with it now and finish it this evening.

MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I'll do my best, but I have to go back for a moment, actually, to the first statement. Questioned by Mr. Tapuskovic:

Q. Mr. Gani -- I'm going to refer to you by your first name. It's easier. I hope you don't mind if I refer to you by your first name. But could we first clarify this fact, that is to say, when did you stop working at your work post where you were employed? In your first statement, dated the 28th and 29th of May, 1999, in the first sentence of that statement, you said that you worked as a technician until the 24th of March, 1999:

"I was employed at the hydroelectric power station as section ⁴⁰⁸² manager."

Today you said something else, something different. Now, could you tell me, which is correct: What you said today or what you said then?

A. We worked until 12 April. As of 24th of March -- allow me to give you an explanation. With the beginning of the NATO bombing on the 24th of March, our timetable changed. I went to go to work every three or four days. That's why I said I stayed in my workplace until the 12th of April.

Q. All right. Thank you. Further on, in paragraph 3, you said that on the 24th of March, you heard on television that NATO had started to bomb. Is that right?

A. Yes, that's right.

Q. And then, during the following days, you heard several explosions coming from the direction of Pristina, and you say, "... which I presumed were NATO attacks." Is that right?

A. I can explain that. On the 24th of March, I heard the NATO bombs, but I still went to work. This is the reality.

Q. Was that of any significance, that you decided, together with your family, to leave the place where these bombs were falling, or was this not significant?

MR. SAXON: Objection. Your Honour --

JUDGE MAY: Just a moment. Just a moment. Yes.

MR. SAXON: Your Honour, the witness described how he heard bombs falling from the direction of Pristina. At no time --

THE INTERPRETER: Counsel, please speak into the microphone. ⁴⁰⁸³

MR. SAXON: The witness described how he heard the sound of bombs falling from the direction of the city of Pristina. At no time -- and we are referring here to NATO bombs, the NATO bombardment. I think it needs to be clarified whether Mr. Tapuskovic is referring in his last question to NATO bombs or bombs or shells fired by the Serb forces. Thank you.

JUDGE MAY: Perhaps you could put the question again so we can understand it.

MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] There's no need for me to rephrase it, Your Honours, because it says here --

JUDGE MAY: I have asked you to rephrase it, so kindly do so.

MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Of course I will, Your Honour, but this is verbatim what his statement says:

"During the days that followed --" this is what he said. I have no reason to interpret it:

"During the days that followed, I heard several explosions coming from the direction of Pristina, 15 kilometres away, which I presumed were NATO attacks."

That is literally what he said.

Q. And now, was this of significance?

JUDGE MAY: What is the question?

MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] My question is whether -- the fact that he presumed that he heard NATO bombing, whether that affected his decision to leave together with his family so that he would seek shelter from the place where these bombs were falling. That's my question. ⁴⁰⁸⁴

JUDGE MAY: Yes. Can you answer that?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I want to be brief. Every Albanian I think was looking forward to NATO bombing, because he hoped and they hoped that it would bring their freedom. I don't know where the mistake is, but the fact is that --

JUDGE MAY: There is no mistake. It's been suggested because you heard the explosions, you were fleeing from the explosions. If the answer is no, just say no.

MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, it may appear so, but I did not leave because of NATO bombing but because of the shelling by the Serb forces. We could tell between the NATO bombing and the shelling. These are two different things. I want to make it clear that we did not go away because of NATO bombing.

MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Gani, please, I'm just asking you to give me answers that are as brief as possible, bearing in mind the time involved. Now we have this other statement of yours given on the 10th of October, 2001. On page 2 of that statement, the English version also page 2, paragraph 2, you said here:

"Altogether I think that in the village of Cecelia, there were about 2.000 people who had sought shelter there." Is that right?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, am I allowed to look at ⁴⁰⁸⁵ the statement? Because I am not clear.

[Trial Chamber confers]

JUDGE MAY: This is obviously going to go on. Would you have a copy of the statement for the witness so he can look at it? Would you get the passage out. We'll adjourn for ten minutes, we'll have a break for the interpreters, and then we'll go on until you finish, Mr. Tapuskovic. Yes, ten minutes.

--- Break taken at 4.08 p.m.

--- On resuming at 4.21 p.m.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. Has the witness got the statement?

MR. SAXON: I believe he does, Your Honour.

JUDGE MAY: What language has he got it in?

MR. SAXON: He's got it in Albanian, Your Honour.

JUDGE MAY: Have you found the passage?

MR. SAXON: We have, Your Honour, and it's been highlighted in yellow.

JUDGE MAY: And in the English, where is it?

MR. SAXON: In the English, it is on page 2 of the statement that is dated 10 October 2001. Close to the bottom of the page, beginning with the words, "Altogether..."

JUDGE MAY: Yes. Thank you. Now, Mr. Tapuskovic, we can go on until 5.00, so would you kindly bring your cross-examination to an end by then.

MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I shall certainly finish much earlier, and I shall certainly be putting very direct ⁴⁰⁸⁶ questions, so I'm sure to finish before that.

Q. So, Mr. Gani, I asked you a while ago, because that's what it says in your statement. It says here, page 2, paragraph 2 - I don't know where it is in your version - but in Cecelia, there were about 7.000 people. Is that right, civilians? That's what it says here.

A. Yes. Approximate number of civilians who stayed in Cecelia for about five days. This is what this figure is about.

Q. And when you came to Gornja Studime [phoen] right from Cecelija, together with the people who were there, as you had put it in your first statement, not to go back to that, there were a total of 10.000 to 15.000 people there. Is that right?

A. Yes, that's right, but I want to give an explanation here too, because other people joined the column of people, so the number grew constantly.

Q. I understand. These are mainly people who came, as you put it in the first statement, they came from various places. I don't have to go into all of that. Drenica, et cetera, et cetera. Just look at page 1 and you'll see all the places that you mentioned. They came from different places.

A. Here it says about 7.000 people who were refugees in Ceceli. But when the column of people started to move downwards, then other people joined it, people who were spread in other villages, in Studime e Eperme, the mountains. So spontaneously the number of the people in the column grew, as I said.

Q. All right. Let's not dwell on that too long. Again on this same ⁴⁰⁸⁷ page, in paragraph 3 - so we're skipping one paragraph - you said when you were in Cecelia, that the KLA told you that you would stay there only temporarily. Is that right?

A. Yes, that is right.

Q. So you were waiting. You were waiting for them to tell you when you're supposed to leave; is that right?

A. We weren't waiting for someone to order us; we were waiting, thinking that we were sheltered and protected there. At the first moment that we felt unsafe, then the KLA withdrew and we left for Studime.

Q. Thank you. Then further on you said - this is paragraph 6 - that you stayed in that village for five days, in Cecelija. "When the KLA told us that the front line was broken at Shala and that the Serb forces had broken through." Is that when you had to leave, due to those circumstances?

A. It is explicitly stated in my statement that after the news was confirmed that the front line was broken at Shala, then we felt unsafe and then left for -- left Studime to go to a town or somewhere else.

Q. Already in the following paragraph it says, literally: "At that time --" while you were in Cecelija, that is. "At that time, I did not see any evidence of civilian deaths in Cecelija." Is that right, that at that time in Cecelija there were no civilian casualties during those five days?

A. As far as I know, there weren't any casualties, with the exception of one victim. I don't know how he was killed. That I don't know.

Q. You've explained that. I'll get to that a bit later. But now, ⁴⁰⁸⁸ after two paragraphs, you say:

"While I was in Cecelija, I saw KLA fighters. I don't know how many there were, but some wore KLA uniform, others wore civilian clothing."

I'm interested in the ratio. How many were in civilian clothing and how many were in uniform? And they all belonged to the KLA. Who outnumbered who?

A. The KLA staff had more members dressed in uniform. There were few civilians, who were waiting maybe to get weapons or I don't know what. They were exercising.

Q. In the next paragraph, you're talking about weapons and you say which weapons the members of the KLA had. Is this true, what it says here, that there were M-48 rifles and then Kalashnikovs. "And I also saw one hand-held grenade launcher. It is the type that is fired from the shoulder. They also had hand grenades."

Did the majority of KLA members have these weapons?

A. Yes.

Q. And now I'm interested in one more thing here. On page 4, on page 4 -- the English version is the 14th paragraph of page 3. It says here: "In Cecelija, I heard that in the village -- I heard that the dead body of a KLA fighter had been brought into the village. I was told that he was killed in Sllakofc or Shala area."

Did you see that or did you only hear about that?

A. I only heard that the dead body was brought and was buried in Ceceli. ⁴⁰⁸⁹

MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, now I am compelled to go back to the first statement, just one single paragraph in the first statement. That is page 3, the second paragraph in the English version.

Q. Over here, you stated, and I have to read this out to you so that I could ask you something. You said that you stayed in Cecelija for five days, and "during which time the KLA suffered such heavy losses to the Serb forces that they told us that we had better leave the area." That's what you stated. Is that right?

A. In my statement I have said that we heard the news that in Shala there were losses inflicted on the KLA, and because of that, we were not safe to stay in Ceceli and then decided to leave to safer places.

Q. I have to highlight this. You said here that during these five days in Cecelija, "the KLA suffered such heavy losses to the Serb forces," et cetera. So can you tell us how many people lost their lives, how many KLA members lost their lives?

A. I don't know about this loss. I just heard it from rumours, because Shala is very far away from Ceceli.

Q. You've heard just now that there were heavy losses among the KLA.

A. This is what we heard. These were the rumours.

Q. So there were considerable casualties, then.

JUDGE MAY: That's what he said he heard.

MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] I'm just interested in one more thing.

Q. In this second statement, you described everything the way you had put it in the first statement. However, in this second statement, you did ⁴⁰⁹⁰ not mention at all that you had seen machine-gun fire aimed at civilians. You did not mention that in your second statement at all. How do you explain that? You said everything else, but you just did not say when the convoy stopped with that white flag, you were standing there for two hours, and in the second statement you did not mention at all that there was any shooting at civilians, but you did say it in the first statement. So how do you explain that?

MR. SAXON: May I object?

JUDGE MAY: Yes.

MR. SAXON: It clearly says, at the very beginning of the second statement given by this witness that: "This statement is being made to clarify some matters that have come up in the prior statement." At the top of the page, a sentence that stands by itself. Now, given that context, I believe this question is a bit unfair to the witness. He had no reason to mention every detail in the second statement.

JUDGE MAY: That answers the question, Mr. Tapuskovic.

MR. SAXON: Thank you.

MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, but he repeated everything else, everything except for that.

Q. I do have to ask you, Mr. Gani: Did you see any shooting against people? Did you see people who were being shot at, unarmed people?

A. At what point in time are you asking me about?

Q. At the moment when you were on the road in that column of people, when you stopped, and when the white flag was raised. In this other statement, you said that you stood there at that point for two hours, and ⁴⁰⁹¹ then you continued your journey. In this second statement, you only said that you stood there for two hours, but you did not mention any shooting whatsoever in your second statement. So is that the way it was?

A. We stayed there two hours. Then, after two hours, we decided to raise the white flag, as I say, because we were unprotected. And so we decided to go to the main road from Prishtina to Mitrovica, and then to leave Kosova. During those two hours, I didn't hear any shooting, but we felt defenceless and we had not eaten anything. We had no food, nothing to drink, so we had to find a solution.

Q. When you continued towards Smrekovnice, was there any shooting, up to the prison?

A. Mr. Tapuskovic, we are still at Studime e Eperme, before the massacre was committed. Although we had the white flag, despite that, the massacre was still perpetrated. What you are talking about happened after that night when we spent at the agricultural cooperative, when we males were taken to the prison, while we knew nothing about the children and the women. So there is a difference from the events in that place to that in the agricultural cooperative, and then we surrendered before we entered the agriculture cooperative. But it is regarded the while flag, and what happened, happened.

Q. I'm just asking you one more thing and that will be the end. On the road, did you see any shooting? That's what I'm asking you. Were you stopped by the white flag? Did you see any people being shot at there?

A. When we had the white flag, after two hours that we started to move downwards, and when we entered Studime, they took away the flag and ⁴⁰⁹² then they began to maltreat us, to kill, to injure people, and so on. We showed the white flag before we surrendered, but nevertheless, they did what they wanted to do.

Q. And you saw 50 people who had lost their lives?

A. Yes, about 50 people. I saw them, sir, after they broke loose the column of people, after they took away the white flag, then they started to maltreat us. So after the flag was taken away, the people continued to walk in the column, and then they were subjected to this massacre, looting, raiding, and everything I said in my statement.

JUDGE MAY: Thank you.

MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Saxon.

MR. SAXON: I will be brief, Your Honour. Re-examined by Mr. Saxon:

Q. Mr. Haradinaj, you just mentioned -- rather, you just described how "they" took away the white flag and began to maltreat us, to kill and so on. Just so that the record is clear, because pronouns are difficult, who is "they"? What do you mean by "they"?

A. It's very clear. The Serb army of the accused.

Q. All right. And earlier on, you mentioned that you -- when you were in the village of Cecelija, you heard rumours or news that in a place called Shala, that losses had been inflicted on the KLA, so that it was no longer considered safe to stay in the village of Cecelija. If you know, and only if you know: Approximately how far is this place called Shala from Cecelija? ⁴⁰⁹³

A. I can't give you an exact figure, but I think it's over ten kilometres.

MR. SAXON: Thank you. I have no further questions.

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Haradinaj, thank you for coming to the Tribunal to give your evidence. It's now concluded and you're free to go.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I would like to thank you, this Trial Chamber. Thank you for enabling me to come here.

JUDGE MAY: We'll adjourn now. Half past 9.00 tomorrow morning.

--- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 4.43 p.m., to be reconvened on Thursday, the 2nd day of

May, 2002, at 9.30 a.m.