⁴³¹⁰

Monday, 6 May 2002

[Open session]

[The accused entered court]

[The witness entered court]

--- Upon commencing at 9.02 a.m.

JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Milosevic.

WITNESS: IBRAHIM RUGOVA [Resumed]

[Witness answered through interpreter] Cross-examined by Mr. Milosevic: [Continued]

Q. [Interpretation] Well, to continue where we left off on Friday, that is to say demonstrations in 1981 that you described. They denoted the beginning of a new wave of violence against the Serbs in Kosovo and Metohija; is that right?

A. I didn't mention those demonstrations by accident. I did so because that was raised by the accused. And it is not true that there was a wave of violence against the Serbs, or the others, for that matter, but the truth is that there was a wave of violence, a new wave, against the Albanians of Kosova and against the Albanians in the former republics of the federation but not against the other ethnic peoples, and that no act was undertaken against the other ethnic groups. These were demonstrations staged by students, violently suppressed by the police and the army then. And as far as I can remember, eight people were killed and hundreds were arrested. And ever since, in Kosova, an extraordinary situation was established. A state of emergency was declared. The army, the former Yugoslavia army, was deployed, and ever since, special police ⁴³¹¹ troops from all the former republics were stationed in Kosova, as well as from Vojvodina. And that situation, that is their presence, as I said on Friday, lasted until 1990, when elections were held in the former republics which were not allowed in Kosova. The free elections were not allowed to be held. And then these police forces were brought there from Macedonia, Bosnia-Herzegovina.

Q. [Previous translation continues]... yourself to answering my question, please.

JUDGE KWON: There seems to be a mistake in the transcript. The name of this witness appeared as "Mehmet Aliu." Yes, go on.

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Rugova, we'll try and get through this as quickly as we can this morning. So if you could keep your answers fairly short. It may be difficult, but if you can, we'd be grateful.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I agree. I'll try to give the right answer. I'll try to be briefer.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. So what I'm saying is that this led to a new wave of violence against the Serbs. And apart --

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Milosevic, this is why this case does not go on. You repeat. After the witness has given an answer denying your question, you repeat the question. There's no point doing that. We just go into a circular argument which continues. Now, if you don't get the answer you want, there is no point arguing about it. Just move on to something else.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right. ⁴³¹²

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. What is the answer then? Because since 1981, that is from 1981 to 1990, as the witness says, there was a state of repression against the Albanians, and I claim the exact opposite. What is the answer to the fact that in 1987, for example -- and this is something that the New York Times wrote about, and I'm going to read you a brief passage from it: [In English] "Ethnic Albanians in the government have manipulated public funds and regulations to take over lands belonging to Serbs."

A. That is not true.

Q. [In English] "Slavic Orthodox churches have been attacked and flags have been torn down."

A. That is not true.

Q. [In English] "Wells have been poisoned --"

A. I kindly ask you, please, please. That's not true. At that time, the lands belonging to the Serbs or to the Albanians were not --

Q. I haven't --

A. -- Your Honours, please make a ruling. I don't think that's true.

Q. Would you please allow me to finish --

JUDGE MAY: Just a moment. First of all, let's have the date of this article. You said it was from The New York Times. What is the date?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The date is the 1st of November, 1987. And would you allow me to complete the quotation. [In English] "Slavic Orthodox churches have been attacked and ⁴³¹³ flags have been torn down. Wells have been poisoned and crops burned. Slavic boys have been knifed and some young ethnic Albanians have been told by their elders to rape Serbian girls. As the Slavs flee the protracted violence, Kosovo is becoming what ethnic Albanian nationalists have been demanding for years, an ethnically pure Albanian region."

JUDGE MAY: Yes. And who is the -- who is the author of that article?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] That was something that was written by David Binder in The New York Times in 1987. It was a time when the media Satanisation, demonisation of Serbia had not yet begun. So that decade started off with your demonstrations in 1981, was a decade of violence in which 50.000 more Serbs under this kind of --

JUDGE MAY: [Previous translation continues]... if you're going to put these allegations, very serious allegations they are too, you must let the witness have a chance to deal with them.

It's alleged, Mr. Rugova, that wells were poisoned and crops were burned. Is there any truth in that?

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. All right. Is this true or --

A. No. No. That is not at all true. As I said earlier, at that time, no violence was perpetrated by the Albanians against other ethnic groups. Second, it is not true that the wells were poisoned. Unfortunately, it was done by the Belgrade regime led by the accused in 1998, 1999. And people have been thrown in these wells. That is the truth. ⁴³¹⁴

JUDGE ROBINSON: Dr. Rugova, might there have been isolated acts of violence against the Serbs, as distinct from something on a wholesale level?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] At that time, no. No. Not even individual cases or an organised campaign.

JUDGE MAY: The other allegations concern boys being knifed and some being told to rape girls.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. No, that's not true.

JUDGE MAY: Yes.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. All right. So that means everything here that was described by The New York Times is not true; is that it?

A. It's not true.

Q. All right. You said on Friday that the KLA wasn't a terrorist organisation. My question is as follows: If the KLA was not a terrorist organisation, then why did you come to me to ask me to transfer you to another country to save you and your family?

A. I said already that it is not a terrorist organisation, and no state knows the department has declared it as such [as interpreted]. It was an organisation set up by the people when the military attack began against Kosova. It was set up by the patriots who wanted to fight for the freedom of Kosova.

With respect to what you say, that I came and asked you, I didn't beg you, in fact. I asked you to leave Kosova, because at that time Kosova was empty. There were no people. There was none of my associates ⁴³¹⁵ there, and I wanted to leave it in order not to be killed some day in some incident or in some plot that might be staged against me by your regime.

Q. What we have seen recorded by even the Western press in that decade shows that the genocide was conducted against the Serbs, over the Serbs. Is that true or not? Against the Serbs, not the Albanians.

A. Please, please, please. Don't mix up things. You are once talking about the 1980s, then you go to the end of the 1990s, when the war broke out. That's why I'm saying there wasn't any genocide committed against the Serbs. The opposite was the case, especially during the war. For over ten years, there was repression, daily violence, people being killed. And during the war, I might say that there was a genocide perpetrated against the majority of the Albanians in Kosova and great destructions inflicted. About ten people got killed. We do not have full records of them. About 4.000 are missing. As I said, we don't have yet full records about that. And where over 120.000 private houses were destroyed, demolished. Thousands of public, social and cultural, historical facilities were ruined, and then schools, well ... I tried to give an answer to your question.

Q. Answer my questions, please, because I have been --

JUDGE MAY: One at a time. Yes. Now, have you a more focused question?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I didn't understand what you said. Do I have questions which are what?

JUDGE MAY: Just move on and ask questions about what the witness said in evidence. ⁴³¹⁶

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] That's what I'm doing, because he mentioned 1981. He brought it up. And of course, at that time, I held no political post, as he claims. But that's not important. It's a minor point, just additional facts which speak to the untruthfulness of these claims.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. But what I was asking about is why you asked me to transfer you to another country, and you said that you were afraid that they would kill you. Is it true that they had already attempted to assassinate --

JUDGE MAY: No. Don't misrepresent the answers. What he said was -- what the witness said was that the country was empty at the time and none of his associates were there.

Now, the question -- you can go on. Ask the question about -- and don't -- we would get on more quickly if you didn't repeat the answers, particularly if you don't get them right.

Now, you want to ask about an attempt at assassination. Now, that is a proper question.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, of course it's a proper question. I don't know why you need to take away my time.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. What I was asking was: Is it true that they had already tried to assassinate you and that the police that was there to protect you killed an assassin who was on the wall of your house? Is that correct or not?

A. I already stated, those days, nobody knew who was going to get killed by whom; by the police, by the army, or by the paramilitaries, or ⁴³¹⁷ the voluntaries who came from Belgrade. And at any moment we were living in dread lest they come in and kill us. When the police and the army were stationed in my very home, then afterwards I heard that a person was killed. He was my former driver. And someone else who thought that it was an easy thing to come, for them to come and free me. But I was never afraid of being killed by the Albanians.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, by "they," whom do you mean? In your question, you said was it true that you feared that they would come to kill -- kill him. Who is "they"?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The KLA.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. No. That's not the case.

JUDGE ROBINSON: We have a direct answer to that.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Rugova, you came to me, asking me to save you and your family from a possible assassination perpetrated by the KLA. Look me in the eyes and tell me whether that is true or not.

A. That is not true. That is not true. I don't want to use any insults here, but I would say that this is but only a lie.

Q. According to your statement, it would emerge that you forced me to send you abroad, you and your family. Now, how did you force me to do that? Explain that to me, please.

A. This is ridiculous, Your Honours. I ask you. You didn't let me stay for -- you didn't let me for a month, and then it was also an international demand for me to leave Kosova. And I myself, as I said, wanted to leave Kosova because it was empty. Everything was deserted. My ⁴³¹⁸ neighbourhood was deserted. My associates were not there. Some were killed. Some had left the country. Some others were in Prishtina. But we were -- we didn't know what would happen to them or they might be killed as the case was with Professor Fehmi Agani. And I asked the police when they arrested me on that day and afterwards, and when I met the accused and others, to let me leave Kosova. That was the only thing I did.

Q. Mr. Rugova, as you know, the police saved your life and protected you the whole time. It did not arrest you. You were never arrested. Is that correct or not?

A. I was under house arrest. And I didn't need any protection.

Q. Did you not say yourself that your friends came, journalists and so on, and the police guarded you, protected you? Is that right or is it not?

A. There weren't any journalists in Kosova then. You brought the journalists yourself. On that evening when I was arrested, they were Serb journalists, and it happened that there were also some Turk and Greek journalists. And it was not me who asked for that news conference. And from the 31st of March until I left Kosova, nobody was able to come and visit me in my home. And someone from my security forces, Mr. Nikshi, he tried to come and meet me but they did not allow him to come even near to my neighbourhood. That is the truth.

Q. Well, your secretary Meroci brought whomever he wanted to your house to talk to you. Is that right or not?

A. No. No, that's not right. ⁴³¹⁹

Q. And where did you ask to go, apart for asking me to send you and your family abroad and then they didn't allow you to go? Where did they not allow you to go to?

A. I was under arrest, and I was not allowed to leave my home. We should not forget that it was wartime. The city was under blockade. And I asked them -- I did not ask for a meeting with the accused. It was he who asked to meet me. And I took the opportunity to ask him to allow me to leave Kosova. I wanted to leave to go to Macedonia, which was closest, and maybe, from there, go somewhere else. That is the truth.

Q. Mr. Rugova, you yourself describe the meeting. You yourself said that we did not compile any statement. We did not have photographs taken or anything like that. Quite simply, you came to ask me to send you and your family outside the country. Is that true or not?

A. As far as photographs are concerned, you have taken as many as you wish, have used the television and so on. During the first and the last meeting we had together, I asked you to leave, to go abroad, and you agreed. First you said no and then you let me. That is the truth.

Q. The truth, Mr. Rugova, is that I accepted your request. I sent to have your family fetched. Your family arrived in the morning. In the meantime, I talked to the minister, the Italian minister, Lamberto Dini, to send a plane to come and fetch you, and that you left. Is that right or not?

A. Yes. I said that day and I'm saying now that it's true that I left.

Q. Well, nobody can say otherwise. But the attempt to kill you, was ⁴³²⁰ that a clear consequence of the power struggle within the Albanian criminal structures in Kosovo? Yes or no.

A. Please. I already said I was never afraid of Albanians and never feared that they would have killed me. There was no power struggle among the Albanians. For the accused, all these, our structures have always been criminal ones, but I was never scared of them, of being killed by any Albanians.

Q. All right. I know why -- why you're saying that now. You came to me with other requests, and I met those requests. But I'm sure you will recall that I suggested that you do not go to Macedonia because they'd kill you there. I suggested that you go to Italy because there is law and order in Italy and that they would be able to protect you. Is that right or not? Was it like that? Was that how it happened or not?

A. I only asked you to release me. It's not true what you are saying, that I was -- that I came there, that someone might kill you. I already stated my reasons right from the beginning. I wanted to leave because Kosova was empty.

Q. Well, a moment ago, you said you wanted to go to Macedonia. So why did I tell you not to go to Macedonia? I said not to go because they'd kill you there. Was it like that or not? And then you went to Italy. Is that right or not?

A. It was up to you to decide where I might go. You said to Italy, and I accepted. I said, "Why not?" I just wanted to leave Prishtina and go to Macedonia thinking that it was the closest place. That was it.

Q. All right. A moment ago you said there were no settling of ⁴³²¹ political accounts in the peaks of power which, according to you, I say were criminalised, and I'm the only one that says that. How then can you explain what happened later; that is to say, when there were no more Serbs or the army or the police in Kosovo any more? And I'm going to quote again. This time just two sentences. [In English] "By May 2000, 23 KLA commanders were shot dead by other elements within KLA. At least a dozen of these hits reportedly were ordered by KLA chief Hashim Thaci." [Interpretation] About these killings, then, that is to say after the war, as you can see very numerous ones, you can find something about that in the New York Times on May the 12th, 2000, and in The Guardian as well, between the 1st and 7th of July, 1999. Is that true or not? Just give me a yes or no, please.

A. I don't know about these things. About murders that took place after the war, we started investigations.

Q. All right --

A. About the murders that took place after the war, UNMIK, that is -- and also the joint government we had formed, we have arrested people, they are in prison, and they will be punished. Of course, work is still continuing with the institutions of Kosova, with UNMIK, with KFOR, and the police of Kosova which now has 5.000 members, including Serbs and other ethnic groups, and the UNMIK police. So these people will be arrested and will answer to justice. Have been arrested and will answer to justice.

Q. And is it correct -- since you don't know anything about these murders, is it correct to say that you don't know what happened to people in your party? I'm going to mention some people from your party to you ⁴³²² now, people who were also killed when there was no Serb army there or no Serb police or no Serbs at all, for that matter. For example, Haki Meri [phoen], from Turicevac, near Srbica, the president of your party for Srbica. He was killed on the 2nd of November in 1999. Is that correct? Just say yes or no.

A. He was killed and others were killed. And as I said, we have arrested people for other murders too, and they will be held responsible to justice. And some trials have already begun in Kosova.

Q. Please. Sejdat Poci, a member your party, he said for Koha Ditore on the 8th of November 1999, that the headquarters of the DSK, that is to say, of your party in Decani, Suva Reka, and Malisevo were exposed to attacks. The activity of the DSK has also been subjected to threats and murders. Is that correct or is that not correct?

A. Excuse me. I said those who committed such acts have been arrested and we will continue to arrest them and we will sentence them.

Q. The point of my question are the numerous murders of your own officials and the so-called commanders of the KLA. This happened amongst you, that is to say, the elements of this so-called military and political top establishment of Kosovo. Is that correct or is that not correct?

JUDGE MAY: The witness has already dealt with that. It doesn't appear to have any relevance as far as this indictment is concerned.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. And do you have any idea as to who killed or, rather, which faction killed Fehmi Agani?

JUDGE MAY: No. Yes, you can answer that, if you can. ⁴³²³

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] After -- excuse me. After the war, we understood that - and this was about three months -- three weeks or a month later - from a foundation in Belgrade, we were told who killed Fehmi Agani. Apparently a kind of Djelatovic, we don't know whether he was a policeman or a soldier or what, but he was the person who killed Fehmi Agani on 6th of May, 1999.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. It's a good thing that you found some Serb name. As for the rest, when there was not a single Serb there, you say that you are carrying out investigations.

JUDGE MAY: This is pure comment. Now, move on.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. This activity, this spectre of murders that took place, this kind of activity of the KLA in 1998 and 1999, is this an act of a terrorist organisation or not?

JUDGE MAY: No. We've been through that. You're not to use -- you're not to use this court as some sort of political platform. You will either ask proper questions, or you'll be stopped.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Is it correct that as for this organisation, the so-called KLA, that it was first heard of in 1994 when an anonymous letter arrived at a particular arrest in Pristina, saying the liberation army of Kosovo, press release: "We wish to acquaint the public of the fact that the ⁴³²⁴ assassination of Lutfi Atani was carried out at the order of our headquarters of the KLA and also other assassination attempts took place on our orders on the 11th of November, 1994." Is that correct or is that not correct?

A. I don't know about this. This is not accurate.

Q. All right. Do you know that your newspapers wrote about this testimony of yours on Friday, and they said, as the main thing, that you had good relations with the KLA?

JUDGE MAY: It does not matter what any newspaper said. Now, go on to the next question or we'll bring the examination to a close now.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Let us now briefly deal with your testimony in relation to Rambouillet. Is it correct that during those three weeks of purported negotiations, the delegations of Serbia and your delegation actually never met except once when Madeleine Albright said to you what you said here she had said to both sides? Is that right or is that not right?

A. It was the attitude of the conference that work should be done on a shuttle basis and that we would work on the agreement, and the Serbian delegation would also do the same, and when the time came, we could meet. But it did not yield results, and the Serbian delegation made no progress in this direction. The agreement was that we work on a shuttle basis. It was not because nobody wished to meet.

And then when the talks became complicated, Albright met both sides and said what I said in my evidence on Friday. That is the truth. ⁴³²⁵

Q. So Albright got both delegations together and said to you that there will be no support unless you sign. You will be isolated. And she said to the Serbs, "If you do not sign, you will be bombed." Is that right? Is that what you said on Friday?

A. Yes.

Q. Can this be called negotiations between the two delegations?

JUDGE MAY: That's a matter of comment.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Was the essence of the differences between the two delegations was that the Serb delegation insisted on the equality of rights of all ethnic communities in Kosovo, whereas your delegation insisted on the Albanian identity of Kosovo? Is that right or is that not right?

A. That's not accurate.

Q. Well, even in your statement, the joint statement you issued with Milutinovic, didn't it say the equality of ethnic communities? Is that right or is that not right?

A. Excuse me. I will answer the accused briefly. Nobody disputed this equality at Rambouillet, and indeed, special places were given for ethnic groups. And it's well known that I am committed to the rights of my minorities in Kosova, and the delegation at Rambouillet also endorsed equality and equal rights. It's not correct that -- that the delegation only asked things for the Albanian majority. It was an all-embracing document sanctioned -- a very positive document that our side accepted.

Q. And why, then, did you not accept the formula that was offered by ⁴³²⁶ the Serb delegation? That to say, that the Kosovo Assembly should have two Chambers, one the Chamber of citizens elected according to the principle one man, one vote, and the other would be the Chamber of ethnic communities in which every ethnic community would appoint a parity number of delegates? Why did you refuse that if you were in favour of equal rights and equality?

A. I don't know what these questions are for, but it's not true. The conference said that there should be an Assembly of Kosova with the Serbs having their own reserved seats. That is, even if they are not present and do not vote, they will have their seats empty, waiting for them. This is what happened in 2000. And on 2001, when we held the national elections, when we allotted ten seats to the Serbs, ten other seats to the other ethnic groups, plus those that they won with their own votes, but the stand of the conference was that we should have a more practical system applied in the Assembly of Kosovo to make it more functional and operational. And even then, we envisioned that the Serbs should have their own seats in addition to what they would have when -- won in the elections. And even if they don't take part in the elections, they should be present.

That is the case also with the government. We have given them seats in the government, in the ministries, which they have even today, seats which they had during the provisional government of Kosova last year, along with UNMIK. That is the situation.

Q. Mr. Rugova --

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please. ⁴³²⁷

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. -- I'm not talking only asking about Serbian seats. I'm talking about the formula of equal and equitable ethnic communities. The formula that was proposed by the delegation of Serbia was the equality of ethnic communities, that is to say, Serbs and Albanians and Turks and Muslims and Romas, and Gypsies, and Egyptians. Is that right or is that not right? Just say yes or no, please.

A. I don't know about this suggestion. When we decided everybody should be there and represented in Kosova, not only Serbs but others, so our position was that there would be one Assembly of Kosova with one Chamber that would represent everybody. This was the standpoint of the conference.

Q. You had the proposal of the delegation of Serbia in writing, and do you remember that the delegation of Serbia consisted both of Serbs and Albanians and Turks and Muslims and the Gorani and the Romas and the Egyptians? Do you remember that?

A. I looked at the working groups that worked on this issue, that is, of our delegation, and the working group considered this issue.

Q. And have you read what was written about Rambouillet in the New Statesman magazine in May 1999? John Pilger [phoen] wrote [In English] "Anyone scrutinising the Rambouillet document is left in little doubt that the excuses given for the subsequent bombing were fabricated. The peace negotiations were --"

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Milosevic, I'm going to stop you. This is simply the opinion of Mr. Pilger. It is of no assistance to this Court to know ⁴³²⁸ what his opinions are. Now, what do you want to put to the witness?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, it may be useful to you to make an assessment when you read this document to see whether it is true. What Ronald Hutchins said in relation to Rambouillet: [In English] "It was a declaration of war disguised as a peace agreement."

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Is that true or is that not true, Mr. Rugova?

A. No. This was not something that was false, it was something that was achieved by the international community at this conference. It was all-powerful agreement.

Q. How can one speak about an agreement when the parties that are allegedly supposed to be parties to that agreement never sat at the same table to talk?

A. I will explain again. There was an agreement that it would be done by shuttle. So each group had the same documents and the same proposals and made decisions. And when matters became complicated, we met. This was an agreement worked out by both groups by shuttle, and lawyers and diplomats know how this works, and it's recognised under international law. So that was our working method.

Q. Is it your assertion that the Serbs, Albanians, Turks, Romas, the Muslims, all the rest who were members of the delegation of the Republic of Serbia took part in the writing, the drafting of this agreement that was offered to them and that Albright said they had to sign? Is it your assertion that they took part in the writing of this document?

A. You know what the rules of this matter are. There was a draft ⁴³²⁹ text that we all had, and we had the right to make comments, and we exchanged comments by shuttle. And we accepted it and the other side did not, and that is what happened.

Q. So the other side did not accept the agreement that was written by these foreign lawyers, as you had put it; is that right?

A. This was an international conference, and we all worked together. It can't be -- you can't talk about foreign lawyers.

Q. Is it your assertion that the members of the Serb delegation, that is to say, of the delegation of Serbia, which comprised all nationalities, did they take part in the writing of this document or not? Yes or no.

A. Everybody took part in the drafting of the document in its final form, both those who agreed with it and those who did not. Logic would dictate that, and that was the case in practice.

Q. All right. You have given a positive answer to my question. It is your assertion that the members of the delegation of Serbia did take part in the writing of this document. Is that right? Yes. Yes. That's what you said, if I understood you correctly.

A. Please. The document was written. Who agreed with it on one side and those who did not are another. I don't know what this is all about.

Q. My question was only who had written the document.

A. Please. I answered you. If you like, I will repeat myself.

JUDGE MAY: I think we have -- I think we have the point. Yes. Let's move on to something else.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Let us move on. In your statement, you mention special measures ⁴³³⁰ of the Yugoslav government in Kosovo between 1980 and 1990. Do you know, first and foremost, that the Yugoslav government was not involved, that it was the Presidency of Yugoslavia, as the highest authority of the federal state, that introduced these special measures? It was not because of political unrest, as you had put it, but because they had established and proclaimed that the order, integrity and sovereignty of the country were imperiled in Kosovo. Is that right or is that not right?

A. It's not true, because it was because of the political upheavals, and when --

JUDGE MAY: Let the witness finish.

A. -- when Kosova was suspended from the federation. It was because of the upheavals. And at that time, people reacted because Kosova was suspended from the federation. This was a prelude to destruction of Kosova's political, economic and civil institutions, and the population did not want this. That's what the truth is. And that's why emergency measures were imposed, against the law.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Yes. And do you remember that these measures that were imposed by the Presidency of the SFRY, that at that time, Rijev Disdarevic [phoen] headed the Presidency of the SFRY, a member of the Presidency from Bosnia-Herzegovina, an ethnic Muslim. Is that correct or is that not correct?

A. I don't know. They used to change every year. There were eight members of the Presidency of eight federal units.

Q. And do you know that, as you say, it was not the Serbian ⁴³³¹ parliament that abrogated and annulled the autonomy of Kosovo but that constitutional amendments were adopted and that it was the delegates in the Kosovo parliament, in the majority Albanians, who voted on these constitutional amendments, and this was in March, 1989. Is that correct or is that not correct?

A. It's not as you say because the Serbian parliament voted for Kosova's federal status to be annulled. It was not decided by the former federal parliament. And the deputies of Kosova, i.e., the parliament of Kosova, was asked under great pressure to pass this. And as I said in my testimony, it was done by force, by violence, and when the session was held on that day, there were a lot of plainclothes policemen in the hall and there were also tanks around the building of the Kosova Assembly, and that's what the truth is.

Q. If that were the truth, that what you've been saying just now, Mr. Rugova, how could you then explain the fact that at the session of the Assembly of Serbia that was held five days after the session of the Kosovo Assembly was held on the 28th of March, 1989, the entire Yugoslav leadership was sitting there, headed by the then-President of the Presidency of Yugoslavia who was Albanian and whose name was, as you know, Sinan Hasani?

A. All this was provided for. It was passed first by the Assembly of Kosova by force, and then it went up to the Serbian parliament. But then the federal parliament never decided it at all, never considered it.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Dr. Rugova, what powers did Kosovo lose by the annulment of its autonomy? ⁴³³²

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It lost the federal status, where it was part in the parliament, in the President's office. It lost the right over security forces, police forces, all the Territorial Defence. Every federal units used to have its own federal or popular defence forces, as well as many other powers like foreign affairs, the right to veto. From that time onwards, everything was decided on Kosova by Belgrade and Serbia, as I explained earlier. That is, the rights of police and of all the forces and education, were deprived of it.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. And do you know that the federal constitution was passed as well? Since you say that the Federal Assembly of Yugoslavia was not doing any deciding. The federal constitution was also passed, and that was fully in accordance with the constitutional amendments in respect of the constitution of Serbia. Is that correct or is that not correct? Just say yes or no.

A. No. No. I said the parliament, because it's not the constitution that acts. I said that the federal parliament did not take any decision on these issues. That's not true, that is. We should not forget that as of 1989 to 1993, 37 laws were -- laws on the -- on a state of emergency were passed by the Serbian parliament, and over 304 other acts, administrative or otherwise, were passed which discriminated Kosova.

Q. The Assembly of Serbia adopted regulations in accordance with the constitution of Serbia and in accordance with the federal constitution, which was also fully in keeping with what you claim was unconstitutional. ⁴³³³ And now I'm asking you whether you know that the constitutional amendments that were passed by the Assembly of Serbia, and before that the Assembly of Kosovo, did not annul the autonomous status of the province of Kosovo or the province of Vojvodina.

I'm going to read Article 6 to you. It says: "In the Republic of Serbia --" this is Article 6 of the constitution of Serbia: "In the Republic of Serbia, there is the autonomous province of Vojvodina and the autonomous province of Kosovo and Metohija as forms of territorial autonomy." Is that what it says in that Article or not? Are you familiar with this, Mr. Rugova? Just say yes or no. Let's not waste any time.

A. That was a suspension of the federal status of Kosova. The Serbian Assembly did as it wished with the constitution.

Q. It worked in conformity with the constitution, Mr. Rugova. You mentioned your constitutional declaration. Now, my question is: Are you aware of the fact that the Constitutional Court of Yugoslavia overruled that constitutional declaration as a whole? It ruled that it was not in conformity with the constitution of the SFRY and that, according to its overall legal status, the declaration was an act towards the secession of Kosovo and Metohija from Yugoslavia. Is that correct or is it not?

A. It was presented in the form of Federal Court. It was not examined. I don't know that the court made any rulings because some of the judges participated in the session, some judges from the former republics of Yugoslavia did not, and so on. There were problems with this court.

Q. I asked you whether you knew that the Constitutional Federal Court ⁴³³⁴ made a decision according to which your so-called declaration was proclaimed null and void and non-constitutional. Can't you answer that question?

A. I don't know that it made any decisions. First, it was necessary for the Federal Assembly to take up and discuss this issue, even if it was -- as you say, it was done under the pressure of the federal institutions by Belgrade.

Q. All right. Those are speculations. Now, are you aware of the fact that the republic of Serbia, according to the constitution dating back to 1990, was defined as a democratic state of all citizens living within it? That is stated in Article 1 of the constitution. And then Article 4 states that the territory of the Republic of Serbia is united, one, is inalienable, and that the citizens decide upon any changes of border and frontier on the basis of a referendum. Are you aware of that?

A. What does it matter if I am aware of it?

Q. It matters because what you're trying to do now and to deduce is unconstitutional. So I -- do you know that about such important questions, it is the citizens of Serbia from the whole of the territory of Serbia that are called upon to decide and not only the members of Albanian ethnicity and those who live in a part of the territory of Serbia which was Kosovo and Metohija. Are you clear on that?

MR. NICE: Your Honour, I object to the relevance --

JUDGE MAY: What --

MR. NICE: -- and the accused --

JUDGE MAY: Just a moment, Mr. Rugova. What is the relevance of ⁴³³⁵ this, Mr. Milosevic?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The relevance is more than great, because the option for Kosovo's independence on the basis of a uni-national say by a national minority, which is something that Mr. Rugova is insisting upon, is opposite to the United Nations Charter, which recognises only --

JUDGE MAY: This is a purely political point. Now, the indictment deals with the events in 1980 -- 1998 and 1999. The witness's evidence dealt with some matters before that. As I said on Friday, your cross-examination should be so confined, not trying to score political points.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, I think it is the truth that should score points here. And as you asked me why my question was relevant, my question was:

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Do you know how many European states would have to be disbanded if this schematic were to be applied? They would fall apart.

JUDGE MAY: No. Did you -- what you can ask, I suppose, might be this: "Did you think that Kosovo's situation could be determined in some way by a broad referendum?" That might be a relevant question. It may be that you can't answer.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Under the constitution of the former federation, like any other federal unit, Kosova had the right to hold referendums for different issues, which it was deprived of on the 28th, 29th of March by the Serb Assembly. And ever since, we are in an ⁴³³⁶ unconstitutional state, I would say, for Kosova, which had been stripped of its federal position. That is my answer.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. We have heard that answer many times. But we're talking about a different type of policy and tendency here. Mr. Rugova, I shall have to skip over some questions because you're taking up too much of my time, but let me ask you this: Are you aware of the fact linked to that the memorandum of the former Albanian intellectuals of Kosovo addressed to international circles on the 28th of October, 1995? Are you aware of and acquainted with that memorandum? I have it here in my hands. Do you know about it? Just say yes or no.

A. There were many memorandums that were addressed to international institutions. That was done by groups of intellectuals, by political parties, by many.

Q. In this memorandum, which has quite a lot of pages, I'm just going to quote three and a half lines from it.

JUDGE MAY: Yes.

MR. NICE: If there is cross-examination on documents, they should be made available to the witness. They haven't been so far this morning, we have had cross-examination out of context. If the witness doesn't know from memory of a particular document, there is no point in this accused asking him any questions about it.

JUDGE MAY: He can ask a question to try and remind the witness about it. In order to save time, we're not having these documents put on the ELMO. ⁴³³⁷

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can't speak about this particular document. As I said, there were many documents, memoranda. This might be one. I don't remember now.

JUDGE MAY: Put the passage you want to to him.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'm going to read out -- I'm going to place something else on the overhead projector. "We can claim that a just solution to the Albanian issue --" "It can be claimed --" The interpreter is asking me to slow down. "It may be claimed that a just solution to the Albanian question demands a shifting of borders between Albania and the neighbouring countries which divide them by a belt in which is inhabited by an Albanian majority. Frontiers are not so sacred that they cannot be shifted." Now, could we put this on the ELMO, please, and you will get an idea of what those borders look like, the borders that, according to this, should be shifted. You will see the south-eastern part of Montenegro, Southern Serbia, Western Macedonia, and Northern Greece within the borders of a Greater Albania. That is what was requested. And that was the consistent policy that was being waged throughout all these years.

JUDGE MAY: Where does this map come from, first of all? Is this from the memorandum?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It was a map that was drawn up by the Albanian nationalists which is generally common knowledge in the Balkans, in Europe, and the world. And as you can see, South-east Montenegro is here, Western Serbia -- Southern Serbia, Western Macedonia, and Northern Greece, including Janjina. That is sufficient, not to take ⁴³³⁸ up more time with this. May I just continue?

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. You have here a platform for the solution of the Albanian national question by the Albanian Academy of Science, published in Tirana in 1998. So it is the Albanian Academy of Sciences and a platform for a solution to the Albanian question. Once again, a very long document, but I'm going to quote just one sentence from it. In conclusion, it says -- the conclusion and the first sentence reads as follows: "As has been stated already in the past century, during our revival, the main aspiration of all Albanians was set to unite all Albanians in all Albanian ethnic territories into one independent national state."

My question for you is as follows -- my question is the following, Mr. Rugova: As quite obviously we are dealing here with a belated nationalist romanticism of the nineteenth century, which was common knowledge in Europe, romanticism of the nineteenth century in Europe, and it is a belated one at that, is one and a half centuries late. Are you aware of the fact that this belated nationalistic romanticism of the 19th century on the threshold of the third millennium appeared like the picture of Dorian Grey, a distorted picture, in fact?

JUDGE MAY: That is not a question which he can answer and that was a speech. Now, what is the point of this? What is the relevance of this particular document?

Leave it for the moment. Could the usher leave it for the moment, please.

What is the point of all this? ⁴³³⁹

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The relevance is the greatest relevance is to be found in what is happening precisely now. That is to say, the complete ethnic cleansing of --

JUDGE MAY: This -- this witness is here to give evidence and has done so. You've been examining him very widely. Now, what is the point of this document being put on the ELMO when this witness is giving evidence? What is the question for him? Yes.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. The question is --

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. The question is was it the realisation of the policy of a Greater Albania? Is that what was afoot?

A. If you allow me, Your Honour, I'd like to make a brief comment. There were many such maps in circulation. And regarding related nationalistic romanticism, the Serbs too did their own share of such maps in the 1990s, at the end of the century, all -- many drew such political and ethnic maps and, as you see, the borders being outlined as they are. As I said earlier, our stand, that is of the Kosova Democratic League and other political parties in Kosova was to strive for an independent Kosova. That was our motto.

As to the ethnic territories, this we cannot change or alter. Therefore, I see this more as an accusation levelled at Albanians in general and at Kosova in particular. The accused might very well remember that there were Serb groups who wanted to establish a Greater Serbia ⁴³⁴⁰ beginning from the Adriatic, Dalmatia, Croatia up to Hungary, including some parts of Bosnia, Kosovo and Macedonia and so on. But I don't want to talk about that here.

I may say that there were many programmes to come to the question of the accused, that is, the aim of ethnic cleansing. That is not at all true. Unfortunately, there have been Serb programmes dating back to the end of the last century between the two world wars and so on.

JUDGE MAY: Dr. Rugova, I think we must stop you there.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you very much, Your Honours. My point is that that is not true. Our official stand is to have an independent Kosova, which started when Yugoslavia began to be disbanded, the former federation. Of course, the Albanians in Macedonia where they are, they make up a large share of the population, they should have their own rights in that country. The Albanians in Southern Serbia or Presevo and elsewhere should have their own rights, in Montenegro too. That is our alternative, the official alternative for which we have been working, and it's not at all a matter of altering the borders.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. My time is limited, so please be brief.

JUDGE MAY: Can we remove the map. We'll remove the map now and --

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please, for Judge May.

JUDGE MAY: Remove the map and give it back to the accused, please.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] ⁴³⁴¹

Q. Do you consider that what I'm now going to read out to you and which was announced by the Prosecution, disclosed by the Prosecution and cannot be refuted as being irrelevant completely goes against what you're now saying? It was a document disclosed by the Prosecutor as an addition to the witness statement. It is 030666, at paragraphs 4 and 5, and the English version paragraphs 4 and 5, where it says that with respect to the Human Rights Award that you were given by the USA congress, to Rugova and Sali Berisha, when asked by a certain Mr. Galiber [phoen] whether the award can be considered to be a green light for the unification of Albania and Kosovo, that your answer to that was, "Of course." Now, does that statement of yours override everything you said a moment ago? Does it deny what you said a moment ago or not?

A. Please. I don't remember such a statement. But we had a statement with three options that we approved in 1991.

Q. All right. Let's move on.

A. Nobody ruled out future integration. This -- I don't know what statement this is.

Q. Just give yes or no answers to my next few questions, the questions that I still have time to ask. Did you at any time call upon the citizens of Kosovo to leave their territory and go to Albania and Macedonia?

A. No.

Q. You did not. All right. Just say --

A. There was a pamphlet issued in Kosova.

Q. And do you know that that is something that the KLA did do? Do ⁴³⁴² you know that the KLA did do that?

A. No. No, I don't know anything about the KLA doing this.

Q. All right, then. Just take a look at this pamphlet of yours. It says differently here.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May we have the pamphlet placed on the ELMO, please.

JUDGE MAY: [Previous translation continues]...

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. You are appealing to the population of Kosovo to go to Albania and to Macedonia.

A. This is not true. This was issued in the first days of the bombing. So as you can see in the document, here is the stamp of the KLA and the signature of the President of Kosova, but it's not my document and it's clearly not of the KLA. I don't know who did it, but it was circulated in Prishtina. It was a forged document of some kind. Either the police, or Belgrade, or the troops, or other people, they did it.

JUDGE MAY: Dr. Rugova, can you tell us very briefly what it says? Don't read it out or anything, but just tell us what the message is.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It is in Albanian. The content is, if you wish me to read it...

JUDGE MAY: If you would just summarise it for us.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It is supposedly this leaflet or poster says -- it asks -- it's in my name, and it asks people, in which I, as President of Kosova, ask people to go to Albania or to Macedonia, supposedly that the KLA is in no position to protect people. That's the ⁴³⁴³ main point.

JUDGE MAY: Yes.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Supposedly as if I had called on the population of Kosova to leave Kosova, which was not true, and it's not a document that I ever signed.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. I have to read the translation of it, because it will be clearer. "Honoured fellow citizens. We are informing you that you should evacuate yourselves from the high-risk territories of the Republic of Kosovo. Therefore, the risky -- high-risk territories of the Republic of Kosovo, because," it says, "in continuation of the fighting, a major offensive is being waged by the Serb occupiers in our Republic of Kosovo. We cannot defend you. This cannot even be accomplished by the KLA. I have to save our people and their lives. That is why we propose that you move towards Albania and Macedonia straight away. We asked NATO to stop the Serb occupiers, and we have won with that assistance. However, the forces of the Serb occupiers are on the whole territory of Kosovo, and they have launched a large-scale offensive. The forces of the KLA are not able to stand up to them and to defend the Albanian population. We inform all Albanians who are in danger, facing the onslaught of the Serb occupiers, to evacuate themselves first of all in the direction of Macedonia and Albania." And this was signed with your name. Now, you claim that you had no part in all this. Do you claim that this is not a leaflet provided by the KLA?

A. I didn't prepare this, and I don't believe that the KLA did ⁴³⁴⁴ either. The signature of mine, I didn't give it.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Is there any indication as to the date of this leaflet? Any indication on the leaflet as to the date when it was released?

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. We can see there is no date on the leaflet, but I think there are journalists in this hall who collected similar leaflets, leaflets of this kind with their own hands at different places in Kosovo and Metohija. And they were distributed during the night by members of the KLA and the activists of the DSK.

JUDGE MAY: You're not giving any evidence now. There's either a date on it or there isn't.

Yes. You've got five minutes more, Mr. Milosevic.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Well, I know that I -- that this method is one that is preventing me from carrying out my cross-examination. This is the most effective way. But I have, in confirmation of this, of what you intended to do with this leaflet, I have to ask you something. Do you remember that you and the people from your party already in 1993 waged -- that is to say, had talks with an American congressman by the name of Elliott Ingels [phoen]? This was in April, 1993. Do you remember that conversation?

A. I had many conversations was American congressmen, with Mr. Ingels and others.

Q. All right. Let me remind you. ⁴³⁴⁵

A. And also with many European and non-European MPs. I had many talks at that time.

Q. I remind you to be more specific, not to take up more time. On the occasion -- let's identify that conversation. Is a plan -- a plan was provided to make a scenario of two things. First of all, operations which would cause the use of the army and provoke the army and police on the part -- by the state. And second, to take on the collective leaving of Kosovo for -- in order to pave the way for the arrival of foreign troops. Do you remember that conversation now? Does it ring a bell? Let me remind you of some of the other details. At the time during that conversation and those talks --

JUDGE MAY: First of all, the poster can be removed from the ELMO. It can be shown to us and then given to the Prosecution.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Somebody wrote a translation on the other side of the poster, on the back side of the poster.

JUDGE MAY: Yes.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. At the time, with Mr. Ingels, was Rexhep Qosja one of the signators of these documents that I quoted a moment ago as to the unification of all Albanians? Rexhep Qosja, did he attend the meeting? Did he advocate staging acts which would trigger off a reaction in the police and the army and that Ali Aliu, a member of your Presidency, said literally that he would wait to see the denouement in the situation in Russia - that was on the 13th of April, 1993, and that the USA would give a sign when the Albanians were to start their collective exodus from ⁴³⁴⁶ Kosovo so that, in two days' time, foreign troops could allegedly enter Kosovo? Do you remember that conversation?

A. I never had conversations of this type. All this is not true.

Q. And do you remember that the age-old idea was that the Albanians should leave Kosovo and hold the Serbs responsible and then give -- open the way to a foreign military intervention? Is that right or not?

A. No. We never sought such things.

Q. And do you know that for this aggression against Yugoslavia, it was precisely explanations of this kind that were taken as alleged mass deportation of Albanians from Kosovo? That was the pretext, although this mass exodus took place after the aggression and not before it? Are you aware of that?

A. As I said, no. There was no policy that this sort of thing would happen. It was never our policy that the Albanians should leave Kosova. This was something carried out by the forces of Belgrade.

Q. Leave Kosovo in order to create a pretext for military intervention --

JUDGE MAY: He just said, Mr. Milosevic, that that was not the policy. There was no such policy, he said. There's no point going on arguing. Now, you can ask one more question.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Just one question?

JUDGE MAY: Yes. Yes.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] If it's just one -- well, then let me ask one.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] ⁴³⁴⁷

Q. When you were -- when you were threatened that you and your family might be killed, you fled to Italy. Have you thought about where you would fly -- where you would be fleeing now once the occupation of Kosovo comes to an end?

JUDGE MAY: That's not a proper question. Mr. Wladimiroff --

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have another --

JUDGE MAY: No. You've just asked a totally improper question. Now, Mr. Wladimiroff, have you any questions of the witness?

MR. WLADIMIROFF: Yes, I do.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. After the adjournment then.

MR. NICE: May I ask that this disputed document be retained by the Court, whether as an exhibit or otherwise, but in accordance with what is the normal practice of documents that are said to be forgeries, or may be the normal practice, and if so, could we have copies of both sides of it in the meanwhile?

JUDGE MAY: Yes. We will adjourn now for 20 minutes.

--- Recess taken at 10.31 a.m.

--- On resuming at 10.50 a.m.

JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Wladimiroff.

MR. WLADIMIROFF: Thank you, Your Honour. Questioned by Mr. Wladimiroff:

Q. Dr. Rugova, in order to assist the Court, I'm going to ask you a few questions to clarify a number of constitutional issues. I will try to phrase it in such a way that simple answers of yes or no will be ⁴³⁴⁸ sufficient.

Kosovo was an autonomous part of Serbia, with the status of constituent republic of the Yugoslav federation in 1988; is that right?

A. It had a federal status.

Q. It had a parliament for Kosovo separate from the parliament for the whole Republic of Serbia up to 1989; is that right?

A. It had its own parliament.

Q. That was separate from the parliament in Belgrade for the whole Republic of Serbia; is that right?

A. It had a separate parliament, like all the federal units. It had its own parliament, its own government, and its own Presidency.

Q. Thank you. Were you a member of that parliament of Kosovo in 1988/1989?

A. No, I was not a member.

Q. Now let's move on to 1998/1999. Kosovo was not an independent republic in the Yugoslav federation in these years, like Serbia and Montenegro, but a part of the Republic of Serbia; is that right?

A. Excuse me. We declared the independence of Kosova in 1991, and we continued to construct our state with all its institutions, despite the repression and violence. And it operated in the world at large, and this society was recognised as a parallel state. And after the suspension of the -- of Kosova from the federation, it had no status at all. It was kept down by force.

Q. Dr. Rugova, what I'm going to ask you now is this: I will ask you questions about the constitutional system as it officially functioned ⁴³⁴⁹ under the constitution of the Yugoslav federation and the constitution of Serbia and questions related to the informal parallel system. I make a separation between these two. Do you understand that?

A. Excuse me. The parallel system, that is, our system, that is, our state, it operated in an independent manner, and the former federation was not operated in Kosova. After the destruction of the former federation, Belgrade kept Kosova in its own by force, by violence, without its institutions. All its administration was Serbian and was imposed by Belgrade. What operated after that time was mainly the police and the army and nothing else.

Q. I appreciate your views about that, Dr. Rugova, but let's try to separate these two issues, and for that reason, I put forward a few questions.

Kosovo was not an independent republic in the Yugoslav federation in 1998/1999 like Serbia and Montenegro but a part of the Republic of Serbia. And I'm not referring to the parallel system. Is that right?

A. Please. That Serbia and Montenegro made this federation after the collapse of the SFRY, and now this federation itself is faced with collapse.

Q. That was not my question.

A. A phantom federation.

Q. I'm afraid that was not my question, Dr. Rugova. What I'm asking you --

JUDGE ROBINSON: Dr. Rugova, just listen carefully to the questions. I understand what Mr. Wladimiroff is trying to do, and I ⁴³⁵⁰ attach a lot of importance to it.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] But, please. They made this federation without asking anybody at all. This is Montenegro and Serbia. This is my answer. And if we had been asked, we wouldn't have entered this federation.

MR. WLADIMIROFF:

Q. Dr. Rugova, let's not discuss what your aspirations were in those days, and perhaps even today. Let's try to sort out what the reality was in 1998/1999. So I will phrase the question again, ask you again. Kosovo was not an independent republic in the Yugoslav federation in 1998/1999, like Serbia or Montenegro, but a part of the Republic of Serbia; is that right?

A. I -- I -- my first answer I gave you. I don't have any other answer. It was retained by violence.

Q. Dr. Rugova, the next question I'm going to ask you is of the same type. I beg you not to answer in the way you've done before by referring to the reasons why. I simply ask you what was the situation at that time. Now, in constitutional terms, Kosovo and proper Serbia were one republic of the federation and shared one and the same constitution in 1998/1999, i.e., a constitution of the Republic of Serbia. Yes or no.

A. They made this constitution for themselves. We had no part in it.

Q. Again, in constitutional terms, the Republic of Serbia, including Kosovo, had only one parliament in 1998/1999, that is the parliament in Belgrade, and I'm not referring to the parallel system. Is that right?

A. The Kosova Assembly was suspended in 1990. I explained this. ⁴³⁵¹ This was on the 5th of April -- 5th of July.

Q. So would your answer then be yes if I ask you again, in constitutional terms, that the Republic of Serbia, including Kosovo, was only one parliament?

A. Please. I don't understand the question, and I don't know why it's being made, but the Kosova parliament was suspended, and we continued with our system, and we had a parliament whose commissions worked.

Q. Dr. Rugova, in 1998/1999, again according to the constitution, and I'm not referring to the parallel system, Serbia had one government and one President for the whole republic, including proper Serbia and Kosovo; yes or no.

A. I answered this question several times. I don't see it as relevant.

Q. Well, it's for the Court to sort out whether it's relevant or not. I ask you --

[Trial Chamber confers]

JUDGE MAY: Dr. Rugova, it may be difficult for you, but it's important for us to know what the constitutional setup was. Whatever one's views about it and how right or wrong it was, it's important. And that's why counsel is asking these questions, simply so the Court understands the constitutional setup, that's all.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Please. I've explained already. Kosova was suspended. Its parliament, its government, its Presidency was taken from it. Kosova was retained by violence.

JUDGE MAY: Yes, Dr. Rugova, we have all that. But there was a ⁴³⁵² constitutional framework, whether it was one that was approved of or not, which counsel is now asking you about.

Mr. Wladimiroff, I wonder if there's much point continuing. I mean, we can have -- we can have other evidence about it.

MR. WLADIMIROFF: Right.

Q. Mr. Rugova -- Dr. Rugova, have you ever been elected in a constitutional body not in the informal parallel system on a municipal, provincial, or republic level before the year 2000?

A. No.

Q. Had you ever been elected in an informal parallel body on a municipal or a provincial level before the year 2000?

A. Please. As I said in my statement, I was elected in 1992 in the general elections in Kosova in our system. I was elected President of Kosova by a direct vote. And also on 22nd of March, 1998, I was re-elected president of Kosova.

Q. I understood that from your evidence. So I ask you: Have you ever been elected in the informal parallel system in a body on a municipal or provincial level before the year 2000?

A. I said I was elected at the level of -- well, Kosova was called a republic at that stage, so I was -- I was elected twice at the level of the republic.

Q. Does that mean that your answer is no, you have never been elected on a municipal or provincial level?

A. But, please, I -- if you're -- if you're talking about our parallel system, I was elected. In other systems, no. ⁴³⁵³

Q. Dr. Rugova, have you ever been a member of a constitutional institution, not an informal parallel institution, like a government or being a President, before the year 2000?

A. No, I haven't been. I was never in any institution, neither locally nor nationally, nor at the level of Kosova.

Q. Am I right in thinking, Dr. Rugova, that where you say in your evidence the Kosovo parliament, the government of Kosovo, or the President of Kosovo, you refer to the informal parallel system existing in Kosovo in those days in 1998/1999?

A. Yes.

Q. Never having been a member of the constitutional parliament or the constitutional government of Kosovo before the year 2000, your political functions were limited to such functions in the informal parallel system or in your party; is that right?

A. I was involved in the functioning of the parallel system. I was the President. I was directly elected. I was not a member of parliament in the parallel system.

Q. Thank you. I will now ask you a number of questions, Dr. Rugova, about your party, the LDK, and your work within that party. In your evidence, you have said that you are, from the very beginning, the President of the LDK; is that right?

A. Yes, that's right, from 1989.

Q. I take it you are not the only official in that party. Is there a board and are you the president of that board?

A. Yes. The party has its Assembly or congress, and then it has its ⁴³⁵⁴ general council, which has 60 members, and it has its Presidency. I was and remain a member of the Assembly, of the general council, and of the Presidency of my party. And these elections are held every four years. Now they're held every two years.

Q. I suppose, Dr. Rugova, that other parties, political parties, that is, in Kosovo are organised in a comparable way, having a council or a board and a president?

A. Yes. The other parties are organised by law in this way.

Q. In 1998/1999, were there contacts between the non-Serb parties in Kosovo?

A. We had contacts, and we operated as political parties, as Albanian political parties, such as the Christian Democratic Party, the Liberal Party, the Social Democratic Party, the Parliamentary Party and others, and we had contacts with other parties; Bosnian parties, Turkish parties, which existed at this time.

Q. Thank you. Were there regular communications, meetings, or other forms of exchange of information between the councils or boards of these parties?

A. Yes, there was, as need arose and according to people's requirements.

Q. Were these regular communications or meetings?

A. They took the form of meetings, joint meetings, exchange of information.

Q. Did the KLA take a part in these contacts?

A. At that time, the KLA did not take part in these political ⁴³⁵⁵ councils. It had its own political parties, I think, in Pristina.

Q. Which political party represented the political ideas of the KLA in those days, 1998/1999?

A. It didn't have a party, but it had a political representative, it seems to me. It had a representative that spoke for the KLA. I believe it was Mr. Demaci.

Q. Did this representative take a part in these regular meetings and contacts between the political parties?

A. No, it did not take part. But he did this job.

Q. Did he attend these kind of meetings?

A. No, he was not present.

Q. Did members of your council or board communicate with members of the council or board of the KLA?

A. They had contacts in the fields.

Q. That's right. In your evidence, you indicated that there were some unofficial contacts with the KLA, local people, because many of your members in the districts had joined the armed movement; is that right?

A. Yes. They had contacts.

Q. Were they contacts on the level of the council or board of your party and those of the council or board of the KLA?

A. There were no contacts at the level of the councils.

Q. Was any information obtained by people on the ground level, so to say, brought upwards to your board, related to the KLA?

A. Please. I said there were contacts, and we received information through the media and other forms of contact that existed. ⁴³⁵⁶

Q. The question was, Dr. Rugova, whether any information related to the KLA obtained by members in the district brought upwards to your board.

A. Information was received at the district level and at the grassroots, and it came to us.

Q. Was that a system or was it by incident?

A. Contacts were intermittent because it was difficult to communicate.

Q. Could you assist the Court in explaining what your sources of information were in 1998/1999 to keep you updated of what was going on in Kosovo in these years?

A. We had the Kosova Information Centre, which reported on the situation in Kosova on a continuous basis. There were some newspapers which appeared. Now and again there was a satellite television programme which was broadcast from Albania, as I have said in my evidence, from where we could have access to European, American, world media outlets. It was a whole system of information that we had set up in our parallel system in Kosova.

Q. This Kosovo Information Centre, was that organised by the LDK or by all political parties or even more interested parties?

A. It was organised by LDK as well as by the government of Kosova, but it represented the independent opinions of all the political parties.

Q. Did you consider yourself as well-informed in 1998/1999, Dr. Rugova?

A. Given the existing conditions, I would say yes, I was well-informed. ⁴³⁵⁷

Q. What do you know about the actions of the KLA in these two years?

A. The activity of the KLA was reported through information media about the clashes between the Belgrade police and the army and the KLA and the consequences of it. We could all see that.

Q. Was this anterior or posterior information?

A. Mainly posterior, because it was difficult, you know, to communicate.

Q. Right. Finally, I've got a few questions about the Serbian government and the accused. It appears from your evidence that you met with the accused only three times in 1998 and in 1999; is that right?

A. Yes, in 1998. On the 15th of May, as I have testified in my evidence, then during the wartime, as I say in my evidence.

Q. All right. In 1999 twice; April the 1st and May the 4th.

A. And also in May, yes.

Q. Thank you. During the last two meetings, NATO was bombing and you had openly welcomed the NATO attacks. Were you afraid during these two meetings with the accused?

A. Yes. I welcomed the NATO bombing. I was also afraid. I had to be cautious in what I did in those circumstances.

Q. Am I right in thinking then that you could not speak openly or in a detailed way about your concerns about the way the Serb forces acted against the Kosovo population during the second meeting?

A. Yes, that's right.

Q. Your third meeting was only concerned with your wish to travel with your family to Italy because Kosovo, as you said, was empty; is that ⁴³⁵⁸ right?

A. Yes, that's right. Yes, that's right. That was the main focus of our talk, that is, for me to leave Kosova.

Q. No other relevant issues were touched on?

A. No. No.

Q. Now, Dr. Rugova, in your evidence, you referred to what you described as Belgrade did this or decided so-and-so. What do you know about the decision-making in Belgrade? Now, I'm not asking you to pass hearsay evidence.

A. I don't know much because I was not part of those circles or part of the system, but we know who was in leadership then in Belgrade. We know from the accused to the others who were in office then.

Q. Right. Finally then, Dr. Rugova, what do you factually know yourself about the alleged role of the accused in relation to deportations or killings or rape or plunder and persecution? What do you know yourself on a factual basis?

A. On a factual basis, I know what I saw, what occurred. The accused had the office that he had. That we know of. He was the President and the Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces and of the police forces. I don't need to make any further comments on that.

Q. Thank you.

MR. WLADIMIROFF: That's all I ask, Your Honours.

MR. NICE: One or two matters do arise, Your Honours. First of all, constitutional issues. As the Court may expect, I plan to call a constitutional expert in due course, and it may be ^{4359 BLANK PAGE 4368} constitutional matters of detail are best put off until then, but I am in a position, in case either or any of the Court wish to consider them, to provide the relevant constitutions both in English and in Serbian now.

JUDGE MAY: Yes.

MR. NICE: Well, then, can we deal with that? They're quite bulky. There's the federal republic's constitution, and there's also the Serbian republic's constitution, which was referred to by the accused, particularly this morning when he was dealing with its Article 6. So if we can make those available. They can be given appropriate exhibit numbers. But I shan't necessarily ask this witness any questions about it.

THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia Constitution will be Prosecutor's Exhibit number 131.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If you allow me, Your Honour, I'd like to say a few words.

JUDGE MAY: Just let us deal with these procedural matters first, and then of course you can add something. Once we've got everything.

THE REGISTRAR: Okay. And the Serbian Constitution, Your Honours, will be Exhibit -- Prosecutor's Exhibit number 132.

JUDGE MAY: Thank you. Could we have the dates of these two?

MR. NICE: I think the dates are on one of them but not on the other. The Serbian document, as you'll see on the second page, is copyrighted in 1994, but on the third page, Introductory Notes, Constitution of the Republic of Serbia, 28th of September, 1990. If Your Honours would be good enough to go to the other document, ⁴³⁶⁹ which is the federal constitution, but flick through towards the first page or thereabouts of the Cyrillic version which accompanies it. You'll see, in Cyrillic, the 21st of February, 1974, at the top.

JUDGE MAY: While we're dealing with that, it may be sensible to deal with the poster.

MR. NICE: Yes.

JUDGE MAY: If you still have that.

MR. NICE: I haven't got the poster back yet because I handed it back to the Registrar, and I haven't received a copy back, I don't think.

JUDGE MAY: Does the registry have it?

THE REGISTRAR: Your Honour, I've requested copies to be made. They're on their way. And we will submit them as Defence Exhibit number 1, but we will not admit them until --

JUDGE MAY: I think we need to think about that for a moment.

[Trial Chamber confers]

JUDGE MAY: Very well. D1.

MR. NICE: Now, Your Honour, before I turn --

JUDGE MAY: Dr. Rugova wanted to say something.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I just wanted to say that if you could take into consideration the constitution of Kosova of 1990 and of 1974. That is by the constitution of the former Socialist Federation of Yugoslavia, because at that time, Kosova had its own constitution. That is all I wanted to say. Thank you.

Re-examined by Mr. Nice:

MR. NICE: I have one question, really, about constitutional ⁴³⁷⁰ matters, perhaps divided into a couple of parts, arising from the cross-examination, and they are these:

Q. Dr. Rugova, do you yourself have any legal training? Yes or no.

A. You think by profession? I am a literary critic and scholar, but I've never had any legal training.

Q. Thank you. Now, you've been asked several questions by Mr. Wladimiroff about constitutional matters and about the parallel institutions. Just help us with this, please: So far as you were aware, was the suspension of Kosovo's autonomy lawful or unlawful when it occurred?

A. It was unlawful. Under the constitution of the former federation, that is former Socialist Republic of Yugoslavia, it was unlawful, also under the constitution of Kosova, as well as under the then-Constitution of Serbia.

Q. Thank you. And of course, you told the Judges last week about the way in which the law was passed in Kosovo with the tanks and so on. Following that which you regarded as an unlawful withdrawal of your autonomy, did you regard there as being any lawful government operating from Serbia that had a right to control Kosovo?

A. Following the withdrawal of the autonomy and the Kosova constitution, then Serbia - Belgrade - decided to establish its own government in Kosova, which was described as a representative responsible for Kosova. I don't know how to say. A governor, sort of governor from Serbia. We didn't have any government per se. This is how it operated.

Q. Thank you. ⁴³⁷¹

MR. NICE: Your Honour, a little bit more -- or perhaps I'll just deal with the Exhibit D1 that it's to be.

Q. The pamphlet that was shown you and that you summarised for us and that the accused read to you, was that a pamphlet you'd ever seen before?

A. No. No. I hadn't seen it before.

Q. Was it a pamphlet or were -- had you ever seen any similar pamphlets to that before?

A. I saw a copy of it put or thrown in front of my home like they did with many others, but I was not familiar with the text. I had never seen it before.

Q. When were they throwing this type of pamphlet at your house?

A. I can't tell you exactly when they did that, but I think it was prior to 31st of March, or close by that date. I don't know who did that. It was very difficult for someone to distribute such leaflets. I don't know who could have done that. Maybe a group of policemen or some other groups. I can't say.

Q. At the time that you recall having similar leaflet or leaflets thrown at your house, was it practically possible for Kosovo Albanians to be distributing such leaflets?

A. It was very hard indeed to distribute such leaflets all over the city, because it was very difficult to circulate and to move around, especially at night. It was very dangerous.

Q. At the time of their distribution, who did have access to the part of the city?

A. Such leaflets have been distributed to several parts of the city. ⁴³⁷² Those who could circulate freely were only the military, the police, other paramilitary groups, and so on.

MR. NICE: I think that the leaflet has come back, Your Honour, and very helpfully has been copied in the red colour as well.

Q. Before we pass from it, Dr. Rugova, would you like to have it and read it to yourself. I don't need you to read it out loud, but take your time to read it, please.

A. Do you wish me to read it out loud or --

Q. No, to yourself. And I wish you to read it and see if there's anything in the text that helps you one way or the other to identify who might be its author or who might have been responsible for it. But take your time, as you haven't seen it before.

A. It is difficult to say who the author might have been but I see some linguistic mistakes we don't make in Albanian here.

Q. Can you point them to us just so that -- tell us, first of all, which line they're on or -- and then read out the passage.

A. They are more spelling mistakes.

JUDGE MAY: Can we have it on the ELMO, and perhaps the witness can point to the mistakes.

MR. NICE:

Q. Dr. Rugova, if you could put it on the ELMO, please.

MR. NICE: He's highlighting the passages at the moment. Perhaps the marked version in due course can become a sub-part of the exhibit itself, except that it then acquires a Defence Exhibit number. Perhaps it can be D1A. ⁴³⁷³

JUDGE MAY: It can be D1A.

MR. NICE:

Q. Dr. Rugova, you have highlighted several passages. Are they spelling or grammatical errors, can you help us, please?

A. They are more spelling, orthographical mistakes.

Q. Very well. Can you point to the version on the overhead projector. The usher will assist.

A. Yes. First line. You see here the title, you see, "Compatriots," an "E" with two dots is missing.

Q. Yes.

A. Then the first line, they were temporarily "perkohesisht," in Albanian it needs a schwa, which is the same letter, "E" with two dots. The second paragraph also -- sorry, the third paragraph, first line. This word, "settling of accounts," "hesapeve," the word in Albanian, also doesn't need an "E" with two dots, schwa that is. And the words "in a position," it doesn't need a schwa. These are some spelling mistakes.

Q. And "ovakuohen" you've also mentioned. Further down, at the bottom.

Right. Did you have anything whatsoever to do with this document or any document like it?

A. No. No, I had nothing to do with it or any such documents. I have not issued it. I have not seen it. Someone may have written it, someone who doesn't have a very good mastery of the Albanian, but not myself. And I have not seen it before.

Q. Thank you. Dr. Rugova, you were asked a couple of questions ⁴³⁷⁴ by --

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Nice, may I just ask? Dr. Rugova, you told Mr. Nice that you saw a copy of a similar document which was thrown near your home, your house. Did you actually pick up the document and read it?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. I said I haven't seen this document, and I haven't drafted it. But someone has brought it to me after he found it near my house, after they had distributed, a copy, similar copy of it.

JUDGE ROBINSON: And did you then read it when it was brought to your house?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. I read it, as well as many citizens who were concerned over it.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Did you do anything in relation to it? Did you take any action in relation to it? It's a document that purports to have been issued by you.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. I was unable to take any actions whatsoever. Someone may have written it and put my name underneath, but I couldn't do anything about it. As well as the logo, the KLA, on top of it. If I had issued it, I would have used my own insignia, my own logo. I have my own logo as the President of the Republic of Kosova.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.

MR. NICE:

Q. Perhaps one last question about this document, Dr. Rugova. By the ⁴³⁷⁵ time you saw it or something similar to it, you think it was the 30th of March. So the bombing was well under way, but can you, from your knowledge of your compatriots, calculate what might have been the effect of such a document on Kosovo Albanians at that time?

A. I said this happened before 31st of March. And I don't think it may have had a very large impact on the population, even though it has concerned them and warned them. I explained the reasons on Friday for the expulsion of the population. But I believe it has created some problems. It has worried some people.

Q. Thank you. One other question arising from the questions of Mr. Wladimiroff. You were asked about your direct knowledge of the accused. You were asked about his responsibility or your knowledge of his responsibility, and you gave an answer explaining what his position was. When you challenged him at that first meeting or on any subsequent meeting, was any other figure identified as bearing responsibility for what was being done by Serb forces in Kosovo, apart from the accused?

A. As far as the figures are concerned, I said that we don't have yet complete figures. About 10.000 killed, and 4.000 missing.

Q. My mistake for not making the question clear. Mr. Wladimiroff asked you about the responsibility or your knowledge of the responsibility of the accused. Was anybody else ever identified as bearing responsibility for the --

A. Of course. The accused knew of what was going on.

Q. Very well. I won't take that any further. Now, there's one document I'd like you to look at. It's been -- ⁴³⁷⁶ well, a couple documents, or one in particular. This has been referred to by the accused.

MR. NICE: The Court will remember -- the Court will remember that the accused asked the witness about a document that the accused said was numbered 030666. That's the B/C/S translation of what was an English original, so I think it would be helpful if we look at the English original on the ELMO and produce that in part. It's a long interview, but in order that I can get the witness to deal with the accused's questions, there are just two passages we should look at.

JUDGE MAY: This is an interview purported to be given by the accused; is that right?

MR. NICE: Yes.

Q. Now, it's only in English, Dr. Rugova, but we'll get its setting first. If we look at the top of the first page, it describes how you, the President of the Republic of Kosovo, on the Kosovo elections, the Serbian regime and opposition, union with Albania, and the southern front -- I hope the interpreters have got these in their booths -- it goes on to say:

"The Human Rights Foundation of the United States Congress awarded its highest honour this year to Albanian democracy. In October, it will be received by Dr. Ibrahim Rugova, President of the Republic of Kosovo, and Sali Berisha, President of Albania. To date, the award has been received by Vaclav Havel, the Dalai Lama, and the Chinese Student Movement."

Now, do you remember this interview, Dr. Rugova? ⁴³⁷⁷

A. I remember the award, but I wasn't asked for any interview. I don't remember that.

Q. "In the former premises of the Kosovo Writers Society where the Democratic Alliance of Kosovo is now temporarily residing, Ibrahim Rugova, after all the predicted newspaper delegations had taken turns visiting him, showed me a fax that had arrived for the President of the Republic of Kosovo, that is for him, from Washington. He added that at this time, the award was very important to Albanians and that the Albanian name was now entering Europe and the world after the complete isolation in which Albania had lived and in spite of the repression that was still a reality in Kosovo."

And then we have the interviewer, whose name appears to be Lebar. Do you remember the interview?

A. I don't remember the interview, but I can find that out and let you know. I remember the award. I mean, I was informed of it.

Q. You --

A. But not the interview. I don't remember. Maybe someone has asked me about the award, but I don't remember to have given any special interview.

Q. Can I just read now about four answers, two on this page and one on the following and then ask for your comments about the answers. Lebar is reported as asking: "Can we also interpret the award that you recently received as international approval of the idea of uniting Kosovo and Albania?" And this, I think, is what the accused was asking you about. You're said to have replied: "Of course we're also counting on ⁴³⁷⁸ that, but our desire is primarily to promote ourselves as the Albanian people, to strengthen political integration and to enter Europe. The border that has separated us from Albania has so far been too much like the Berlin Wall." You were asked: "How unnatural is the border with Albania?" You said: "It is completely unnatural. It is a border that has separated Albanians. We often say of Albania that it is the only state that borders on the territory of its own people." And then it says -- or Lebar goes on to deal with predictions that Serbia and Albania will partition Kosovo.

If we go to the second sheet, please, in the middle of the page, we see Lebar, the interviewer, apparently asking you: "Is Kosovo's existence within the borders of Serbia in a confederation still likely?" To which you reply: "That has not been in our programmes for a long time. We want an independent, open Republic of Kosovo as a neutral state between Serbia and Albania. That would be the best solution for a certain period. The purpose of the elections was also to gain legitimate representatives for Kosovo which will be a small state like all the states that arose from the former Yugoslavia republics." Now, I don't want to take time going through all of the interview. There may be other passages of interest. But do the answers that I've read out fit with your opinions being expressed at that time?

A. Please. This paragraph is more an accurate reflection of my official view, that we wanted an independent Kosova as a neutral state between Serbia and Albania; but in the other section, there are elements that coincide with my views but it might have been taken by journalists ⁴³⁷⁹ and put together somehow. And this text has been -- this text has been put together by the compiler and called an interview. And I would have to verify it.

Of course I talked about the Albanians and the border, and in this paragraph, that is my official position.

MR. NICE: Your Honour, it may be helpful if this document is given an exhibit number since the accused wanted to rely on it. Probably it should technically be a Defence exhibit but I'm entirely relaxed about it being a Prosecution exhibit.

JUDGE MAY: It would be easier if it's a Prosecution exhibit since you produced it. Can you tell us where it's from and a date?

MR. NICE: I'm afraid I can't at the moment. We've managed to dig this much up about it for the time being. The date we don't know. The witness may be able to tell us what year he received this award.

Q. Can you, Dr. Rugova?

A. No doubt it was 1993 or 1994, but I will tell you about it.

Q. Well, you say tell us about it. Tell us about the document or the award?

A. And -- both the award and the document. I'll look into it. It could be from sometime between 1993 and 1995. I remember I received it rather earlier than -- rather early.

Q. All right.

MR. NICE: Well, Your Honour, if there's further information, I'll bring it to the Court's attention.

THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Prosecutor's Exhibit ⁴³⁸⁰ 133.

MR. NICE: On a similar topic, or broadly similar topic, the Court will recall, when examining Dr. Rugova in chief, we spoke of a declaration in October 1991. It's paragraph 10 of the summary. We did not have at that stage any version available of the position stated by the witness. We now do have a document, one's come to hand, only in English. It sets out the three options spoken of by the witness in his evidence and, to some degree, tracks the attitude of the interviewee in the interview we've just been looking at.

Might this be produced, for completeness? I think it would probably be helpful. It's a one-and-a-half-page document in English, and I will try and find a version in another language if one exists. The extract is from the original produced, which is an LDK pamphlet. So may that be the exhibit and the extracts we've got be exactly that?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's of the LDK.

THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Prosecutor's Exhibit 134.

MR. NICE:

Q. And if this can go on the ELMO. We don't need to look at all of it because it's available for review later but we see at the bottom - and this will remind the Chamber of the evidence you gave - dated the 12th of October, 1991. Second to last paragraph on that page: "Albanian political parties in Yugoslavia, being determined to pursue a peaceful and democratic solution of all questions on the basis of ⁴³⁸¹ the right of people to self-determination according to the principles of CSCE and the conference of Paris, offer the following options for the solution of the Albanian question in Yugoslavia as well as the Yugoslav crisis in general."

And the next paragraph reminds us of what you said in answer to me last week.

"If the external and internal borders of Yugoslavia remain unchanged, then Kosova must have the status of a republic as a sovereign and independent state with the right of joining an alliance of other sovereign states in Yugoslavia."

And the top paragraph sets out population composition and ends with: "As to the question of the Serbs, the Montenegrins, and other ethnic groups in Kosovo, we naturally guarantee all national and civil rights."

Then: "Albanians in Macedonia, accounting for 40 per cent of the population, as well as in Serbia and Montenegro, should have the status of a state-forming element and should enjoy all national and civil rights."

Then the document goes on to another possibility: "If internal borders between the republics are to be changed, demand of the Albanians in Yugoslavia as an Albanian republic in Yugoslavia on the basis of ethnic and other principles that apply for the Serbs, the Croats, the Slovenes, and other peoples of Yugoslavia."

And then the third alternative: "If the external borders of Yugoslavia are to be changed, the Albanians in Yugoslavia request that ⁴³⁸² decisions about reunification of Kosovo and other Albanian territories in Yugoslavia with Albania are made through a plebiscite under international monitoring."

And then it goes on to set out some certain matters of history, with your name, and identifies the political parties present at the time. Any other comments about this beyond what you gave us last week when giving evidence, Dr. Rugova?

A. I have no further comment. This was -- this is a document that was approved by the Albanian political parties of Kosova, Macedonia, Southern Serbia, and Montenegro, and I have no other specific comment beyond what I said the other day. This is a valid document. Thank you.

Q. The accused, in the course of cross-examination of the witness, I think raised concerns about the absence of a Serbian version of the Rambouillet agreement. We certainly have that available if he wants it, if the amici want it. I don't know whether the Chamber wants it or not but it's available.

JUDGE MAY: Yes, let it be distributed.

MR. NICE: While that's happening and to save time, the Court will remember that we took versions of that agreement in English and of the education agreement from a book. That's the "Kosovo Conflict," which I'm holding up, which is Kosovo Conflict, a diplomatic history through documents." We've only, I think, got the one version. I hope we may retain it with copies being sufficient for the Chamber's purpose, but I can provide one further document about the education agreement in a second. ⁴³⁸³

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Nice, Dr. Rugova referred earlier to the Kosovo constitutions, two constitutions. I think it would be useful for us to have copies of those as well.

MR. NICE: All right. Microphone, please. We can't hear you.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] And I also send a copy of the constitution of the Republic of Kosova, which I have with me, and also a copy of the constitution of 1974. I will send them to you. I have them here.

MR. NICE: They will be copied and made available to the Chamber tomorrow, I hope, at the latest.

But may we just look at one other document in relation to the education agreement. It's an original with a part translation. Your Honour, it has -- it hasn't been possible to find a full version of the agreement in the Serbian and this may be because it simply was never published in full in the Official Gazette. We may be able to obtain one from somewhere else but not the Official Gazette. And the agreement was touched upon, so far as our research has revealed, to a very limited extent in a document coming to the witness and the accused and the amici now. And the translation is a part only of the Official Gazette. And if the original could be placed on the overhead projector. On, I think, the left-hand side, at the bottom, 933. The original on -- yes, on the left-hand side. No. The original, please. On the left-hand side, 933, so that it may be viewed. Further down. Now that, in translation, if we can place the English translation on the ELMO, is an ⁴³⁸⁴ extract the Official Gazette of the Republic of Serbia, 12th of September, 1996, and it reflects the education agreement in this way: "Pursuant to Article 29 of the law on the government of the Republic of Serbia, the government of the Republic of Serbia has made a decision," and then it sets out: "The following persons are appointed as members into the group for implementation of the agreement on the return of Albanian students and teachers to schools in the Autonomous Region of Kosovo and Metohija." And then under II, it says: "This decision is to be published in the Gazette."

Q. Dr. Rugova, do you know one way or another whether the full text of the education agreement was ever published in the Official Gazette?

A. I don't know whether it was published in the official Gazette of Serbia or not. You see the names of the working group. But we published in all the media in Kosova at that time. I didn't receive this Official Gazette.

MR. NICE: Just a few other questions, Your Honour.

JUDGE MAY: May we have an exhibit number, please.

THE REGISTRAR: Since this is an excerpt, we'll go -- we'll exhibit it as Prosecutor's Exhibit 127A ter.

MR. NICE: Your Honour, we haven't been able to locate original versions of any of the newspaper articles cross-examined on by the accused. I've managed to extract part of the article by David Binder or Binder of November 1987, and there's only one line from that that I would like the witness's comment on.

Q. Do you remember being asked questions -- and I've got the extract ⁴³⁸⁵ available for the Court if it wants it but it may decide it doesn't. You were asked questions about an article said to have been written by David Binder. Do you know him as a journalist or what his interests were?

A. Yes, I know David Binder. I know him. He often wrote about Kosova. He wrote some good articles and some others.

Q. What was his standpoint or interest, if he had one that was identifiable?

A. As far as I had contacts with him, he was very concerned about the situation in Kosova, and he wrote about the violence and the things that happened to the Albanians. And I remember a case in 1990 when there were demonstrations in Kosovo when about 50 people were killed and he went to visit a family near Prishtina where a young girl of 15 had been killed, Fatime Humoli [phoen], and he was very upset. Yes, I know Binder.

Q. Now, the extracts that were being put to you by the accused, I think from the version I have, were being -- were accounts of what other people were saying rather than perhaps his own account. In his own account, he's reported as saying this, and I'd like your comment on it: "For the moment, Mr. Milosevic and his supporters appear to be staking their careers on a strategy of confrontation with the Kosovo ethnic Albanians."

Would that be a view about which you would like to comment? Accept it, reject it, or comment on it?

A. No, I have no comment. That's how it was. That's how it is. His remark was in place.

MR. NICE: Thank you. ⁴³⁸⁶

JUDGE MAY: I think the more we have these opinions of various journalists, the less value they are to the Chamber. These are -- I'm not criticising you for re-examining on it since there was cross-examination. These are the opinions of people who happened to go there at the time and writing on it for newspapers. Evidence comes in the form of evidence which is put before the Trial Chamber. If they want to give evidence, of course they can, and that will be listened to.

We've allowed the witness -- the accused, rather, to cross-examine the witness upon them, but it must be understood that the only evidence is that which the witness gives. If the witness agrees with some comment, then of course it does become evidence, but otherwise, it's pure comment.

MR. NICE: Your Honour, I'm heartened to hear that. Our concern has, of course, always been that these things are frequently taken out of context.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. Of course, if there is examination on it, of course you're entitled to re-examine.

MR. NICE: A couple of questions arising from the accused's questioning this morning.

Q. You were asked a number of things about the arrangements made for you to go to Italy. I noticed it wasn't challenged that it was first suggested to you you should leave your family behind you. Your preference would have been not to have gone to Italy but to have gone to Macedonia; is that right?

A. I asked to go to Macedonia, which was closer, but I decided -- the accused decided that I should go to Italy. He was able to decide about ⁴³⁸⁷ these things at this time.

Q. And at that time --

A. As I said in my testimony, I didn't agree to go without my family.

Q. And at that time, had you gone to Macedonia, would there have been Kosovo Albanians there loyal to you and to whom you would have had loyalty? Were there any such Albanians or many such Kosovo Albanians in Italy?

A. In Macedonia, I wouldn't have had any problems with the Albanians. I paid a visit on the 19th of May, 1999. I visited the refugee camp at Stankovac. Whereas in Italy, there are Albanians. There are local Albanians. There are Albanians in Rome.

Q. Finally, or I think finally -- second to last. You were asked about Sinan Hasani and his role in events, and you spoke of this, the federal parliament's response. You said, "Everything was provided for." Can you explain what you meant by the phrase "everything was provided for" when speaking about the man Hasani?

A. At that time, he was -- this is 1987 or 1988. On the basis of the system of the former federation, every federal entity, according to rotation, had its turn. And it came to his turn, and he held the leadership for one year. We also had deputy presidents of the former federation because it was a rotation system of the communist leadership. And there was Fadil Hoxha, Mahmut Bakalli was there --

Q. Let me stop you there. It may be that what the accused was suggesting was that he was in some way involved in a way that showed approval of constitutional changes. If that's what was being suggested, ⁴³⁸⁸ what would your comment be?

A. Unfortunately, he -- he got mixed up, I would say in a negative way. He agreed. He was implicated, I would say. That's how I remember it. But the former federal parliament should have decided this kind of issue.

Q. Finally, you were asked in the most general way about the possibility of the United States and you being in an agreement that involved both the exodus of people from Kosovo and linked that to the early entry of troops. Was there any such agreement made by you and any American whereby the exodus of people from Kosovo was going to be linked with the incoming NATO or American troops?

A. No. Please. This is a fabrication. This is untrue. This is, I would say, a lie. There was never any case of this kind. It was never discussed at all.

Q. Thank you.

MR. NICE: Nothing else.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.

JUDGE MAY: Dr. Rugova, that concludes your evidence. Thank you for coming to the International Tribunal to give it. You are free to go. We're adjourned now. We will sit again in 20 minutes. No. No more questions.

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

--- Recess taken at 12.15 p.m.

--- On resuming at 12.35 p.m.

JUDGE MAY: One on each side. Just a moment. Are you going to be ⁴³⁸⁹ fairly quick?

MR. NICE: Very quick. I think very quick, but -- fairly quick. The 1990 Kosovo constitution we have, it will be copied, distributed. May the same number be retained for any earlier constitution when it's provided by Dr. Rugova, if there is 1974 constitution. Second point is this: Back to the question of location binders, and the Court will remember that the amici are being asked to and have agreed to use the binders served on them and simply to extract the irrelevant material. There are 36 such binders altogether. The accused now has the assistance of lawyers who respect the Court and who are under terms of, no doubt, cooperation with the Court. All this material, 36 binders, has been served on the accused, and I've waited a time, but those representing him must now be in a position to assist with sorting the material, and we simply cannot go on on the basis of copying everything twice for the assistance of the accused because he doesn't or doesn't choose to go to that room.

Now, I would invite the Court so to express itself as to encourage, or indeed even compel, the lawyers to make themselves available for sensible contacts with me and those in my teams on matters that will assist the good management of this case, and in the short run to sort out and make available for the accused to use in court the relevant binders, because frankly, to have to copy another 36 binders is extremely wasteful, very time-consuming and something we shouldn't be engaged in.

JUDGE MAY: We'll think about that.

MR. NICE: And on a slightly related topic, I'm asked, sensibly ⁴³⁹⁰ ahead of the time when the problem arises, to inquire of you this: Laws, typically - laws of any country - don't need to be produced as exhibits because they can simply be referred to. They exist. In this case, we could try and forecast all the relevant laws that we may need to refer to and then try and produce them as part of our compendious production of matters to be admitted. Or the Chamber could say, Well, a law is a law. When you need to refer to the law of the former Yugoslavia, it's there and you can refer to it. It would assist us to know, at some stage, whether you want all the laws to be gathered up, we hope comprehensively, but it will probably be quite an exercise, or whether laws can be simply dealt with as matters to which reference may be made as and when necessary.

JUDGE MAY: The only difficulty is we will need access to them in one form or another, and if you've got a copy of the laws, so much the better.

MR. NICE: But we can always produce them when it's --

JUDGE MAY: Or you can produce them in a comprehensive way, if they're in a volume or something of that sort.

MR. NICE: Well --

JUDGE MAY: Well, we can think about it.

MR. NICE: Thank you very much.

JUDGE MAY: Yes.

THE REGISTRAR: Your Honour, just for the record, the translated version of the Rambouillet agreement will be Exhibit number 128 ter.

JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Milosevic.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] First of all, something to do with ⁴³⁹¹ what Mr. Nice said a moment ago and then I'll go on with the questions that I wanted.

First of all, nobody represents me. The fact that I am allowed to communicate with my two advisors, associates, does not mean that they are my representatives. They are my associates. Therefore, I consider that the circulation of material should be enabled as is suited to me. That's the first point. Now, as Mr. Nice asked us to introduce the SFRY 1974 constitution here, I consider that we should not only have the 1974 constitution, which was not in force at the critical time we're discussing, but the latest constitution of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia as well, that is to say, before it was forcibly dismantled. So those are the two remarks I had to make, and now I want an explanation of a procedural nature.

Mr. May, at the trial here on the 24th of April, 2002, took note of, and this is on page 3701 of the transcript, line 22, and I'm quoting what you said in that line: "It is the practice that additions to witness statements are accepted together with the statement itself." That is what you took note of yourself, and that is why I demand that the additions to the statement of this particular witness, the one who just left and which was disclosed by the Prosecution also be admitted into evidence as exhibits. And I have in mind the following additions: The addendum to the document that the Prosecutor disclosed as being an addition to the statement, Rugova, on the platform of the democratic alliance of Kosovo. The number of the document is, in the Serbian version, 03037052, and in the English version, it is K021410. ⁴³⁹² Furthermore, it is -- this is also a document which was disclosed by Mr. Nice as an addition to the witness statement. It was entitled, "Rugova Cautions of the Radicalisation and Total War." The number of that document, the Serbian version, is 03036489 and K212002147.

THE INTERPRETER: Could the accused please be asked to slow down when quoting figures.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] And also another document by Mr. Nice, Rugova speaking of a visit to Italy and the Pope. On the right-hand side --

THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness [sic] please quote the figures more slowly. Thank you.

JUDGE MAY: You're asked to quote figures slowly.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The last document, in the Serbian version, was 03037120, and the English version was -- I haven't got the English number, in fact, for that document.

And finally, another document also produced by Mr. Nice, and it is 03036508 in the Serbian version, and in the English version it is K0214118.

So on that same basis and on those same grounds that you explained yourself, I request that they be introduced along with the witness statement, according to standard practice as I was able to understand it from your own explanation, Mr. May.

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Nice.

MR. NICE: With respect, no. The material was provided to him either under Rule 66 or Rule 68 for him to use for cross-examination if he ⁴³⁹³ wanted to. He sought to rely on one document for cross-examination, and since the exercise hadn't been conducted properly, I dealt with it for him in re-examination, and that interview then became relevant. The other documents are, I think - I haven't got them at hand - press releases or statements of one kind or another. They would need the witness's comments for them to become of any value to you. If they haven't been cross-examined on, they shouldn't now burden the record.

JUDGE MAY: Let us see the documents. We have a balance here between an accused who is acting in person and of course the fact that documents should normally be put to the witness before they're exhibited, but it may be that we can find a way forward having in mind that this is a Bench of professional Judges. Could you give us the documents in due course, when you can find them.

MR. NICE: When we can find them. It won't be until later this afternoon or tomorrow morning. Yes, we'll do what.

JUDGE MAY: We'll consider the position then. May we have the next witness.

MR. NICE: Mr. Saxon will take the next witness.

MR. SAXON: Good afternoon, Your Honours. The Prosecution calls Mr. Sejdi Lami.

JUDGE MAY: Is this the witness who was going to give evidence the other day and did not get on?

MR. SAXON: No, it's not, Your Honour.

JUDGE MAY: It's another one. Nonetheless, we should attempt to finish his evidence before the adjournment. ⁴³⁹⁴

MR. SAXON: Absolutely, Your Honour.

[The witness entered court]

WITNESS: SEJDI LAMI

[Witness answered through interpreter]

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

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

JUDGE MAY: If you'd like to take a seat. Examined by Mr. Saxon:

Q. Sir, is your name Sejdi Lami?

A. Yes.

Q. Mr. Lami, were you born on the 8th of August, 1950?

A. Yes.

Q. Were you born in the hamlet of Lama in the village of Vata in the municipality of Kacanik, in Kosovo?

A. Yes.

Q. And is the hamlet of Lama in the village of Vata located about five to six kilometres north-west of the town of Kacanik?

A. Yes.

Q. On the 14th of July, 2000, 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.

Q. On the 30th of January of this year, 2002, in the municipality of Kacanik in Kosovo, were you provided with a copy of the statement that you ⁴³⁹⁵ made in July of 2000 in the presence of representatives of the Office of the Prosecutor and a presiding officer appointed by the Registrar of this Tribunal?

A. Yes.

Q. And were you able to confirm that the copy of the statement provided to you was true and correct?

A. Yes.

MR. SAXON: Your Honour, at this time I would tender the statement as an exhibit under Rule 92 bis.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Prosecutor's Exhibit number 135.

MR. SAXON: Your Honours, Mr. Sejdi Lami is a 51-year-old male Kosovo Albanian Muslim from the hamlet of Lama in the village of Vata, in the municipality of Kacanik. He is married with three daughters who, in 1999, were aged between 4 and 7 years.

Mr. Lami's statement describes the action of Serb forces in the village of Vata, in Kacanik, on the 13th of April, 1999. He will describe that there was no regular KLA presence in the village during the conflict. However, about a week prior to the attack by Serb forces, some 20 KLA soldiers stayed in a house in the witness's village. These KLA soldiers left the village the day before the attack on the village of Vata by Serb forces.

The witness will describe how on the 13th of April, 1999, at about 5.00 in the morning, he saw four Pragas and six military trucks filled ⁴³⁹⁶ with about 100 VJ soldiers entering his village. The population realised that soldiers had also surrounded the nearby village of Slatina in the municipality of Kacanik and that others had arrived from the direction of Brod.

At about a quarter to six in the morning, shooting began coming from the Pragas and from hand-held weapons. As a result, a large part of the population - about 300 people - began to walk towards the mountain -- the mountains, excuse me. There was constant shooting in their direction but nobody was hurt at that time. The witness and his family hid in a gorge by a stream and from there he was unable to observe the soldiers. Later on, however, he heard from others that four men from the village had been captured.

The shooting stopped and the soldiers left the village at around 1600 hours. The witness and his brothers went along the gorge and found the bodies of four unarmed civilian men; Mahmut Caka, Hebib Lami, Rrahman Lami, and Brahim Lami, who had been captured by the VJ soldiers earlier that day. They brought the bodies to a house in the village and the same day, seven more bodies were brought to the village from different locations in the area.

In the hamlets of Caka and Tifeku, most of the houses were burned. On the 14th and 15th of April, 1999, the entire population of the village fled. The witness and his family went to Macedonia. On the way to Macedonia, they were stopped by VJ soldiers who demanded money from them in order to let the people pass. The villagers paid 500 Deutschmarks to these soldiers. ⁴³⁹⁷ When Mr. Lami returned to his village on the 17th of July, 1999, he found his home looted of all of its valuables. The same fate had happened in other homes in the village.

Of the 11 bodies that were initially buried in the village cemetery, the body of Ramadan Xhokli was reburied in the KLA cemetery because he had been an active KLA member at the time of his death. However, all the remaining victims were civilians. Thank you.

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

Q. [Interpretation] In your statement, you speak about the attack by Serb forces on your village and how the people left the village; is that right?

A. That's right.

Q. What date was that, precisely?

A. On the 13th of April.

Q. Is it correct - and that's what we see from your statement - that up until that day, that is to say up until the 13th of April, you lived peacefully in the village. Would that be right?

A. Until 13th of April, we were living in fear. We were sheltering in the hills because of the Serb armed forces and the tanks. And they had -- they had burned all the houses in our village.

Q. When did they burn the houses in your village? You say that you were attacked on the 13th of April.

A. They had -- ⁴³⁹⁸

Q. When did they burn --

THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter apologises. The tanks had surrounded the houses in the village.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] They surrounded the houses in the village on the 13trh and then they were burned. In Lama, only one house was burned. In Slatina.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. All right. You're talking about an event that allegedly took place on the 13th of April, and what I'm asking you is this: Why did you send your women and children to Urosevac much earlier than that date? Because up until the 13th of April, according to your statement, nobody touched you.

A. We withdrew our children from our villages. We sent them to Ferizaj because the Serb army kept shelling all the time. And whoever they captured, they maltreated them.

Q. Well, I don't know if you understood me. You said that you were shelled on the 13th of April. Now, why was it that you took them away before the 13th of April in view of the fact that nobody touched you up until the 13th of April and you yourself said you lived quietly?

JUDGE MAY: You asked him that. As I understood, his answer was this: They sent them away because the Serb army kept shelling, and that if anyone was captured, they were maltreated. That was his answer. That's before the 13th of April, he's saying.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes. But he says that the army shelled the place on the 13th of April, and I'm asking him why he sent ⁴³⁹⁹ them off in January or -- because between January and April, there's quite a lot of time. It's a long period.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Can I speak now?

JUDGE MAY: Yes. Answer this: Was there any shelling between January and the 13th of April?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There were shelling all over Kosova. Shelling went on to six, seven villages. The Serbs set houses on fire, committed crimes, killed people, injured people, and maltreated them.

JUDGE MAY: This was before the 13th of April; is that right?

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

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Well, a moment ago you said that nothing happened before the 13th of April.

A. I said nothing happened in my village. But from my village, Duraj, Gabrexh, Koxhaj, Dedaj villages, they were only three kilometres away from my house, they were all burned three, four days before.

Q. All right. You say that there were operations three or four days before the 13th of April, which means the 10th of April. And until the 13th, it didn't take place in your village, and up until the 10th, there was none in the surrounding areas either. My question to you is: Why, then, did you send the population off as early on as January when not even in the surrounding areas of your village before the 10th were there any operations going on?

A. I want to tell you that I am speaking here about the 13th of April, about what I saw with my own eyes, what was perpetrated by the ⁴⁴⁰⁰ massacre that was perpetrated by the Serb army and the police.

Q. All right. But I'm asking you why you sent them away, the women and children, in January to Urosevac when by the 10th, before the 10th, not even in the places around your village there were any clashes or conflicts of any kind.

A. We sent our children away from the village because we felt that it was calmer in the city. On the 23rd of March, we brought the children from Ferizaj to the village because we heard that Ferizaj was going to be attacked by the Serbian army.

Q. All right. We're obviously not going to get anywhere with that question. But answer me my next question. Why, then, did you stay on in the village? You had sent your women and children off in January. Why did you yourself remain in the village?

A. We stayed in the village after we sent away the children because for us it was easier to run and find refuge in the mountains, in gorges. But if you have small children -- some had children of two, three months, old or, five, six years old; it was hard for us to carry the children. That's why we sent them to Ferizaj.

Q. How many men stayed on in the village?

A. Our village is not a big village. It has about 12 houses. We were two or three men. Just to look after the livestock and the cattle we had and the properties. But at that time, there was no KLA in our village.

Q. All right. And how long were the soldiers of the KLA in your village? ⁴⁴⁰¹

A. There was no KLA in my village, but nearby, about 200 or 300 metres away, in the place called Sopotnica, there were.

Q. So they were 200 or 300 metres away from your village and you said that they had put up in a house.

A. That's right. In a house called the house of Emin Kastrati.

Q. And how many of them were there?

A. Well, there were -- there were 20, but half of them were in uniform and half them were in plainclothes.

Q. And what weapons did they have?

A. I didn't see weapons. I only know the house where they were, and I didn't see anything else. I didn't see them with any real weapons.

Q. And how long did they stay there where you say they were, at a distance of 200 or 300 metres away from you?

A. They stayed two or three days -- not two or three days. And then they went. And on the next day, Serbian forces attacked us.

Q. Do you know which unit of the KLA it was?

A. I have no knowledge of this. I didn't take any interest in this sort of thing.

Q. Did you perhaps know what their commander's name was?

A. No.

Q. And did you know those members of the KLA from before?

A. No.

Q. So none of them was from your village; is that right?

A. There were no members of the KLA from my village.

Q. And is it true that they were digging trenches in your village? ⁴⁴⁰²

A. It is true. Above my village.

Q. What? You say above your village? Did I get you right? Above your village. In the hill above your village; is that right?

A. That's right, above the village.

Q. And what did they need those trenches for?

A. They dug them to defend the place and to defend the Albanian people.

Q. Did you see them open fire from those positions of theirs, at the police and army?

A. When the Serbian forces started, fortunately there was no KLA there, because then there would have been a worse massacre than at Racak because the population were there.

Q. And what do you know about Racak?

JUDGE MAY: That's a side issue.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, he mentioned it. The witness mentioned the question of Racak. He said that it was worse than it was in Racak, so he knows --

JUDGE MAY: Yes. But what he knows isn't relevant. Move on, please.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, can I tell you why it is relevant?

JUDGE MAY: Yes.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] He said that it would have been worse than in Racak, because there were inhabitants here. The population was there. Which means that he knows that there was no -- there were no ⁴⁴⁰³ inhabitants in Racak, just the KLA.

JUDGE MAY: We're going to hear evidence about Racak in due course by people who were there. We'll hear evidence from them, not by somebody who was a long way away. Now let's get on with what he can deal with.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. You said that on the 24th of March, NATO started its bombing. Is that right?

A. Yes, that's right.

Q. And you claim that they bombed during the night only; is that right?

A. Yes. That's right and true.

Q. What was the intensity of the explosions that you heard during the night?

A. Explosion was great when the Serb forces shelled from a position in a village called Picrrak, where they were stationed. More than 200, 300 soldiers with tanks, armoured vehicles, everything.

Q. All right. But let's just see if we understand each other. You said that from the beginning of NATO's bombing, most of the farmers and their families had taken to the woods to hide in them because of the Serb shelling. Is that right?

A. Because of the -- of the Serb bombing and shelling, we found shelter in the forest. But we were not at all afraid of the NATO bombing, because NATO didn't hit the civilians.

Q. All right. Tell me, since you spent this time in the woods, you ⁴⁴⁰⁴ heard the explosions of NATO from the 24th onwards, what kind of shelling were you seeking shelter from in the woods when you say yourself that the shelling started only on the 13th of April? What kind of shelling were you seeking shelter from for all of 20 days? That is to say, from when the bombing of NATO started, from the 24th of March until the 13th of April.

A. From the 24th of March, we were in the village, up to the 13th of April. From the 13th of April, when the offensive was launched on Cakaj, Lama, Sllatina villages, I don't know how many victims, casualties there were. We buried them on the 14th of April and then fled the village because we saw houses burned, people injured, and we were obliged to leave for Macedonia.

Q. Please concentrate on the answer. You said that you were hiding in the woods all this time until the 13th of April. That is to say, from when the NATO bombing started. Is that right or is that not right?

A. We hid in the mountains, in the forest, because of fear of Serb forces who entered the village and ransacked the houses.

Q. All right. You said that the Serb forces entered on the 13th of April. I am asking you about the time up until the 13th of April. What were you hiding from between the 24th of March and the 13th of April?

A. From the 24th of March to the 13th of April, we were hiding because of fear of the Yugoslav army.

Q. All right.

A. We were afraid.

Q. All right. Did I understand you correctly then, the villagers did ⁴⁴⁰⁵ not leave the village because of the NATO bombing but were doing that because of Serb shelling; is that right? That is your assertion.

A. Can you please repeat the question? I am not so clear about it.

Q. I have understood from your explanation that the villagers did not leave the village because of NATO bombing but because they were afraid of Serb shelling. Was that your explanation?

A. Yes. Yes, we were afraid from the Serb army but not from NATO.

Q. What were you afraid of before the shelling which took place only on the 13th of April?

A. But I said that we were afraid, and we hid out of fear of Serb forces.

JUDGE KWON: Mr. Lami, was there any shelling from Serb forces before 13th of April, after the NATO bombing had started?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. There was shelling in the mountains, in the surrounding areas, and in the village. In Pricrrak village, many houses were burned. In Biqefc village, many houses were burned.

JUDGE KWON: So in your statement, page 2, the second paragraph, when you say, "NATO was bombing during the night and the Serbs shelled the village during the daytime," are you meaning -- did you mean the shelling of Serb forces which took place before the 13th of April offensive?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I mean before the 13th of April when they shelled other villages. This is why we were afraid and took shelter in the mountains and elsewhere.

JUDGE KWON: [Previous translation continues]... Mr. Milosevic. ⁴⁴⁰⁶

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. All right. At the outset, you said that this previous shelling, before the 13th, could have been three or four days prior to that. That is to say, on the 10th of April at the earliest. And you were hiding in the hills all the time, ever since the bombing started. Is that right or is that not right?

A. Yes, that's right. We -- we were found in between the villages that were being shelled. And so we were afraid and had to leave. On the 13th of April, they attacked our village. At 5.00 in the morning, the Serb army blocked three or four neighbourhoods of the village.

Q. All right. But just a short while ago, the soldiers of the KLA, as you call them, you say they were 200 metres away from you, all the way up to the day on the eve of the 13th, you said that they ran away on a particular day, and the next day, the shelling started. Is that right?

A. Yes, that's right. They left one day before we were attacked.

Q. And why were you hiding then until that day when they left when they were present there all the time? Wasn't their protection sufficient for you? Why did you flee into the forests 20 days before, when the NATO aggression started?

A. I have no idea why they left.

Q. You stated that your family, approximately one week before what you call the Serb attack on your village, tried to go to Macedonia. Is that right?

A. Yes, that's right.

Q. Why did you decide to do that when the KLA was there right by you, ⁴⁴⁰⁷ 200 metres away, as you had put it?

A. My family left after the KLA left the village, after the offensive. And during that offensive, I said there was no KLA present there.

Q. Please, Mr. Lami. Let us try to get the timing right. Today, just a little while ago, you said that the KLA left the village one day before the offensive started; is that right?

A. The KLA didn't know that there would be an offensive against our village, but I have no idea why the KLA left. And they were not regular forces.

Q. My question was not why they left. That doesn't matter. It's quite clear why they ran away. But the question was whether this was, in terms of time, one day before the attack. That's what you had said. Is that right or not? They left one day prior to the attack. That was your assertion.

A. Yes, that's right. Before we were attacked, they left, whereas we, we left after the offensive.

Q. All right. And you say that your family, about a week before the attack against the village, tried to go to Macedonia; is that right?

A. Yes, that's right. And then we were turned back because the border was closed, the border with Macedonia.

Q. All right. Now why did they decide to go to Macedonia a week before that when, during that time, the KLA was in your village? It was there, 200 metres away.

A. The first time that we tried to go to Macedonia, when we returned, ⁴⁴⁰⁸ we found that the KLA were there. During the second time, I went to Macedonia after the offensive.

Q. All right. Tell me, please, did your family try to go to Macedonia out of fear from a conflict between the Serb forces and the KLA that was there, 200 metres away?

A. No, we were not afraid of that, not afraid of the KLA, but we were afraid of the Serb forces and nothing else.

Q. All right. Did you expect the Serb forces to clash with the KLA over there, 200 metres away from you?

A. This is what the Serb forces tried to find out, where the KLA forces were and attack them. But on that particular day, there were no KLA forces, and there was no incident between the KLA and the Serb forces.

Q. All right. But you could not have known that a week earlier, that the KLA would flee only one day before.

A. I told you I had no idea why. I had no idea whether they would be -- we would be attacked or not.

Q. And did you expect that, this one week prior to the attack, that there would be clashes between the Serb forces and the KLA that was there, 200 metres away from you?

A. No, we did not expect that.

Q. So why did you try to go to Macedonia then?

JUDGE MAY: He said, frequently, they were afraid of the Serb forces. That's why they went. Now, that's his answer, and you can't go on going round and round it.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right. ⁴⁴⁰⁹

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. And is it correct, in terms of this attempt made by your family to go to Macedonia, that on that occasion you were warned by the soldiers that the Macedonian authorities were not letting refugees in any longer and that that is why you had to return to the village? Is that correct?

A. Yes, that's correct. They closed the border and turned us back.

Q. So only a week before the attack on your village, as you had put it, the soldiers did not maltreat you. As a matter of fact, they advised you, they informed you that Macedonian authorities were not taking people in. And then you returned to the village, and then you claim that, afterwards, they attacked you with no reason whatsoever. Is that your statement?

A. That's right.

Q. All right. On the basis of what you've been claiming, if I can put the picture together now, the army waited for the KLA to dig trenches near your village, and then they left the village, and then they attacked innocent villagers. Is that right? Were 300 men --

JUDGE MAY: That's all comment. That's all comment. That's what he says happened.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'm trying to put his story together and I'm trying to ask him whether that's his story, whether that's the way it was.

JUDGE MAY: That is what he's told us. There's no need to repeat it.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right. ⁴⁴¹⁰

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. And in the preceding days, in the days that preceded what you call the attack on the village, why were you preparing a shelter near the brook?

A. What bridge are you talking about? There was no bridge. Yes, there was the brook. We were sheltering in the hills, and there was this brook there.

JUDGE MAY: You were asked -- you were asked why you prepared a shelter.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We were preparing the shelter to shelter the children, because they might have been hit by a bullet.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. All right. But you had sent the children to town earlier on. That's what you said.

JUDGE MAY: They had been brought back. That was his evidence.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We brought them back on the 23rd of March. And after that, we started preparing shelters up in the hills as protection against shelling by Serbian forces.

Q. And how long did the children stay with you in the village?

A. I don't know how many children there were. There were about 150 of them.

Q. I did not ask you how many children there were there. I asked you for how long the children stayed with you in the village after you had returned them.

A. They remained until the offensive. ⁴⁴¹¹

Q. And is it correct that on the day prior to the attack, Avdi Bajgora, otherwise commander of the police station in Kacanik, was at a meeting in your village?

A. That's true.

Q. So the KLA was still in the village then.

A. The KLA left the place on that night, the night before the attack.

Q. Was this after the meeting with Bajgora or before he came to the village for this meeting?

A. Bajgora came to the village -- into the village and -- and obtained information. And on the following morning, we were attacked by Serbian forces.

Q. Did he come to the village before the KLA had withdrawn or after the KLA withdrew?

A. He was the spokesman for the Serbian police. He -- he often went among villagers and controlled them.

Q. Since he was there a day before that, did he see the KLA in the village or not?

A. He wasn't able to see them because he was there at night.

Q. Is this the night when they had already left the village or was it before that?

A. I didn't see them, and I have no knowledge about when they left, but this is -- this was the decision of the KLA.

Q. And was he still in the village when the KLA was there? Was he still visiting your village then?

A. Bajgora came in the evening. And in the evening, the KLA was in ⁴⁴¹² its own house. This was about a kilometre away and they were unable to see each other.

Q. How was it possible for them to be a kilometre away when you said that they were only 200 metres away?

A. Bajgora took information from a person in the village, and he would be about 1.500 metres away. But this house is about two or three hundred metres from my house.

Q. All right. Obviously we are getting nowhere with these questions.

Who were these four men that the soldiers took prisoner in your village then?

A. These four men: My nephew, 16-year-old; my cousin, 20 years old, a student; and another cousin of mine, 56 years old; and a neighbour of mine, and he was -- and he was burnt.

My cousin helped some of the villagers, one of them who was an invalid, to find a shelter.

Q. Were they killed in fighting?

A. They were not killed in fighting. They were captured. They were killed. They were massacred.

Q. Did you see them get killed?

A. My wife saw them. My wife heard the shots, the screaming. When they got hurt -- when he got hurt, injured, and when they gouged his eyes out.

Q. So your wife saw somebody gouging his eyes? Is that what you're claiming? ⁴⁴¹³

A. She didn't see him gouging the eyes but she heard the screaming and when they were killed by automatic fire. After three hours, I went there with my brother -- with my two brothers, and we found them there, killed.

Q. But you did not see when they were killed or who killed them.

A. I couldn't see them because I was in -- hiding in a gorge and, from there, I couldn't see it. We were there with the children. But they didn't fire, fortunately, at us. Only they captured those, Brahim Lami Mahmut, those four people I mentioned. They injured them. And after four hours, I went with my brothers and saw them, and we put some -- their caps over their faces because it was a very sad sight to see their eyes popped out.

Q. All right. Since you did not see them being killed or how they were killed, how come you know that they were not killed in combat?

JUDGE MAY: He's given his account of what he heard.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right. All right.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Where was Ramadan Xhokli from?

A. Ramadan Xhokli had found shelter together with his family in Cakaj village. Was he a member of the KLA?

A. He was, but he was responsible for providing food to the KLA.

Q. Was he killed in your village?

A. He was killed in the village of Cakaj.

Q. How far away is that from your village?

A. It's one and a half kilometres away. ⁴⁴¹⁴

Q. When was he killed? Was this on the 13th of April when there was this attack on your village?

A. He was killed on the 13th of April. I have heard that he was killed at 1.00.

Q. How come he was killed on the 13th of April when you say that the KLA withdraw a day before the attack on your village?

A. He had not gone with them on that day. He had gone with his own family.

Q. Did any other members of the KLA stay behind or did they all withdrew -- did they all withdraw? First you said that some of them -- that all of them had withdrawn. Was it only Ramadan Xhokli that stayed behind?

A. Ramadan Xhokli did not go with them. He had a small child and a wife, and his father and mother. And he didn't go with the KLA. He remained behind to help his children.

Q. In view of the closeness involved and in view of the fact that you live nearby, are you familiar with what happened in Kacanik in addition to what happened in your village?

A. I don't know anything about what happened in Kacanik.

Q. And how far is your village from Kacanik?

A. Our village is six kilometres from Kacanik.

Q. Do you know about the incident when on the 12th of February, 1999, Selin Topolani [phoen] was kidnapped and taken barefoot out of his house. He was President of the political party of the Albanian Democratic Initiative. ⁴⁴¹⁵

JUDGE MAY: He said he didn't know what happened in Kacanik, so there's no point going through it.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. So you don't know anything about any crimes committed by the KLA on the territory of your municipality, the municipality of Kacanik; is that right?

A. That's right.

Q. All right. I don't think we need waste any more time. We have come to the end of our working day anyway. I don't want to go on asking you any questions. You say in advance that you I don't know anything, so there's no point.

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Wladimiroff?

MR. WLADIMIROFF: I have nothing to ask, Your Honour.

MR. SAXON: I'm aware of the hour, Your Honour. Will you permit me two minutes?

JUDGE MAY: Yes. Re-examined by Mr. Saxon:

Q. Mr. Lami, if you could please focus on the question I ask you and only respond to that question, please, we'll go a lot quicker. You mentioned that on the 13th of April, four people in your village were killed; Mahmut Caka, Hebib Lami, Rrahman Lami, and Brahim Lami. Did you know each of these persons? Just yes or no.

A. Yes.

Q. Were they all neighbours or relatives of yours? ⁴⁴¹⁶

A. Three were relatives, cousins; Rrahman, Hebib, and Brahim. And Mahmut Caka was a neighbour.

Q. When saw the bodies of these men, were there any firearms anywhere near the bodies?

A. No.

Q. How were these men dressed when you saw their bodies?

A. In civilian clothes.

Q. To your knowledge, were any or either of these four men members of the KLA?

A. No.

Q. You mentioned that one of these men was an invalid. Who was that?

A. Brahim Lami was an invalid.

Q. And what was his disability?

A. One of his legs was ten centimetres shorter, from birth.

Q. And was Brahim Lami able to run?

A. No.

Q. Was Brahim Lami able to fight?

A. No.

Q. Mr. Milosevic asked you about the first time when you and your family tried to go to Macedonia about a week before the 13th of April. At that time, when you left your village for the first time and tried to go to Macedonia, were the 20 KLA soldiers already present in your village?

A. When we set off for Macedonia, there were no villagers. When we came back from the border, we found them in a house in the village of Kastrati. ⁴⁴¹⁷

Q. So when you set off for the border the first time, there were no KLA soldiers in the village?

A. No there weren't, that's right.

MR. SAXON: Thank you. Nothing further.

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

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.

[The witness withdrew]

JUDGE MAY: The Court will adjourn. Nine o'clock tomorrow morning, please.

--- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.51 p.m., to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 7th day of May, 2002, at 9.00 a.m.