⁴⁶⁰⁶

Thursday, 9 May 2002

[Open session]

[The accused entered court]

[The witness entered court]

--- Upon commencing at 9.00 a.m.

JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Saxon.

MR. SAXON: Thank you, Your Honours. Good morning. As promised yesterday, we have the copies of the statement of Mr. Abullah Salihu and, pursuant to Rule 92 bis, we would now offer that into admission, please, into evidence.

And I would again ask the Honourable Judges and the other parties to please make note of the correction by the witness yesterday on the second page where it says "200.000 people." It should say "20.000."

THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this will be marked Prosecutor's Exhibit 142.

JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Milosevic.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Before I begin, I'd like to make an objection and say that we didn't get a summary yesterday that was provided for this witness yesterday, but let me move on to my questions.

WITNESS: ABDULLAH SALIHU [Resumed]

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

Q. [Interpretation] In your statement, you say that you finished your primary school in Cirez; is that correct? ⁴⁶⁰⁷

A. Yes.

Q. All eight years of schooling there?

A. Yes. I finished the eight years school in Cirez, the high school in another place, and the university in Prishtina.

Q. What did you study in Pristina?

A. Nothing. I didn't study anything. I did only the high school, I'm sorry.

Q. A moment ago I understood when you said you attended the university of Pristina that you actually did. Were you at the university or not?

A. No, no, no. I did -- I did the primary school in Cirez, the high school in Prishtina. It is called Medresa. That is the high school.

Q. Is that a religious school?

A. Yes, it is.

Q. May we then conclude that you know the village of Cirez very well and its inhabitants too?

A. Yes, I do.

Q. What did you do between 1986 until September 1998?

A. Until then, I worked in the construction field. I did a course on construction, and I worked as a construction worker then. Until four years ago, I worked as imam in Baks village. As a Muslim priest.

Q. Yes. I understand. So you worked in the field of construction, and you also worked as a hodza, a Muslim priest, at the same time; is that right?

A. At that time, I did not work as hoxha, but I did a construction ⁴⁶⁰⁸ course and worked as a construction worker until four years ago.

Q. And you worked in the village of Baks as a hodza. Did you work as a hodza anywhere else, apart from the village of Baks?

A. I worked also in Jashanica village, '74/'75.

Q. Also as a hodza; right?

A. Yes.

Q. And how long did you work as hodza in the village of Baks? From when until when?

A. I worked as hoxha for 25 years in the month of Ramadan. It's only one month a year. Now I work as imam, because now we have built a mosque in the Baks village, and this is where I work now.

Q. In your statement, you say that 80 per cent of the population left the village of Baks and that only a few people remained - and they were men - to look after the cattle; is that right?

A. Yes, that is right.

Q. How many men stayed on?

A. Several men. I couldn't say how many exactly, but during the first offensive in September of 1998, the Serb rebellion, that is the onslaught which came from Gllogoc-Skenderaj, has driven the population out to Cicavica mountain where over 20.000 people were gathered in those places. The Baks village was totally burnt, or if not exactly 100 per cent, 90 per cent of the houses were burnt.

So that offensive ended, which lasted for two days. After that, we received some aid from the OSCE. I don't --

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone. Microphone. ⁴⁶⁰⁹

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Salihu, I'm going to interrupt you. If you just listen to the questions and just answer them, we'll get on more quickly.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. As we were saying, how many men stayed on in the village when, as you say, the population left the village? Men to tend to the livestock, that is.

JUDGE MAY: He said that he couldn't say exactly. Can you give us a rough idea, Mr. Salihu?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] About 20, 30, because there was no place where the population could go to. I told you, 90 per cent of the houses were burned down.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. All right. I'm asking you how many remained in the village, because you said that the men stayed on to tend to the livestock.

A. Yes. I'm saying 20, 30 men.

Q. All right. Very well. Now, those men, were they armed?

A. No, they were not.

Q. Well, if they weren't armed, how can you talk about an attack on the village?

JUDGE MAY: What does that question mean? Just a moment. Let's see if we can understand the question.

What does the question mean, Mr. Milosevic?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, in the village, there were 20 to 30 people who were not armed, and the witness claims that an attack was launched on the village which was empty except for a few unarmed people. ⁴⁶¹⁰

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Is that right?

A. I told you the offensive was launched in October 1998, and they burned all the houses. The population had no place where to go. Therefore, only 20, 30 people could stay, could put their heads somewhere, could find some shelter. And these people were unarmed.

Q. Please. You said that 80 per cent of the villagers had left the village of Baks and that the people -- some people stayed on to tend to the livestock, and then you said that an offensive followed. Is that right? Is that what you said?

A. Yes. I'm talking about the offensive of 1998. Then after that, the houses were burned down. I don't know what you don't understand here.

Q. I don't want anything. I'm just asking you in connection with your statement.

JUDGE MAY: This is at complete cross-purposes. Now, I suggest you move on to another question.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. You say that between 180 and 190 people were killed in the area. On the basis of what do you base this assertion?

A. On the Cicavica offensive. It is true.

Q. So you're talking about the fighting that went on at Cicavica; right?

A. There was no fighting. There was only an offensive mounted on it ⁴⁶¹¹ by the Serb army. It was shelling from a distance of 10, 15 kilometres, so that when we returned there, there was no house standing almost. As I said, it came from Gllogoc-Skenderaj. They had shelled Cicavica.

Q. Mr. Salihu, let's clear something up. You said a moment ago an offensive at Mount Cicavica; is that right?

A. Yes.

Q. Now, do you know that on the Cicavica mountain there were strong forces of the KLA? Are you aware of that?

A. This is not true that there were KLA forces in the Cicavica mountain at that time.

Q. All right. Then we can move on because, according to you, there were no forces of the KLA on Cicavica.

Now, who were your sources of information with respect to what you say and what you say went on on Mount Cicavica?

A. I was one of those who fled with my family, with my neighbours, with my nephews and nieces. We all together went there to that place. I experienced that myself.

Q. All right. So this confirms once again, unless I'm mistaken, that you're a very well-informed man about all the events that were taking place. Can we draw that conclusion?

A. I am well-informed about what I have stated in my statement, because I went through it myself, and I am certain of what I'm saying.

Q. All right.

JUDGE MAY: Help us about this: The figure of 180 to 190 people killed at this time, what is that based on? ^{4612 BLANK PAGE 4613}

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Because at least 30, 40 people I helped myself to bury with my own hands.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May we proceed?

JUDGE MAY: Yes.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Do you happen to know, then, that the KLA terrorists were especially dangerous in their attacks day and night, especially in the village of Cirez? Do you know about that?

A. I don't know about the terrorists. I know the KLA was not dangerous. I know that the KLA defended the people as much as they could and were capable of.

Q. All right. That is your description of the character of their activities. Now, I'm asking you whether you know about that particular activity of theirs.

A. I said the KLA defended the people, stood up for the people.

JUDGE MAY: Well, help us with this: In the period we're dealing with, which is the autumn of 1998, September and October, were the KLA in Cirez or not?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There -- there was in Cirez, in Pelez, but the KLA, and I'm sure of what I'm saying, that the KLA was not a terrorist organisation. It defended the people. That was our only support.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. All right. I'm not asking you actually about the character or in your opinion what their activities were like, but I asked you whether they ⁴⁶¹⁴ were there, and you said yes. Now, does the name Muj Krasniqi Kapuci mean anything to you? Do you know the name?

A. I've heard about him, but I don't know him personally.

Q. All right. If you've heard of him, even if you don't know him personally, do you know that, in the area, he killed policemen, for example? Do you know about that?

A. This I don't know. That was probably a secret of the KLA.

Q. [Previous translation continues]... move on. And do you know who Ramush Haradinaj is?

A. I know. He is from Gjakove, and I am from Drenica. It's about 70 to 80 kilometres away. And I have heard his voice on television.

Q. And do you know that this man, Muj Krasniqi Kapuci, whom you've heard of, together with Ramush Haradinaj, was active in the area, in that region, in the district, and that they perpetrated a series of actions in which many people were killed or kidnapped? Do you know anything about that?

A. No, I don't. I don't have any information on this.

Q. And did you perhaps see a book of his, a dialogue, in fact --

JUDGE MAY: He has no information on this. Now, let's move on.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right. Let's stick to what he does have information about.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. You said in Cirez, in the surrounding villages, that the KLA was there. Now, what were they doing in concrete terms there? What were they doing specifically? ⁴⁶¹⁵

A. The people were relying on them. And this was the only support we had. We didn't have any protection but the KLA.

Q. Please. I'm asking you what they did. I'm asking you what they did physically speaking.

A. And I'm telling you: They were defending the people.

Q. All right. Describe how they were defending the people, then.

A. If there was any need. But there wasn't even any -- there wasn't even any opportunity, because the shelling was from a distance. They didn't even have a chance to defend us. Because the KLA was not situated inside the village. It was always five, six kilometres away, therefore, it did not have any real link with the civilian population.

Q. All right. A moment ago, you said that in Cirez, and you mentioned another village which is in the transcript here but I can't remember its name just now, that the KLA was there. Now you say that they were outside the village. Were they in the village or were they outside the village?

A. The KLA was always at a distance from people, and it didn't have contact with people. It was five or six kilometres away. It kept at a distance from the civilians.

Q. All right. That's a little different from what you said a moment ago.

Now, in your statement, you say that nobody from your village was killed; is that correct?

A. What? I didn't understand the question. At that time, nobody was killed. ⁴⁶¹⁶

Q. And where do you get these 180 and 190 people who were allegedly killed that you referred to?

JUDGE MAY: He's already answered that. He said he buried 40 of them himself.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There were at least 40 villagers at that time in the offensive, villagers who had gathered in Cirez from Klina to Gllogoc. All the villages from Cicavica -- all the villages roundabout had gathered on Cicavica.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Salihu, those whom you buried, did you bury as part of your duties as imam?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. There were groups of villagers, and we buried the bodies together.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. You buried KLA members who had been killed at Cicavica. Is that right or not?

A. That's not true. I buried civilians and also Les Gradica [as interpreted], a doctor, who was one of the people massacred at Cicavica and mutilated. He had a hand cut off. I didn't bury any of the soldiers of the KLA because none were killed. There were only civilians.

Q. So there were no KLA soldiers who had died?

A. No, there weren't any killed.

Q. So in all those villages, the KLA was there, there was an offensive, but none of the KLA members were killed. So the offensive was not against the KLA, it was against the civilians. Is that what you're ⁴⁶¹⁷ saying?

A. That's true.

Q. And in which places were these people killed?

A. These people were killed in the village of Grabofc and also in Dubofc. Cicavica is about 13 kilometres long, and this was the area where this happened.

Q. Did you see it? Did you see them being killed?

A. I told you that I buried them. I couldn't see them all being killed. This would have been impossible. I might have seen three or four, but I saw one person from Kozhnice when a shell hit a tree, and a father and son were killed when the tree fell on them.

Q. So that's what you saw with your own eyes: You saw those two people killed when a tree fell on top of them. Is that it?

A. It was the matter of the shell cutting the tree, and it wasn't the matter of the tree. It was a father and a son. The father got killed and the son is still alive.

Q. I understand. So that's what you saw personally yourself.

A. Yes.

Q. A moment ago, you said that the KLA did not have occasion to defend the people, because our forces were shooting from a distance; is that right?

A. Of course. The shelling was from 10, 15 kilometres away. Gllogoc and Skenderaj.

Q. So are you saying that the members of the KLA didn't shoot at all because they didn't have anybody to shoot at? Is that it? ⁴⁶¹⁸

A. There was no KLA there. Please, Mr. Milosevic, don't mix up my statement. The KLA was to defend the people. I -- there was no KLA there. I told you. There were only civilians, and the shelling was aimed at Cicavica, and they even dug holes on the ground. Everything was destroyed.

JUDGE MAY: Did the KLA at this period, as far as you could see, did they fire any shots? Did you see any firing from the KLA?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. Fire was not opened.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. That means that they had no one to shoot at, because our forces were operating from a distance. Is that what you said? Is that your explanation?

A. I -- I'm saying that we -- all these people were gathered on the mountains of Cicavica, and they came from -- with tanks towards all the people gathered there.

Q. A little while ago, you mentioned trenches that they had dug. Who was it that had dug the trenches?

A. It's not true that this is what I said. I said that after the offensive, two days later, we buried people.

Q. I asked you about the trenches that you referred to a short while ago. Who had dug these trenches?

A. I didn't say that. There were no trenches. I replied that after the offensive, we buried people. We were not able to leave them just lying on the ground. And I mentioned one man whom I saw myself mutilated, Dr. Lesi [phoen] from Gradica. ^{4619 BLANK PAGE 4620}

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Salihu, do you know of any occasion in that period when there was any fight between the KLA and the Serb forces; any occasion in which the KLA and the Serb forces were engaged in a fight?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. In that period, there was not. In that period, there was a KLA, but they were unable to fight. And after the offensive, they were shattered. No, there was no -- there were no clashes at this time.

JUDGE MAY: Now, Mr. Milosevic, you've been cross-examining for half an hour. We have not got beyond the first page of his statement, the witness's statement. As you know, it contains the most serious allegations of mistreatment. He was present at an execution. All of that he describes. If you're going to challenge that, you should do so in the next half hour rather than dealing with these preliminary matters.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I fully challenge that, because this is certainly not true. However, I do not expect the witness to say that this is not true, because the witnesses who come here, some of them, say such untruths that somebody probably had to instruct them to behave that way. You don't really think that --

JUDGE MAY: You don't -- you don't make a speech now. If you're going to challenge that this witness is telling untruths, then you must put it to him so he's got a chance to answer. And if you're making suggestions about instructions of how witnesses should give evidence, then you must put them to the witnesses so they can answer. It's no good making wild allegations to us.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right. All right. A short ⁴⁶²¹ while ago, the witness said that after the offensive, the KLA had been broken.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Is that correct?

A. That's right.

Q. And before that, you said that in that -- that the KLA did not even participate in that offensive. How could it be shattered in an offensive in which it did not even participate?

A. It is possible because of the shelling by the Serbian army. The KLA had no -- was not able to confront this. The KLA kept up its morale and tried to strengthen itself after the offensive. I have never been a member of the KLA myself, but I regret it now that I wasn't a member. And I kindly ask you to read my statement to see that if I had a gun myself --

Q. I didn't ask you that, whether you were sorry that you were not a member of the KLA. I didn't ask you that.

JUDGE MAY: One at a time. Now, what's the next question?

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Do you know, do you know that in 1998 there were very intensive actions launched by the KLA terrorists against the police and against other citizens precisely in your area; Selimi Sulltan, Zoltarasahi [phoen] Jashari from Donji Prekazi, Sabit Geci from Lausa? They figured the most prominently. As a matter of fact, he was wounded and he found shelter in Baks, in your village. Do you know them and do you know about these events in view of the role of your village in that? Do you know about that? ⁴⁶²²

A. That is not true that Shabit Geci came to Baks village. That is untrue. And he was not injured in Baks village. And I have not heard that Sulltan Selimi, as you call him, has attacked anyone. Or Jashari, I didn't get well the name you mentioned; I have not heard of them attacking the police. I have no information about that.

Q. All right. You don't know anything about this.

A. No.

Q. Let's not waste any time since you don't know anything about this. And do you remember, for example, as far as back as 1994 --

A. You should ask me about what I know and what I have testified.

Q. I'm asking you because you're a very informed person. You worked as a hodza, and you know everybody in the area.

As far as back as 1994, do you know Shefqet Dibrani, a forest keeper who was maltreated and afterwards killed by the KLA? Have you heard of him?

A. Shefqet Dibrani was killed by your offspring, not by the KLA. He was killed in Skenderaj. And you know very well who killed him, Mr. Milosevic.

Q. All right. So you do know of the killing of Shefqet Dibrani, a forestkeeper employed by the state.

JUDGE MAY: He's given his answer. Don't -- there's no need to go on. Yes, let's move on.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. And do you remember when these same terrorists maltreated Halim Halil and his father Hasan, a farmer from Cirez? Do you know about that? ⁴⁶²³

A. Yes, I know.

Q. And can you tell me how many young men the KLA recruited in the village of Baks and Cirez?

A. Yes.

Q. How many were recruited?

A. In Baks, there were seven, and four in Cirez, as far as I know.

Q. Only those 11?

A. Those are the ones I know.

Q. All right. They were recruited forcibly by the KLA; is that right or is that not right?

A. Not forcibly. As I said, I would have wished to have been a member of the KLA, looking back today, but I didn't have that luck.

Q. All right. But I'm not asking you about that. You claim that they were not forcibly recruited. And now, is it correct that as a hodza -- as a hodza, you convoyed messages from Allah about a jihad, a holy war, to these same soldiers? Is that right or is that not right?

A. No, that's not true.

Q. And is it true -- is it true that in 1994, among the hodzas an agreement was reached to say to the faithful that they can take false oaths before the authorities and that that is the agreement that was reached among the hodzas? Is that right?

A. No, that's not true. I have -- I can say that what is in my statement is absolutely true, everything that I said. But Mr. Milosevic is not asking me about my statement, because when I was taken prisoner --

JUDGE MAY: Just try and answer the questions, if you would. ⁴⁶²⁴

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. All right. In your statement, do you not know actually about a single element about this, that the hodzas agreed that the faithful can take false oaths? You don't know nothing about that?

JUDGE MAY: He said it's not true, so there's no point arguing about it.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. All right. In your statement, you do not explain at all the period between September 1998 to March 1999. Where were you in that period and what did you do?

A. As I said before, 20 and 25 of us went back to the village with the USA and I was there in my village, and we had some tents and improvised shelters in my village, and that's where we were up to 29th, 30th April, when the second offensive came, I can say one of the toughest offensives that ever took place in Kosova in what is known as Fusha e Molles.

Q. All right. So you were in the village all that time. All right. But in the statement, you say that you were arrested in the forest on the 29th of April, between Baks, Vrbovac, and Cirez, in that triangle.

A. Yes.

Q. You say that 11 persons were arrested with you and that all of them were your relatives. Is that right?

A. Yes.

Q. If they are your relatives, how come you don't know the three -- ⁴⁶²⁵ three -- the names of three of them?

A. These names were not mentioned because they were not from my village. So I didn't mention the names. I only mentioned the names of the people from my village. Because on that day when we were captured in Fusha e Molles, which is surrounded by the villages of Baks, Cirez, Trstenik, Glogar, Studica, Gllogofc, this place is known as Fusha e Molles, and on that day --

JUDGE MAY: Don't go on for a minute. Yes, Mr. Milosevic, the next question.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. So you were arrested in the village or were you arrested in the forest? You said that you were arrested in the forest, and now you said that you were arrested in the village. So where were you arrested; in the forest or in the village?

A. I didn't say in the village but in the place called Fusha e Molles. We had -- all those villages that I mentioned, people had been expelled from them. And we were gathered - men, women, children, the elderly, young people - on Fusha e Molles.

Q. All right. You've answered my question. When you were arrested, where did they take you?

A. They took us to the mosque at the village of Cirez, which is now being demolished.

Q. All right. If you were arrested and if you were taken to the mosque in the village of Cirez, how did you know what was happening on the 29th of April when you were arrested? ^{4626 BLANK PAGE 4627}

JUDGE MAY: I don't follow that question. What do you mean?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The question is the following: If he was arrested and taken to the mosque, how could he know what was happening on that day when he was not there?

JUDGE MAY: Which passage in the statement are you referring to?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can say that --

JUDGE MAY: Let's see what the question is.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I can see the paragraph now. He has two statements here. He speaks about events --

JUDGE MAY: Is this the passage you have in mind: "On Friday, the 29th of April, a new, very big Serb offensive started against the entire area. The offensive lasted for three days. Area after area was attacked day by day."

Now, the question is: If you were in the mosque, how did you know what was going on elsewhere?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] When they captured us that day, it was 29th of April, and they took us to the mosque, and that night, we stayed in the mosque. On the next day, we saw them attacking again the place where we had been captured. And in the morning, about three jeeps came, three or four, belonging to the Serbian military, and they took out 176 people who had been in the mosque, and they took us to Gllogoc. Before taking us to Gllogoc, in the place known as Shavari, three trucks came, and although there were people still remaining at the mosque, about 32 people were taken off the trucks at Shavari, and I saw with my own eyes, I saw them being shot. ⁴⁶²⁸

JUDGE MAY: That's what you yourself saw and experienced.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. I was present myself.

JUDGE MAY: Is there anything else or any other knowledge which you have? You say, "The offensive lasted for three days," and, "Area after area was attacked day by day."

Now, what is that based on?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is what I heard, going to Shavarina. And after I went to Gllogoc, they kept us in the cinema, and then they brought another group from there to Gllogoc, and then they told us that they were still fighting, the offensive was still continuing.

JUDGE MAY: Yes.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Who was fighting? Well, thank you that my turn has finally come. So who was fighting?

A. It wasn't fighting, it was civilians. A child of nine was killed, a five-month-old child was killed. Elderly people were killed.

Q. Please. You said only a minute ago, "They were still fighting." "They were still fighting," and then when I ask you who, and then you say there was no fighting. So were they fighting or were they not fighting? Yes or no. Let's not waste any time.

A. I said it was not fighting, it was fighting against civilians. I said that we were there with our members of our families.

Q. All right. All right. I know about that explanation. According to that explanation, the KLA was not fighting at all. Please. You say that they took you to -- ⁴⁶²⁹

A. It fought when the need arose.

Q. All right. So then you claim that there was no need for them to struggle --

THE INTERPRETER: Interpreters note that it is impossible to interpret two speakers at a time.

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Salihu, would you wait, please, until the interpretation is finished. Otherwise, there is difficulty for the interpreters.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, there is a problem. He knows Serbian and he wants to answer straightaway. He can't wait for all this stage management.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. You say that they took you to some field, that they beat you in the process and that they had the intention -- you claim that they had the intention to kill you by a tank, by trampling over you with a tank. And then since NATO aeroplanes were flying above, they did not start the tank. They fled from NATO aircraft. That is to say that you were free then, because our soldiers had fled from you. Is that right or is that not right?

You say that the Serb soldiers fled to the woods, including --

JUDGE MAY: Let him answer what's being put.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] When they captured us, we were 65 people. They laid us out on the ground. They beat us. And one of the leaders of the military gave the order to push us back.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] ⁴⁶³⁰

Q. Please. That was not my question.

A. That is in my statement, sir.

JUDGE MAY: Let him explain. Now, what happened? What happened when the aircraft came?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] He ordered us -- the tank to trample over us, our bodies, but at that moment, thanks to God and NATO, the tank changed its direction and we were safe. Then they took us to the mosque.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. You said that the soldiers fled into the woods. You stayed in that meadow by yourselves.

A. I didn't mention that. The army, soldiers were around us. They were guarding us with their guns, automatic. And then they took us to the mosque.

Q. Please. Let us clear this up. They wanted to kill you with a tank, and since they did not kill you with a tank, they fled into the woods and then you were free. Does that mean that they returned yet again and arrested you again?

A. Mr. Milosevic, don't mix up my statement, please. I said that the tank changed its direction, but army was there. It was very close to us; maybe three, four metres away.

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Salihu, in fairness to what the accused is putting, let me read out what it says in your statement. "The man in charge for the paramilitary unit ordered the driver of a tank to start the engine and run over us. We were in two lines, and the tank manoeuvred in direction to us. At the same time, NATO aeroplanes ⁴⁶³¹ came and were circled over the area. All the Serb forces ran away into the woods, including the driver of the tank. The NATO aeroplanes stayed in the air for ten minutes. When the planes left, we were ordered to march in the direction of Cirez. The tank left in the direction of Studica. We had to march with our hands behind our heads." Now, the question was: How was it, if the Serb forces ran into the woods, that you came to be ordered to march in the direction of Cirez?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] They only went away, let's say three metres or five metres, not more. They wanted to hide the tank from NATO planes, but the army troops were there, were very close to us. We were prisoners at that moment.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Was that in the morning?

A. It was about 1.00, 2.00; midday.

Q. Around noon then, midday. In broad daylight Serbian tanks are moving and NATO aircraft are flying, and they did not manage to notice Serb tanks that were moving. Are you trying to say that?

A. Yes. I don't know whether the NATO planes saw the tanks or not. This I can't say. I know only this: Thanks to NATO, we managed to escape.

Q. All right. Well, obviously they couldn't see him. And you claim that they could not see a tank in broad daylight, at midday.

JUDGE MAY: It's not a matter for him. He's given his evidence. There's nothing more he can say.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I don't know what military experts ⁴⁶³² would say about this particular statement.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. From that place to the place of Shavarina, how long did that journey of yours take?

A. From there, it is about five kilometres where the mosque of Cirez is situated. This is where they took us. We spent the night there. The mosque was destroyed. It was burned. Only the walls were still standing.

Q. All right. That's not what I'm asking you. As we have to save time, let me ask you this: Did you travel in trucks or on foot?

A. [Previous translation continues]... telling you how they went there. From Fusha e Molles to the mosque, we walked on foot. From the mosque to Shavarina, we went there by trucks.

Q. Afterwards?

A. From Shavarina, again by trucks to Gllogoc.

Q. All right. Now we've come to the question that I asked you to begin with and I didn't get an answer to. Shavarina and Glogovac, you went on your way in trucks; is that right?

A. That's right.

Q. Did those trucks have tarpaulins?

A. No.

Q. So they were open trucks, were they?

A. Yes.

Q. And in addition to yourself, how many other people were in the truck?

A. There were about 22 besides me. That is we were, altogether, 23 ⁴⁶³³ persons. And I think that the same can be said of other -- the other three trucks.

Q. And how many trucks were there in all?

A. There were three. When they first took us from Cirez to Shavarina in the first crowd, the first group. But there were still people left behind, at the mosque. One of the trucks, as I said, the people on that truck were executed. I think they were about 32 people. They shot them. I saw them being shot at with my own eyes.

The second truck and the third truck, they went to Gllogoc. Then a jeep came from Gllogoc, they said something among themselves, and then from there, the two other trucks were sent to Gllogoc, to the cinema.

JUDGE MAY: Time is limited so perhaps you could just keep the answers fairly short. Yes.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. How far were the trucks spaced out, one away from the other?

A. As the case is usually with trucks driving one behind another. I didn't have a metre to measure. They may be 10, 15 metres away from one another.

Q. And in which truck in line were you?

A. I was on the third truck.

Q. And you say that in every truck there were about 20 people and that all the trucks were open. Is that it?

A. I say that there were from 20 to 30 people in every truck, and they were open, without any tarpaulin.

Q. Why did they use so many trucks if there were only 20 people in ^{4634 BLANK PAGE 4635} each truck?

A. There were 176 persons, sir. Some people were still left behind in the mosque. I told you. We were about 65 people who left.

Q. I'm talking about the people in the trucks. Now, from which truck were these people taken down whom you claim were shot?

A. From the first truck. They ordered them to get down, and they were lined up in three rows. Three Serb soldiers with mortars and automatic rifles shot them one by one. I saw them being shot at with my own eyes.

Q. Mr. Abdullah, you don't wish to say that they were shot by mortars. Surely they weren't shot that way. And from a truck where there were 20 to 30, surely they did just not take down 30-odd people. Do you realise what you're saying?

A. I understand very well, but I think you don't understand me. I went through that myself.

JUDGE MAY: Just a moment. Did you say "mortars"? That was the way it was translated.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I said mortar at the end. Yes, when they were shot, they threw also a mortar -- a hand grenade, actually. I haven't spoken about that yet. It is at the end of my statement.

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Milosevic, your time is now up. You can ask two or three more questions.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, after this, I don't know whether I need ask any more questions.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] ⁴⁶³⁶

Q. But can you tell me the names of the people who were executed? They were all people from your village.

A. I could tell you. Some of them I don't remember. There were three -- the first three who were killed, their bodies were burned. Now, Xhevat Osmani, Sejdi Osmani, Hysen Zaqiri, they were burned.

Q. Now, that's a new fact. Please. In your statement, you claim that people were killed with three --

A. I didn't mention them in my statement, but he asked me about the village. Thirty-eight people were killed in my village, but I didn't note these people in my statement, but he asked me about my village, and I'm giving details about how many were killed in my village.

Q. Out of 34 people killed from your village, how many of them were members of the KLA of those 38? Thirty-eight people killed, sorry.

A. There were no members of the KLA. Five-year-old children, infants, elderly people of 80 or 90, how can they be members of the KLA?

Q. All right. Very well. I -- now with respect to the execution that you've been talking about, you claim in your statement -- let me refresh your memory -- you say that people were killed with three, four individual bullets. Is that right? Is that what you're saying?

A. That's right.

Q. And a moment ago, you said that they were all killed from a machine-gun, a mortar, and so on and so forth, and now you've added that they were burnt too, that they burnt.

A. I would ask this gentleman -- I said they were killed by individual shots, not by a volley of shots. And after the execution was ⁴⁶³⁷ finished, they threw a grenade on top of them. This is what I saw with my own eyes. This is a hundred per cent true.

JUDGE MAY: That will conclude the examination. Mr. Kay, is there anything you want to ask?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right.

MR. KAY: Yes. Thank you, Your Honour. Questioned by Mr. Kay:

Q. Mr. Salihu, you told the Court that on the 29th of April, as a result of a Serb offensive, that was when you moved from your area; is that right? Just say yes or no.

A. Yes.

Q. I want to ask you about what happened the day before that, as in your statement you've told this account, that on Thursday, the 28th of April, NATO aeroplanes attacked Ferronikel factories in Gllogoc.

A. Yes, uh-huh. There were Serbs there and, for that reason, NATO attacked it.

Q. Were you in your village of Baks at that time?

A. No. I was at Fusha e Molles. It's nearby, about two or three kilometres away. Two or three kilometres away, Fusha e Molles, from Baks.

Q. Were you able to see NATO planes bombing the factories?

A. Yes. We only saw the vapour in the air because we were in a kind of valley. And this was about seven or eight or nine kilometres away from us. Ferronikel is quite a distance away.

Q. The Ferronikel factories, are they close to the centre of the town of Gllogoc, near the railway station? ⁴⁶³⁸

A. No, further north. Fairly nearby.

Q. Were you able to see the effects of this bombing, what damage was caused to the town?

A. No, because we were in a valley. We only saw the smoke rising when there was bombing.

Q. Did you travel near that area after you moved from the 29th of April?

A. That time I was travelling in a truck, when we were taken from Fusha e Molles to the mosque and then from the mosque onwards.

MR. KAY: Thank you. No further questions. Re-examined by Mr. Saxon:

Q. Mr. Salihu, Mr. Kay asked you some questions about the 28th of April when NATO planes attacked the Ferronikel factory, and you made a comment that I'd like you to clarify, if you can. You mentioned that there were Serbs there - that's what you said - at that factory. What did you mean by that, that there were Serbs there?

A. There were tanks, Serbian artillery, and the heaviest artillery that they had, which they kept in various places, at large buildings.

Q. These tanks and artillery were located at the Ferronikel factory that was bombed by NATO?

A. When NATO bombed, I can't tell what there was inside, but certainly before the NATO bombing, there were tanks there.

Q. Thank you.

MR. SAXON: I'd like to ask the assistance of the usher and of the Registrar if Exhibit 17, a photo collage, could be placed on the ELMO, ⁴⁶³⁹ please. I'd like to ask the witness a question about it.

Q. While that's being done, Mr. Salihu, the accused asked you about the events of the 30th of April when you witnessed men being executed at Shavarina. You mentioned how three trucks came to the mosque, and the three trucks carried men to Shavarina, and over 30 men were taken off the truck --

A. Yes.

MR. SAXON: I'd like, Mr. Usher, if you could place that photo collage on the ELMO so the witness can take a look at those photographs.

Q. Mr. Salihu, could you please take a look at the pages with photographs that are to your left. Take a look at the photographs themselves, Mr. Salihu. And if you could, please, tell us if you see on those photographs a vehicle that resembles the trucks on which the men were transported to Shavarina on that day. There's several pages there, so you may need to flip through the pages.

A. This one.

Q. What number is that, Mr. Salihu? What number photograph?

A. Number 8.

Q. Thank you.

MR. SAXON: I have nothing further, Your Honour.

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Salihu, 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 for inviting me here to say what I went through myself.

[The witness withdrew] ⁴⁶⁴⁰

JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Ryneveld.

MR. RYNEVELD: Thank you, Your Honours. The next witness that we have scheduled is presently listed as Witness K4. I believe you have been advised by my colleague that this witness no longer seeks protective measures, and accordingly, will be proposing to give evidence live, as it were, without protective measures subject to, of course, our application before the court to have the evidence by way of 92 bis. Having said that, to this point, I'm not aware if the Court has had an opportunity to rule on our application to have his evidence go in the way of 92 bis, and so before I actually call him, I wonder whether perhaps that could be clarified.

JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Kay.

MR. KAY: Yes, Your Honour. We received last night by fax a memorandum from the Registry, saying that this particular witness would be subject to attestation under the 92 bis procedure, and he is within the document filed by the Prosecution on the 2nd of May in which there's an attachment A, I believe Your Honours will be familiar with it, in which there is a large number of witnesses, the remaining witnesses within the Prosecution case, concerning this part of the joined indictment in which he features in that schedule as a witness that they would like to be included within the 92 bis procedure.

The amici, at this moment, are still dealing with this motion as it involves a great deal of work for us to assess and evaluate the witnesses and make our own judgement about whether that would be appropriate or not in our view. ^{4641 BLANK PAGE 4642} I've been able to read the statement of this witness, K4. He is one of the insiders, a military man giving a great deal of detail, as he says, from what happened in Kosovo at this time as an insider within the military. It may well be that the Court has not had a chance to read his statement. I don't know.

JUDGE MAY: We have. We have.

MR. KAY: Good.

JUDGE MAY: And it's true that there is detail. Most of it is related to one municipality and the activities there, and of course, one particular execution and massacre, it deals with that. It does deal with other matters.

MR. KAY: There is generality about the involvement of paramilitaries, the involvement of others within what took place in that particular region. If the Court permits the 92 bis procedure in relation to this witness, if I can put it that way, certainly there may well be a great deal of questioning from the accused which would exceed the normal hour with which he is allotted. One can see many issues.

JUDGE MAY: That's something we would have to consider.

MR. KAY: But again, I raise this flag whether this Court would want this witness to go under the 92 bis procedure itself, because he is a witness of perhaps greater substance in relation to allegations within the indictment against the accused; whether that would be appropriate, we raise with the Court, because there would be concerns about it.

[Trial Chamber confers]

JUDGE MAY: We will admit this witness's statement under Rule 92 ⁴⁶⁴³ bis since it is concerned with one municipality in the main. And although it is true it deals with some matters to do with the organisation of the VJ and the like, the evidence is cumulative in the sense that other witnesses give evidence about it, and it's cumulative in relation to Djakovica, the municipality involved.

However, I think it right to say, Mr. Ryneveld, that we will look carefully, when it comes to these insider witnesses, as to whether Rule 92 bis is appropriate, and perhaps you would do the same. Perhaps you could reconsider the matter. I know there's a need for expedition, but we've got to balance the two.

MR. RYNEVELD: Absolutely, Your Honour. You must appreciate that the Prosecution is prepared to proceed with live witnesses wherever necessary, but time constraints and expedition, we just propose, in order to attempt to meet the schedule, we must take whatever appropriate attempt that we can to put the evidence fairly before the Court in the most efficient manner, and for this witness, we felt that that was appropriate, to submit him for 92 bis. It may be that for the others, we will have to reconsider.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. The other point is that we will reconsider the time limits on the cross-examination, given the scope of the witness's statement.

MR. RYNEVELD: Yes, and I may ask for the Court's indulgence with respect to this witness, for some indulgence on the five minutes that I need for preliminary questions, because some of the exhibits -- the Court may well benefit from a few questions about some of the exhibits that were ⁴⁶⁴⁴ attached to his statements in order to get some explanations as to how they came into being, because without a couple of words of explanation, that may be of some problem for the Court in understanding their significance.

[Trial Chamber confers]

MR. RYNEVELD: I'm only talking about the two maps.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. Some explanation of the maps. The other point is we're not -- just one moment. We're not sitting -- we're not sitting in this case tomorrow.

MR. RYNEVELD: No. I'm aware of that.

JUDGE MAY: So is the witness available for Monday, if need be?

MR. RYNEVELD: Yes, I believe so.

JUDGE MAY: Thank you. Yes.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I should like to draw your attention to the fact that this is not the first time that the other side over there holds a secret witness and then, on the day when that witness is to be examined, they explain that he is no longer a secret witness but a public witness. And everyone is aware of the fact how limited the possibilities are of amassing any kind of information about a secret witness. The same thing happened with the witness Veton Surroi, who was assigned a number K-something until the day he appeared to testify here and then he testified quite normally as a live witness and without any restrictions or limitations. Now we're faced with the same situation. As this is a repeat of the first situation -- that is to say, the first time, I thought it was just a mistake. Now as it's repeated itself, ⁴⁶⁴⁵ I don't think it is a mistake, I think it is ill-intentioned because it limits the possibility of collecting information about the secret witness, and then when he comes to be examined, he is proclaimed to be a public witness.

At the same time, this witness is being introduced before the witness that was supposed to testify - Isuf Loku - and not him. So we thought that he would be -- it was stated that he would be on Thursday, and Thursday is a full working day. So why are we skipping a witness again?

So once again, there is a change in the order of witnesses. I insist upon having a strict list and order for the witnesses at least for a week in advance and not to allow that order to be disturbed in any way and changed. If the other side is incapable of respecting the order and list of witnesses at least for a week, then it should be at its detriment and not at the detriment of the elementary functioning of even an illegal Tribunal of this nature.

JUDGE MAY: We have dealt already with the Prosecution with the problems of the order of the list and required them where, unless it's absolutely essential, to stick to the list.

Your allegation that there is ill-intention is one without substance. If we thought there was any question of motive or anything of that sort, we would not allow the Prosecution to do it. There is none. The witness has changed his mind about the protection, as I understand it.

Mr. Ryneveld, is that the position? ⁴⁶⁴⁶

MR. RYNEVELD: Absolutely, Your Honour. If I may just make a couple of comments about the allegation that's totally improper, the suggestion that the Prosecution is somehow making this witness public for some improper motive.

The fact -- the fact is he's not been a secret witness to this accused. He's not been a secret witness to the amici. They have known his identity. The only issue was whether or not, when he testified, whether he would be testifying with a pseudonym and facial protection or not. This witness has indicated to the Prosecution that he now feels that he wants to testify openly. And in the interests of a public and transparent trial, we would encourage that wherever possible, and that is the reason and no other. But the accused has known this witness's identity, his real identity, it's not been secret to him. Secondly, we have also indicated that this particular witness will be been to testify on the 9th of May in the letters we have provided. We have always indicated that that was the date we intended to call the witness. If, because the scheduling and witnesses taking longer, we didn't get to Mr. Loku prior to today, that is a matter that's totally out of our hands, but we've always indicated that Witness K4 would be testifying today.

And so with respect, the allegations are -- have no basis in fact.

JUDGE MAY: It's now --

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Just one question.

JUDGE MAY: No. The matter is now concluded. It is now time for the adjournment. We will adjourn for 20 ⁴⁶⁴⁷ minutes.

--- Recess taken at 10.30 a.m.

--- On resuming at 10.50 a.m.

[The witness entered court]

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

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

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

WITNESS: NIKE PERAJ

[Witness answered through interpreter] Examined by Mr. Ryneveld:

Q. Mr. Peraj, would you give your full name to the Court, please.

A. My name is Nike Peraj.

Q. And Mr. Peraj, I understand, sir, that you are 55 years old, and you're a former teacher, and that you then became a captain in the Yugoslav army. Is that correct?

A. Yes.

Q. And you remained a captain until sometime in June of 1999, just three days prior to NATO troops entering Kosovo; is that correct?

A. Yes, a First Class Captain.

Q. Yes. And I understand, sir, that when you left the Yugoslav army, you were subsequently convicted in absentia by a military court for desertion; is that correct?

A. Yes. That's what I've heard. But I have not received any document officially. ^{4648 BLANK PAGE 4649}

Q. You've heard that that's what happened, and you were tried and convicted and sentenced for desertion from the army?

A. Yes.

Q. I understand, sir, that your ethnicity is Albanian and that you are an ethnic Albanian, born in Kosovo; correct?

A. Yes.

Q. But you belong to the Catholic faith. You're not Muslim.

A. Yes.

Q. And I understand, sir, that you're married, with three children.

A. Yes.

Q. Now, sir, did you give various statements to members of the Office of the Prosecutor of this Tribunal, the first of which was on the 18th of April of the year 2000? Did you provide a statement at that time?

A. Yes.

Q. And subsequently, did you provide a second statement in February of 2001, also to members of the Office of the Prosecutor?

A. Yes.

Q. And at that time, sir, did you provide some maps to attach as -- to attach to that second statement?

A. Yes, that's true.

Q. Now, sir, I understand that subsequent to that, you arrived at the Tribunal and that yesterday, the 8th of May, you had an opportunity to review those statements in a language known to you and that you appeared before a presiding officer and made a solemn declaration that the statements you gave, as amended by you, were true to the best of your ⁴⁶⁵⁰ information and belief. Is that correct?

A. Yes.

Q. Now, at the time that you reviewed those statements, did you make some corrections to them before you gave your solemn declaration?

A. Yes.

Q. And were those corrections recorded on -- on paper, and did you also solemnly declare that those corrections were true?

A. Yes.

MR. RYNEVELD: Your Honours, at this point I would like to tender a package, if I may, of the 92 bis procedure. And there are copies. Those passages would include all three, if I can call it that, statements, which included yesterday's corrections and the maps which are attached to the second statement. And I want to make this observation: That on the documents with the corrections yesterday, most of the cover pages, et cetera, all have the correct date, i.e., the 8th of May, 2002. However, the cover page of the corrections say the 18th of April. So that was just something that was missed off the cover page. That would be at ERN number that you have in the package, K0223426. That cover page has the date of the 18th of April because, when it was used as a precedent, they didn't change the date. But all other references show the 8th of May, 2002. Before I read the summary, I wonder whether -- I'm sorry.

THE REGISTRAR: Okay. Your Honours, that will be marked Prosecutor's Exhibit number 143.

MR. RYNEVELD: Thank you, Madam Registrar. I would propose before reading a very brief summary of these ⁴⁶⁵¹ statements, Your Honour, if this would be an appropriate time for me to ask the witness to clarify for the benefit of the Court these maps, just so that the Court can make some sense of them.

JUDGE MAY: Yes.

MR. RYNEVELD: Thank you. First I would ask that this large map be put on the ELMO, and perhaps Mr. Usher can assist. Unfortunately, Your Honours, the copy that I have has two colours on it, green and blue, but the copies that Your Honours would have are photocopies and, therefore, only show up in black. But there are three -- do we have three colour copies? We have the original and two copies in colour. Both the amici and the accused would have received these by disclosure a long time ago, with the appropriate colours, in the coloured version.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. Let it be put on the ELMO and be given a separate exhibit number in a moment.

MR. RYNEVELD:

Q. Now, Witness, first of all, I would like you to look at the map that is presently on the ELMO. First of all, do you recognise that document as a document that you made some notations on during the course of the taking of your second statement?

A. Yes.

Q. And the colour that -- the map that you're looking at, does it have some markings in green pen and some markings in blue pen?

A. Yes.

Q. And what were you attempting to describe in making these markings ⁴⁶⁵² on this map? If we could start looking at the top of the map, if I can call it that, there is a marking --

A. The buildings marked and ringed in green are positions of places where the commands were stationed, garrison commanders, in Gjakove, and part of the command of the Pristina Corps at different times, also noted there. And in blue, I show where members of the police, i.e., police commands, were placed.

Q. All right. So the green represents the VJ or the military, the army; is that correct?

A. The army, yes.

Q. And blue signifies the MUP; is that correct?

A. Yes, that's right.

Q. Now, very briefly, sir, because time is of the essence and Their Honours will have had the benefit of reading your statement, perhaps you could simply outline for us, if we start at the top of the map at -- where I see at the end it's K2.4, do you know what that -- do you see the reference I'm making? Yes. Just put your pointer, so we're all clear what I'm talking about. No, to the right. To the right. Yes, right there. The green -- yes, right there.

There are some things between two streets?

A. That was a private house, and in the cellar, the military police was stationed with soldiers and guards.

Q. Okay. Then to your left, just moving down the map, if we can. At sort of the bottom of a curve, just to the left. Yes. What is that?

A. This was a building with -- also with a cellar where the command ⁴⁶⁵³ of the Gjakove brigade was.

Q. All right. And there's both green and blue there. What does the green signify?

A. Green signifies the institute for social security in Gjakove, and this is where the police, the MUP, were sighted.

Q. And there's also blue there in that location.

A. Green. And blue again. And this was part of the Pristina Corps, but the number 1 here shows that there was a police team here. There was part of the police here too.

Q. All right. Perhaps you could indicate to us, just down below that, we see numbers where there is K2.3. What is that?

A. They stayed here two to three days.

Q. I'm sorry, I --

A. They stayed here two to three days, but I haven't noted here in which month.

Q. All right. No, I'm just actually using the 2.3 as being a location. What was located there, sir, where you have the green circle? I'm just using those numbers to identify the location on the map for the record.

A. 2.3 was the command of the brigade here in Gjakove, in a private house, in the cellar.

Q. All right. Sir, I'm going to try to speed this up a little bit by asking you, can you point out on this map for us the location of the Pristina Corps, if it is in fact on this map. The Pristina Corps garrison. ⁴⁶⁵⁴

A. This was near the Lajci Cafe, on what was called Marsal Tito Street, now Mother Theresa Street. And in front of it there was an old barracks in -- here, in Gjakove.

Q. All right. And just for the record, you pointed to --

A. This is marked with Roman I, 2.5.

Q. And just so that we're clear where you're pointing, you're now pointing off --

A. Was --

Q. -- to the left of the map, near the legend; is that correct?

A. Yes.

Q. All right. You were earlier referring to a location where we see Roman numeral III under the letters "ARBR." What is that? Down.

A. Point III --

Q. Yes.

A. Where the command went to take shelter. This was the command.

Q. All right. And finally, can you indicate to us where the 52nd Rocket Artillery Brigade was located that's referred to in the statement?

A. The ARBR -- in all the places where there is ARBR are places where the anti-aircraft artillery had its command.

Q. ARBR means the Rocket Artillery Brigade, that's the way to shorten that?

A. Yes.

Q. I see. And finally, there is some blue at the bottom, right-hand corner of the map where it says "Mustafa Bakia" and there's the words "MUP." What is that big circle? What does that signify? ^{4655 BLANK PAGE 4656}

A. From the MUP building, everybody moved over to the new part of the Mustafa Bakia school and also the old Mustafa Bakia school. There are two schools here, but the small blue circles here are all private houses where policemen lived.

Q. All right. I want to move on to another map, if I may, now, and that is also --

JUDGE MAY: Before you do, that should have an exhibit number.

THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honours. This will be marked Prosecutor's Exhibit number 143.1.

MR. RYNEVELD: Thank you, Your Honour.

Q. Moving to a second map - and I'll do this as quickly as I can - you also made some markings on a -- a map of the Gjakove area during the course of the interview. Do you recall doing that? The second map.

A. Yes.

MR. RYNEVELD: And this is an A4 size piece of paper, Your Honours. It looks like that, and it should be attached to the 92 bis package.

Now, it's this map in particular that's extremely hard to read, and I have discussed with the amici the fact that the Court may well be assisted by a computer-generated map, and I will ask some questions about that. And you don't have that yet, but I propose to make some sense of this by using a computer-generated improvement.

Q. First of all, sir, this map that you now have with -- bearing ERN number K0223471, you see that map?

A. Yes. ⁴⁶⁵⁷

Q. What is that a map of?

A. This is a map of Gjakove.

Q. All right. And did you, during the course of the interview, make some markings, some handwritten markings, on this map; draw some circles, draw some dates, draw some arrows?

A. Yes.

Q. All right. And have you, during the course of the interview yesterday been shown some computer-generated documents and compared them to the markings you made on this map? Were you shown some documents?

MR. RYNEVELD: Perhaps we could distribute those. I'm going to be asking that the Court accept them, but -- with my friend's permission. But the accused, although it's been disclosed to them in the past, they haven't been marked as an exhibit, but they would certainly assist the Court in understanding his evidence.

JUDGE MAY: Yes.

MR. RYNEVELD: Thank you. I would like a copy of each of these maps, please, placed on the ELMO. The first one is the one with the red sort of orangey circle, which is a photocopy of the map that was attached to the 92 bis.

Q. Very briefly, sir. This is a copy of the same map upon which you made markings earlier; is that correct?

A. Yes.

Q. And the area circled in red on this map, is that the area of Decani that you were trying to describe in the course of your statement?

A. Yes. Yes, entirely. Yes. ⁴⁶⁵⁸

MR. RYNEVELD: Might the witness now be shown a second map with some markings on it?

Q. Witness, I'm now asking you to now look at the map now placed on the ELMO. This is again an enlarged portion of the map that you drew your personal markings on. Have you, yesterday, had an opportunity to compare the notations you made with the computer-generated markings on this particular map?

A. Yes.

Q. What can you tell the Court about whether or not this map accurately depicts what you were trying to draw on the map produced into evidence earlier? How does it compare?

A. Entirely the same.

Q. With reference to the --

JUDGE MAY: These should have separate exhibit numbers.

MR. RYNEVELD: Thank you.

JUDGE MAY: Let's deal with that now. First of all, I take it you want to deal with the photocopy of the whole municipality with the various figures on it which is illegible but no doubt you would like it exhibited.

MR. RYNEVELD: Yes, I would. Thank you, Your Honour.

JUDGE MAY: That would have the next exhibit number, please.

THE REGISTRAR: Your Honour, that map is actually included in the 92 bis package.

JUDGE MAY: Well, no, but give it a separate number now.

THE REGISTRAR: That would be marked Prosecutor's Exhibit 143.2.

JUDGE MAY: And next, the map with the red on it. ⁴⁶⁵⁹

THE REGISTRAR: Prosecutor's Exhibit 143.3.

JUDGE MAY: And finally, the one with the various markings on it.

THE REGISTRAR: That will be, Your Honour, Prosecutor's Exhibit 143.4.

MR. RYNEVELD: Thank you.

Q. Now, Witness, in the course of your statement, you made some markings on Exhibit 143.4, the one that is before you on the ELMO. Can you describe for us, if you would, please, very briefly, what the red arrows signify.

A. The red arrows mark the displacement of the population and their movements in the direction of Gjakove from the valley of Carragojs and from the village of Korenica towards Gjakove.

Q. All right. And maybe you could use your pointer because there are two red arrows, tell us which red arrow refers to which. You are now talking about the one starting near the stop and working down towards the bottom. Yes. Diagonal line.

A. The longest red arrow shows the movement of the population from the Carragojs Valley, as it's called, towards the village of Meja and to Gjakove. And on the left, the curved red arrow shows the --

Q. [Previous translation continues]...

A. -- displacement of the population towards Gjakove.

Q. The blue arrow, which seems to be parallel to the first of the two red arrows, which -- what does that signify?

A. The blue arrow shows the direction of the attack of the special forces of the MUP, and alongside it, there's another arrow in green which ⁴⁶⁶⁰ shows the direction of the attack of the military forces belonging to the 63rd Parachute Brigade from Nis. And on the right and on the left, these green lines, thick green lines, show the blockade of the entire territory by military forces.

Q. And you've described that in your statement, have you, sir?

A. Yes. And these circles --

Q. Yes. First of all --

A. -- in green --

Q. -- the green circle where there is a black box indicating an arrow to it, what does that circle mean?

A. The command of the operation consisting of officers of the army, which commanded operations in the field, was sited here in the place called Qafa e Osekut. That's the name of the hill. And from here, you can see the entire territory in which this operation was conducted.

Q. I'm going to stop you there for a minute and ask you this question: Where were you on the 27th of April, 1999, when you indicated in your statement that you saw these things happening? Where were you located, physically located in order to be able to draw these arrows?

A. On the 27th, in the morning, I arrived from Nis. And when I heard from my brother what was happening there --

Q. Now let me focus the question. Where physically were you, standing or sitting or whatever you were doing, when you were able to observe? Where were you physically?

A. Physically, when I saw these things, I was in Meja and in Korenica. ⁴⁶⁶¹

Q. Okay. This place called Osek, were you ever there on the 27th of April? Or the 28th?

A. No. On the 27th, I was not at the Qafa e Osekut. I was there on the 28th, in the morning.

Q. All right.

A. And also in the village of Duzhnje and Nec, on same day.

Q. Sorry. When you were in Osek on the 28th, could you see the things that you have described for us, this vantage point?

A. I was at this vantage point myself, and I taught there for some time with Colonel Kotur and with Colonel Stankovic.

Q. All right.

A. Colonel Kotur belongs to the command of the Pristina Corps, and Colonel Stankovic was the chief of the brigade, the army brigade, of course, in Gjakove.

Q. Yes.

A. Which led the operations in the field.

Q. I understand who you were with, I understand who they are, that's in your statement. What I want to -- what I'm trying to direct your mind to is when you were physically at that location with those people, what could you see happening down in the valley? First of all, could you see the valley?

A. Yes.

Q. Did you personally see the movement of these people that you've described?

A. On the 28th, there was no movement at all because the people were ^{4662 BLANK PAGE 4663} already entirely displaced on the 27th in the morning. You could only see smoke and flames coming from almost all the houses in the valley of Carragojs and beyond.

Q. All right. And on the 28th, did you see the movement of the forces you've described, the military and MUP forces?

A. Yes. On that day, the second day of the operation, because the operation covered about half of the territory, and it continued on a second day.

Q. I have only two more questions, sir, about the map, because the rest of the evidence is contained in your statements. I know the temptation is to tell us more, but Their Honours have this information.

JUDGE KWON: Mr. Ryneveld?

MR. RYNEVELD: Yes.

JUDGE KWON: Is this the map the witness is mentioning in his second statement?

MR. RYNEVELD: Yes.

JUDGE KWON: I know you put the number, paragraph 59, or the third paragraph of page 12. Am I right in that?

MR. RYNEVELD: Yes. Let me just check, because this statement, before it was bis'd was not paragraph numbered. We did that for ease of identification, as we indicated to the Court, that we would try to number the paragraphs. So I'm just going to have to double-check that. And there's two statements.

JUDGE KWON: And the second one.

MR. RYNEVELD: Second one, 59 is -- ⁴⁶⁶⁴

JUDGE KWON: 59 paragraph in the new version.

MR. RYNEVELD: It is the one for 59. The annotated map of the operation in the Carragojs Valley and Meja area. This is it.

JUDGE KWON: This is it.

MR. RYNEVELD: Paragraph 59.

JUDGE KWON: Thank you.

MR. RYNEVELD:

Q. Two more questions, if I may. The red circles. You haven't told us what these red circles on this exhibit, 143.4, I believe.

A. The red circle, the first one from the top is a checkpoint that was in the village of Meja. And the second one was at the crossroads of the road from Meja to Korenica.

Q. And just for reference, what happened at those checkpoints?

A. At these checkpoints, more than 500 people were stopped at Meja by police forces, regular police forces, local police, paramilitaries, and some other reservists who were also there.

Q. All right.

A. And at -- may I go on?

Q. Well --

JUDGE MAY: Let's move on, because we have much to do today.

MR. RYNEVELD: That's right.

Q. Sir, and could you also describe for us, please, on this map where Meja is. You've made reference in your statements to Meja and incidents in Meja. Is Meja actually depicted on this map, and if so, where? Could you point to it? ⁴⁶⁶⁵

A. Meja is on the left side of the red circle. I've covered that -- the name with the red circle a bit, but you can see clearly written "Meja."

Q. Okay. There are two red circles. It is the top red circle with the bottom part of the red circle obliterating the word; is that correct?

A. Yes. There's a line, and you can see, in brackets "Meja."

Q. All right. Thank you, Witness.

MR. RYNEVELD: Those are all the questions I have. With the Court's indulgence, I'll quickly, for the benefit, read in a very brief summary of what is contained in the two lengthy statements. My understanding, Your Honours, from the statements is that the witness describes that from December of 1998, he was an officer in the Air Defence and Rocket Artillery Brigade of the Pristina Corps. And then in 1999, General Pavkovic was appointed commander of the VJ 3rd Army, while General Lazarevic took over as commander of the Pristina Corps. In his statements, the witness describes in some detail an overview of the structure of the armed forces, including the VJ, the MUP, and a structure he termed Territorial Defence, the TO. He indicates that he is of the view that during times of war, the MUP and TO came under the control of the VJ. Paramilitary groups, including Arkan's Tigers, Seselj's White Eagles, and Franko Simatovic's unit, the Frenkis, operated under the TO. His statement indicates that the regular VJ in the Gjakove area was responsible for operations against the KLA, and that attacks against civilian targets were conducted by the MUP. His statement describes a huge influx of army and police between ⁴⁶⁶⁶ February and March of 1999. In addition to these units, the witness will describe the creation of local police operating in various villages where the regular MUP had difficulty patrolling.

Now, it goes on to say that after NATO began bombing, groups of 5 to 10 people would arrive in Kosovo where they would join up with VJ units. He indicates that they appeared unkempt and many had criminal records.

He then describes that VJ reservists wore the same green camouflage uniforms and insignia as the VJ but, of course, these reservists tended to be older. The MUP reservists were usually people with military police background and retired regular MUP. He says that there were about 50 to 70 in Djakovica, but many more came from Serbia. At first, the MUP were tasked to handle the KLA alone. They wore blue camouflage uniforms and had a patch that included the colours of the Serbian flag and the word "Milicija."

The TO included people ranging in age from 15 to 65 years. They were not VJ or MUP, but included Civil Defence people. And their role, apparently, was to defend the civilian population. He indicates that partial mobilisation of the TO began in October and November of 1998 and was complete by January or February of 1999. He indicates there were paramilitaries in the area, most of whom were Arkan's and Seselj's groups, with about 30 from Frenki's group.

And he goes on to say that, in theory, all armed groups were subordinate to the VJ. The VJ and the MUP met every day but they had separate headquarters. Now, operations maps showing deployments were ⁴⁶⁶⁷ prepared by the VJ and then given to the MUP, and the MUP relied on the VJ support for large operations.

He goes on to say that at the start of March 1999, an operation was planned against Albanians in the area, and describes in the statement being present at a meeting where an order was given that at least 100 heads had to be eliminated and all houses burnt in retribution for the killing of a MUP officer in a KLA ambush.

On the 27th of April, a massacre at Meja and Korenica took place. On the 28th of April, 1999, the day after the massacre at Meja, the witness was in brigade headquarters where he saw a report on which -- in which the VJ stated that 74 terrorists had been killed in Korenica and 68 in Meja.

On the day of the massacre, the witness helped ten families to escape. He helped them pass through a checkpoint manned by the MUP. After the massacre, he saw about 20 bodies that had been shot from close range. He notes that he saw the powder burns on the heads. The following day, the witness assisted a further two families to escape by assuring the MUP that they were not KLA members.

The witness recognised members of paramilitaries groups in Meja at the time of the massacre and describes that the factions that took part in this massacre included the VJ, MUP, local police, and paramilitaries. Now, the witness also produced the annotated maps as an attachment to his statements. We've gone into that information in some detail, both with the Carragojs Valley, and Meja. And the VJ was in the west in order to defend against the KLA coming from Albania and was also deployed along ⁴⁶⁶⁸ the Djakovice-Decani road.

The military moved down the valley, burning property and pushing civilians towards paramilitary groups around Meja. These paramilitary groups acted as a blocking force. This operation was coordinated from the headquarters in Djakovica. On the 27th of April, the push reached a place where the local MUP and paramilitaries took over. The massacre occurred on the same day, and on the 28th of April, the push continued in a south-easterly direction. And that is clearly visible from these maps that we discussed.

In the days after the massacre, the VJ and MUP were looking for bulldozers ostensibly for road clearance, but the witness opines that it was for the disposal of bodies. And the reason he says that, apparently, is that on the 29th of April, he saw two trucks going toward Djakovica from Meja, covered with tarpaulins. When the tarpaulins lifted in the wind, the witness saw parts of bodies. The KLA, according to him, had left Djakovica area by the time NATO commenced their bombing. And from the beginning of 1999, there was no real resistance from the KLA in the area.

In these various statements, the witness also names key individuals in the VJ, the MUP, the TO, and the municipality, and he outlines their roles during the period of the NATO bombing. Clearly, this is only the briefest of outlines of fairly detailed evidence, but Your Honours have that for your consideration. Those are my questions. Thank you.

JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Milosevic. ^{4669 BLANK PAGE 4670} Cross-examined by Mr. Milosevic:

Q. [Interpretation] The military court in Nis convicted you to a prison sentence; is that right?

A. Yes. I heard about that.

Q. You were sentenced to a prison term of 15 years; is that right?

A. This is what I heard. This is what I heard.

Q. Because of that, were you not able to move around, to move outside the region you're in?

A. No. I could move about. Wherever I wanted to go, I went.

Q. So you could move around freely outside Kosovo and Metohija, all through the territory of Yugoslavia; is that it?

A. I can go even to the territory of Serbia, but I will return without my head.

Q. Yes. But then that means, in view of the sentence, that in fact you are not permitted and cannot move outside Kosovo in the territory of Serbia.

A. Only me, but no one wished to go there and end up in prison or end up with his head -- beheaded.

Q. All right. Now, this circumstance, what you've just been explaining to us, and the fact that you were sentenced to a serious term of imprisonment, that you were in detention and a warrant was published, issued for your arrest, now, all these facts, do they motivate you to testify here in the capacity of a witness, a Prosecution witness?

A. I am not at all sad about that. The court there can do what they deem appropriate. I don't feel ill at ease, because I have done nobody ⁴⁶⁷¹ any harm. I have only performed my duties in the exercise of my duties in the Yugoslav army under the constitution, to defend the people and the state and not to engage in other things.

Q. My question was: Does this fact and these circumstances that you explained to us, that is to say, that you would end up without a head or in prison if you went there, and the fact that you were sentenced to a maximum prison sentence according to the Criminal Code of Yugoslavia, that you got 15 years, in fact, was that a motive for you to come and be a Prosecution witness at this trial?

A. No.

Q. All right. You say that you went about your constitutional business and duties and that you defended the country as an officer of Yugoslavia. Who did you defend the country from, in fact?

A. We didn't need to defend the country, because under the constitution, the army was supposed to protect the country from any external attacks, but not to become active and fight against its own people.

Q. And was the country attacked from outside by the NATO aggressors or not?

A. We tried to defend ourselves, but it was of no avail.

Q. So who were you defending the country from?

A. In fact, we engaged in a meaningless defence, I would say, because it was quite meaningless to defend ourselves against the international community.

Q. Well, who attacked Yugoslavia; NATO or the international ⁴⁶⁷² community?

A. NATO attacked, but it was under the supervision of international community. Everything that went on in Kosova and the former Yugoslavia was open for the entire world to see.

Q. And does that mean that you claim that NATO attacked Yugoslavia upon permission by the Security Council of the United Nations?

JUDGE MAY: This is not a matter for this witness. No doubt if it's relevant, we can hear other evidence about it. You should restrict your examination to the matters which he can deal with, particularly his statement.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. You say that it is not the duty of the army to react against terrorism because that is an internal enemy. Have I understood you correctly?

A. If there is terrorism, then there are forces that fight terrorism, and they are called anti-terrorist forces. But this is not done by the regular army.

Q. And that's what I'm asking you. You consider that it is not the duty of the army to fight terrorism?

A. We didn't have to do with any large-scale terrorism as to require the engagement of large units of the army. Then in that case, the police and other forces shouldn't have done anything when in fact they are paid precisely to fight such phenomena.

Q. Does that mean, then, that when a terrorist group, for example, as you were an officer of the Yugoslav army, when a terrorist group attacks a ⁴⁶⁷³ unit of the Yugoslav army, then it is the army's duty to telephone the police to come and protect them from the terrorists? Is that what you're claiming?

A. No. But you cannot call an entire people terrorists.

Q. And who called an entire people terrorists? Did I say that, perhaps?

A. You can understand that, because the war was declared on the entire Albanian people of Kosova.

Q. And who declared war on the Albanian people?

A. It was not openly declared, but in fact going by the way things occurred, you can say that.

Q. Do you mean the Albanians as part of the people of Yugoslavia against which NATO waged a war?

A. I'm not sure I got the question.

JUDGE MAY: No. Let's have the next question.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. As you were an officer of the Yugoslav army, I assume that you are well acquainted with the rules and regulations governing the functioning of the Yugoslav army. Is that right?

A. Yes. I'm well acquainted.

Q. And do you know that, according to the rules, the army can be used in peacetime to combat terrorism?

A. Yes. An army unit, yes, but not the whole army. In Kosova, all the army units that exist in Yugoslavia were used. Only the navy was not used, and the ships. Otherwise, all the arm -- all the units, the ⁴⁶⁷⁴ physical -- the troops and the military equipment were used.

Q. And you claim, therefore, that the whole army, the entire Yugoslav army, was used in Kosovo in the struggle against terrorism. Is that it?

A. I know very well like the cases in Nis, Vranje, Kraljevo, Cacak, in the barracks there were only some guards and a very small number of soldiers. All the others were deployed in Kosova.

Q. And are you aware of the fact and from what you said in your statement, there are three armies of the ground forces in Yugoslavia, that is, the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Army.

A. The 3rd Army was -- was -- included also the Pristina Corps, but I'm talking about that because from Vojvodina, including the whole of Serbia, with a minimal -- with the exception of the minimal forces were there, the others were sent to Kosova to fight.

Q. And are you aware, as an officer, although a deserter, albeit, from the Yugoslav army, that Yugoslavia was threatened by a ground invasion?

A. I don't know.

Q. And you claim that the 1st Army and the 2nd Army, that all of them went to Kosovo, and the whole of the 3rd Army as well.

A. I answered earlier. If I can add up to it: In Kosova there were also army units from the Republika Srpska. They were stationed west of Gjakove, in the place called Rezina.

Q. All right. So we've cleared that up. You say that the entire Yugoslav army was sent to Kosovo. Let's move on to my next questions. Is that what you're claiming? ⁴⁶⁷⁵

A. Over 150.000 forces were there, according to some figures I've heard also my former colleagues, officers who were in high positions. And you know very well that the army was cut down, downsized, according to an agreement that you had yourself signed.

After what happened in Kosova, everybody was sent to Kosova, leaving behind only the most indispensable number to carry out the usual duties.

Q. So you're not aware, therefore, of the fact that the army is increased in times of war. More soldiers are sent. You know nothing about that, as an officer?

A. Thank you for reminding me. There was also a mobilisation, a mass mobilisation in Serbia. And people who didn't want to come and fight were put in prison.

Q. And as an officer, is that something that seems strange to you, that when a country is exposed to aggression, that one mobilises the army?

A. It's not strange. However, it's strange and quite -- it's quite understandable that people should refuse to come and fight in Kosova in a war that is entirely meaningless.

Q. You don't know that. That's just what you're claiming. Is that right or not?

A. It's true that people were imprisoned because they didn't agree to go to war in Kosova. Another truth is that soldiers deserted from the ranks of the army and even fled abroad in order to -- not to be involved in a war that was quite senseless.

Q. All right. As you're a military deserter and were condemned to a ^{4676 BLANK PAGE 4677} prison term, do you consider that anywhere in the world there is an army which does not arrest deserters from the army?

JUDGE MAY: That's an irrelevant question. You've made the point about the prison sentence by the military court. There's no need to repeat it.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. You left the Yugoslav army only three days before the NATO forces entered Kosovo; is that right?

A. I was with them until three days before the Yugoslav army withdrew. I stayed in Kosova, and I didn't have any need to go with them. I was on the brink of retirement, and the war was almost over. I had nothing to look for in Serbia or any other country. I only wanted to stay in my birthplace.

Q. My question aimed at pinpointing the time when you ceased to be an active officer in the army or, rather, the time you actually left the Yugoslav army. That was what I was getting at. So in terms of time, that is correct, is it not?

A. I didn't flee anywhere. I stayed exactly where my unit was, where my birthplace was, and where my apartment was. I didn't leave my country at all. In fact, I didn't leave the place where I was born; Kosova. That's where I stayed.

JUDGE MAY: When did you leave the army?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Three days -- until three days before the Yugoslav army left Kosova. ⁴⁶⁷⁸

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Right after the end of the war, you had meetings with the KLA; is that right?

A. Yes.

Q. And otherwise, up until then, you were on the KLA's list for liquidation; is that right?

A. I don't know.

Q. How don't you know when on page 14, paragraph 4 of your one but last statement of the 12th to the 15th of February, 2002, that's what it says? How come you knew then and you don't know now?

A. I don't know that I was on any list. Maybe they wrote lists. They made various lists. I have no way of knowing.

Q. Well, I told you the portion of your statement where you say that you do know you were on the list of the KLA for liquidation, but I don't want to argue with you. What I want to do is to ask you questions. You went for talks with the KLA on several occasions; isn't that right?

A. I didn't seek to go to talk to the KLA, but they came to me and asked to talk to me.

Q. I'm not discussing the question of at whose request was the meeting held. I'm just noting that you did go to a meeting with the KLA on several occasions. Is that right or not?

A. I don't understand the relevance of this to my statement, because we met after the war and --

JUDGE MAY: We must be the judges of that. Did you have any ⁴⁶⁷⁹ meetings with the KLA before the war or during the war?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Before the war, I never had contact with the KLA.

JUDGE MAY: And during the war?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Nor during the war.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. As you said yourself, but we're going to get to that later, you warned the KLA to move away so that they would not be destroyed in one particular action. That is what you mentioned yourself in your statement. I'm also referring to several meetings you had with the KLA after you deserted. You attended such talks several times; isn't that right?

A. After the war, yes.

Q. Among others, you talked with the chief of the KLA police in the region or, rather, in the area of Djakovica?

A. Yes.

Q. And as you say in your statement, you talked to Ramush Haradinaj, as well. Tell me, how many times did the KLA talk to you, including that meeting when you saw Ramush Haradinaj?

A. I know Ramush Haradinaj as a person, but I have never spoken to him in my life, nor has he spoken to me.

Q. That's on page 16, the last paragraph of the statement given between the 12th and 15th of February, 2001. But let's leave that aside. How many times did you have these talks with the KLA? How many times altogether?

A. I met the KLA in their own offices after the war on three ⁴⁶⁸⁰ occasions.

Q. You met with the KLA on three occasions after the war? Not to mention the contact during the war. So now let us put this all together through the following question --

JUDGE MAY: Don't go too fast. He denies any contact with the KLA during the war.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, then, I'm not going to put a question in relation to that. Its turn will come. I'm only go to ask about what the witness confirmed.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. So you have this conviction to the highest prison sentence possible. That was a ruling by the military court in Nis. That is one fact. Secondly, you were on the list for liquidations by the KLA. And thirdly, you said that you had three rounds of talks with the KLA. Do you think that all of this makes it clear that you came here to testify at somebody's request, like the KLA? Yes or no.

A. This is not true at all. I have come here because of the lamenting and the tears of the families, brothers and sisters, mothers who have been left without their loved ones, who have come to me and --

JUDGE MAY: Let him finish. Let him finish. Go on.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Who have come to me, many of them, and have asked me don't I know something about the fate of their loved ones, because I was in the army. So it was a moral duty for me to tell you something about these things. And I can meet with the KLA and talk with them. I can meet with whom I want and talk with them now, after the ⁴⁶⁸¹ war.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Do you claim that this statement is not your life insurance policy for the rest of your life that is ahead of you? Under the circumstances that I've just mentioned to you.

A. I will never forget the crimes and terrible things that I have seen and which happened in the places I mentioned in my statement, committed by forces of the Yugoslav army, MUP, paramilitaries and others. Though less in the army and more by the others.

Q. That's not what I asked you. But is it, therefore, your claim that you came to testify here and that nobody threatened you, nobody blackmailed you, nobody brought any pressure to bear upon you? Is that what you claim?

A. I have not come to testify here under any kind of pressure from anybody. I have not come here to lie. And everything that I can say I say with a full sense of conscience and I am ready to face up to anybody -- anybody's questions, and I have simply come here to tell the truth and not to do anything else and merely to say the things that I have seen myself and heard with my own ears.

Q. All right. All these circumstances that we've referred to, the conviction, the liquidation list, and the meetings, that is not pressure upon you, according to what you've said. Now my question --

JUDGE MAY: You've already put this. And, Mr. Milosevic, one of the ways we waste time is by your repeating things. Let's move on.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Don't you worry. ⁴⁶⁸²

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. When giving your statements, you were interviewed, among other people, by Philip Coo, a military analyst, that is, and he will be a witness during the trial. Number 74, I believe. Was this testimony or this statement given attended by somebody from the KLA as well?

A. I don't remember.

Q. You don't remember. And do you remember where this interview was held?

A. I don't know about which interview you're talking.

Q. Your interview when you gave a statement to military analyst Philip Coo, who took your statement. Where was this?

A. I don't know about giving any statement to a military analyst or nothing like that. If you're talking about my two statements given to the respected Court here, I can answer.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. The statement of the February 2001, where was that given?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The statement, he was a representative of the Tribunal, as far as I know.

JUDGE MAY: No. Where was the statement made? You made a statement, you were interviewed in February 2001. The question is whereabouts were you interviewed and where did you make your statement?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In the building of the driving school in Gjakove. About five minutes away.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Yes. And what is now in this building of the driving school in ^{4683 BLANK PAGE 4684} Djakovica?

A. It's now the UNMIK police station.

Q. Is that where the station of this so-called Kosovo Protection Corps is as well? Because they are together with UNMIK.

A. They're not in one place. I don't know.

Q. And who attended that interview of yours?

A. I don't remember.

Q. Do you remember at least how many persons were present while you were speaking to Philip Coo?

A. First of all, I don't know this name at all.

MR. RYNEVELD: Your Honours, it may be of assistance if the name were properly pronounced. I'm not claiming any attempted deception but it may be fairer to the witness. The cover sheets of the statements indicate who were present, by name, and the dates.

JUDGE MAY: Who is it?

MR. RYNEVELD: Philip Coo.

JUDGE MAY: And who else?

MR. RYNEVELD: Paulo Pastore Stocchi. And the interpreter, Iris Rutari-Coen. Those, and it says, "Names of all persons present during the interviews," again Paulo Pastore Stocchi, Philip Coo, and Iris Rutari-Coen. On the earlier statement, we have the same interviewer, Paulo Pastore Stocchi, and a different interpreter, and it says, "Names of all persons present during interviews," and this would be the -- sorry, the 200 statement. There are two other individuals named, one of whom -- sorry, one other individual named who is brother-in-law of the witness. ⁴⁶⁸⁵ That is on the 2000. So all the people who were present are named and listed on the cover sheet of those statements.

And the May 8th - yesterday - again, the names of all persons present are on the sheet. The witness may not know the functions of these people, but he would know their names. He would have been introduced to them.

I can assist, if the court wants, to tell what these people's functions were but that's not my purpose now. I just want to be fair to the witness that the name is Coo, Philip Coo.

JUDGE MAY: Well, it's time to adjourn now in any event. We will adjourn for 20 minutes.

--- Recess taken at 12.15 p.m.

--- On resuming at 12.37 p.m.

JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Milosevic.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Before I continue, I wish to ask you not to have the Prosecutor answer my questions, please, because I had a reason why I asked the witness who attended the interview; and what the first page says, I can read myself.

Secondly, since we are already discussing that, I had expected you to react, in all fairness, because the witness is testifying according to your Rule 92 bis. Then the subject of the testimony and of the examination and cross-examination can only be that which is contained in his statement. And the Prosecutor introduced, during his introductory examination, some kind of a deportation map, although the witness in his statement did not testify about any deportations. As a matter of fact, ⁴⁶⁸⁶ the witness asserts in his statement that he saw the valley of Carragojs after the operations of the 28th. And the Prosecutor questioned him about the direction in which the refugees were moving, et cetera, et cetera. I would like to draw your attention to the following as well, since you said yourself that you are familiar with the statement - and I imagine this is your duty - and he says explicitly in the statement that he saw the valley of Carragojs after the operations of the 12th. This is what it says on page 12 in the penultimate paragraph of the statement, the statement given on the 12th of February, that is. And now I'm going to continue my questions.

MR. RYNEVELD: I'm sorry --

JUDGE MAY: Let me just deal with those matters. First of all, the interruption by the Prosecutor was by way of clarification, in particular because the name of the person present at the interview was not correctly pronounced. And the Prosecutor's entitled to do that. As for the deportation, there is evidence about that in the statement, and the witness was entitled to produce his map. Yes, Mr. Ryneveld.

MR. RYNEVELD: I just wanted to assist the Court. Paragraph 59 of the second statement deals with the issue. There's some complaint about what I did; paragraph 59 of the second statement, page 19, completely -- oh, it's page 12 of 19. It says, "page of 19." It's page 12 of 19, paragraph 59. You'll see that that paragraph amply covers what was summarised.

JUDGE MAY: It refers to the annotated map of the operations in ⁴⁶⁸⁷ the valley in the Meja area and says he's provided it.

MR. RYNEVELD: Yes, and it also talks about forcibly displacing civilians towards the paramilitary groups around Meja. So...

JUDGE MAY: Yes.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, but this does not bring into question what the statement says, that he saw this after the operation of the 28th, and I've just quoted to you where that was from. In the statement itself, that is.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. My next question is the following: Are you afraid of the KLA now?

A. I have never been afraid of KLA.

Q. For a long time during your military service, you were in a transport unit. You were a supervisor there, head of a squad within it; isn't that right?

A. It is true that for four and a half years I was responsible for transportation, and for one year I was the chief responsible for transportation unit in Prishtina barracks.

Q. As far as I could understand what you said, you were in charge of supplying vehicles, equipment, everything else that goes with the job; right?

A. Yes. I was also responsible for training the drivers, planning, and such issues.

Q. I understand that from December 1998 onwards, you trained soldiers. You -- you planned the training and exercises, to put it more precisely. Is that right? ⁴⁶⁸⁸

A. Yes.

Q. What kind of training was it? What subject?

A. Always related to transportation.

Q. You were actually preparing some plans, maps, for guards; isn't that right?

A. When I was responsible in the operational training sector, after I was rotated from my first job.

Q. This planning, this planning the assignments of guards, the physical safety, security of the building, did I understand you correctly?

A. The physical safety of the facilities, that is, of the barracks.

Q. All right. That means I've understood you correctly. So you never had a position in the army that made it possible to you to have available to you any kind of information that relates to numbers of soldiers, deployment of troops, command, et cetera; isn't at that right?

A. That is not right.

Q. All right. You are saying that you were in charge of the security of the building. Do you mean that you were driving people from the command or providing physical security for persons? You worked on physical security. You were not involved in security matters within the army itself; right?

A. I was officer in charge of operational training sector where teaching, drilling plans are prepared, the division of the guards for the buildings are prepared and such issues, but not in the security in the sense of what you are saying. ⁴⁶⁸⁹

Q. I asked you a minute ago whether we can state that you were not in a position to have any kind of information made available to you that had to do with the number of troops, their deployment, reporting, et cetera. You said that was not correct.

Tell me, in which sense did you have this kind of information made available to you, this information that pertains to the deployment of troops, command, reporting, et cetera, if you say that what I said on the basis of your statement was not correct?

A. In the sector I used to work, I was not alone. There was the chief and another officer. But all the notes with the exception of some secret ones, all the notes, all the information was there, the number of soldiers, the kinds of weapons, vehicles, all the information was there.

Q. All right. You are talking about reservists of the army of Yugoslavia. Were there any Albanians among them?

A. At the beginning, yes. At a later phase, very few. You might count them by the fingers.

Q. All right. You claim that the members of the MUP and the reservists - actually, you even mentioned some paramilitaries - you claim that they committed some kind of crimes and that they got out of the command of the army; is that right?

A. The regular army was increased in numbers with those reservists who were on the lists of the army. Likewise, the police also has its reservists that it can draft now and again when it needs them. But there were also various volunteers, because some refused to join military formations. Therefore, they were obliged to draft anyone - terrorists, ^{4690 BLANK PAGE 4691} delinquents, former convicts, people with problems - and enlist them and bring them to Kosova.

Q. Are you trying to suggest that the authorities released criminals from prison so that they would join the army? Do you know of any such cases?

A. We had problems all the time with such kinds of persons in Gjakove. The army imprisoned such persons. And on the basis of information we had, we found out that these were -- such persons were sent to prison for various offences, especially for criminal offences. And we had several such cases. They have created problems in the city, with the regular army soldiers especially.

Q. Let's clarify one matter. Reservists who came were included in the regular units. Is that right or is that not right?

A. Some were included in the regular units. I said that the regular units were fulfilled in numbers by -- with these reservists, but there were those who showed up on a voluntary basis through those other formations like the Tigers of Arkan or the Orlovi, the White Eagles of Seselj, and they also joined. They came on a voluntary basis to commit various offences, crimes, to plunder, to rob houses, and so on.

Q. Does that mean that, according to your assertion, there were reservists who came and who did not join the normal regular army units, that they were some kind of special units?

A. First they came to the military units. Then, seeing that they could not abide by the discipline, they decided to leave and join these forces that I mentioned. So this is how the army came to have problems ⁴⁶⁹² with them, let alone the people.

Q. All right. Tell me, since you were an active officer and since you worked at the command, are you acquainted with the order on the ban of paramilitary formations which says that wherever they appear, they have to be arrested, disarmed, and disbanded? Are you aware of that order?

A. I am aware of the order. Then why didn't you arrest them in real terms when you knew what was happening on the basis of reports that came to you from the ground? So what did you do, you and all your command? We could do nothing, only to kill each other.

Q. And is it correct that the commanders of the army of Yugoslavia arrested many soldiers, even those belonging to the regular force and to the reserve force, those who had committed some crimes?

A. It is true that we have arrested some, I know very well in Gjakove. But on the third day, at the most, orders came from above to release them. I know of one case when the guard told me - he was an old sergeant - it was a prison made up in a private home, in the cellar, he said at that orders came for us to release them.

Q. And who could have issued these orders for you to release them when you said yourself a minute ago that you were aware of this order of the Supreme Command that such persons should be arrested?

A. From what I heard from the person who told me - his name is Sergej Perovic - they had received this order from Belgrade.

Q. And is it correct that -- that soldiers who were suspected of having committed rapes were detained, tried, and ultimately convicted? Is that correct or is that not correct? ⁴⁶⁹³

A. That is correct. There was a case in Gllogofc village in Gjakove. It was the beginning of the arrests. And they were reservists of the regular army forces. That is a fact. But I don't know of any other cases of someone being convicted. I know of them being released later.

Q. In your statement, you didn't say that anybody was later released, and you don't speak about one case but of several cases. And I'm drawing your attention to that page 4, paragraph 1, your statement of the 18th of April. So tell me, when were you telling the truth, then or now?

A. I said that these people who were imprisoned were convicted, but in other cases, they were released. This is what you haven't understood. I didn't say that people were imprisoned and convicted and not released, but the others, who were imprisoned later, were released. So this wasn't the first imprisonment. These imprisonments went on and measures were not taken.

Q. And how do you know that no measures were taken?

A. I saw in the evenings, when I visited the guards, I saw in the prison that I saw the same person with two other people, drinking in -- drinking beer in the Pashtrik Hotel.

Q. And is it true that the commanders of the Yugoslav army did not order any violence, especially not rapes, and that things of that kind were highly isolated cases? Is that true?

A. As far as commanders of the regular army are concerned, it is true that they never -- I have never heard of them giving such an order.

Q. So it's true. Now, is it also true what you claim, that every municipality had to have a police unit composed of Albanians? ⁴⁶⁹⁴

A. At one time, at various centres, so-called local police were formed.

Q. And do you know that members of that local police force in the villages were elected by the villagers themselves?

A. I don't know who selected them because I didn't take part in these meetings or elections.

Q. Well, they should have taken care of -- they were supposed to take care of the security in the villages and safety in the villages, to provide that. Is that true?

A. I was never involved in any way in work of the police and of security, and no doubt they had their tasks allocated to them.

Q. But that's something you talk about on page 5, the last paragraph in your statement from the 12th to the 15th of February, 2001. So that's what I'm asking you; is that correct or is it not, what you say there, it took care of the security of the villages, the Albanian policemen. Is that true or not?

A. Reason would dictate such a thing.

Q. All right. And is it true that you know of no orders for liquidation?

A. I never saw any such order for liquidation.

Q. You said in your statement that there was a lot of drinking. Is it true that your commander ordered you to make this impossible, to see to it that it was not done?

A. Yes. In the Pashtrik Hotel, Arkan's forces and the forces of Seselj and Frenki were stationed there, and the regular army was not ⁴⁶⁹⁵ normally allowed to go there. But they never asked anybody, but they created havoc and fired guns. And by order -- the order was to go and take a few guards and to close it and stop the serving of alcohol, but it was impossible to get them away.

Q. So you did not act upon those orders, did you?

A. I went back and told the commander what the situation was like, and then the chief of the brigade became angry and said I should go -- that he would go. And he fared worse, because he was seen off by whistles and firing in the air. And he left and came back to his base.

Q. A moment ago, you mentioned Seselj, Arkan. You mentioned these names and the names of several individuals. Now, do you know that neither Seselj nor Arkan were ever in Kosovo during the war?

A. During the war, I never saw them in Kosova. They were there before the war, but their men under their command, as is well known, were there. And they said themselves that they were also in Bosnia and Croatia. And they would come to the hotel every day and contact soldiers who were there, and they would admit, themselves, who they were.

Q. Well, if somebody says something about themselves, does that mean that it must necessarily be correct?

A. There was an entire unit there. It wasn't a matter of a single individual. There were dozens there. They were housed in the Pashtrik Hotel. These were Arkan's men and others.

Q. Please. I'm asking you this because you're saying some things which are absolutely impossible. For example, you talk about Frenki's men, the Frenkis. Now, who are these people who called themselves ⁴⁶⁹⁶ Frenki's men or the Frenkis? And what does it mean?

A. Frenki was a unit, the most terrorist unit possible that committed acts of the terror, together with Arkan's men. And I also heard from my other former colleagues that they were people without parents, people who had grown up in orphanages, people without feeling. They would kill someone as if slaughtering a chicken.

Q. Do you know that what you're claiming would not have been possible at all because Frenki or, rather, Franko was no kind of paramilitary formation, it was a deputy to the chief of security who, earlier on, was the head of a regular Anti-Terrorist Unit? So that it was absolutely impossible that what you call bandits should be the members of a unit of this kind. Do you know that, as an officer?

A. I can say quite seriously that this was a special unit with a commander from Belgrade who -- who himself told -- the commander himself told me not to get mixed up with them, not to have any business -- not to do any business with them and not to have anything to do with them. And their commander went among houses in the city and was involved in torture of various kinds. And I don't know what kind of unit it was.

Q. Please. Is it clear that that man was no Frenki, or, rather, somebody that people called Frenki?

A. I don't know Frenki personally, and I don't know who he is, but the unit as a whole was known as Frenki, and they had black scarves around their heads, and they wore different uniforms; the police, army special forces, semi-civilian, semi-military, all kinds of things.

Q. That means, in fact, that that could not have been a unit ^{4697 BLANK PAGE 4698} belonging to the Ministry of the Interior or, rather, the security service. Is that right or not?

A. I can say, according to the conversations that I had with any former colleagues with whom I talked at length about these matters, that they were commanded directly by someone from the secret ministry.

Q. And do you know, as an officer of the Yugoslav army, that the Anti-Terrorist Unit and the security service is the most highly disciplined unit that is made up of people who were sportsmen, if I can say that, with high physical and mental capabilities? So highly disciplined and well-organised unit. And it cannot correspond to a picture as you depicted it.

A. It's -- indeed it's true as you say. They were physically very well-built and muscular and well fit to commit crimes of various kinds.

Q. And do you claim that that unit was precisely that, what you tried to explain by saying that it was a part of the service of the interior?

A. I'm sure that they committed crimes, and I don't believe I have need to go into any details.

Q. Well, it's very important to know whether you're talking about some, shall I say, group of criminals or whether you're talking about a unit which belongs to the organs of power and authority of the Republic of Serbia. That is a very vital point for what you're testifying about. I assume you are well aware of the fact, as an officer, that this kind of testimony paints a very ugly picture of the regular forces of the powers that be, if what you're saying were to be true.

A. I don't know how to describe or what name to put to it, but that ⁴⁶⁹⁹ was a unit that committed crimes. For me, this can be called only a criminal group. I know of no other names to call it.

JUDGE MAY: What did you see the unit doing?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This unit, in cooperation with some in Gjakove city, they were stationed near the stadium called Vllaznimi stadium. All night, they used to set fire to houses in various areas of the city. During the day, at about 14 hours, they gathered in the coffeeshop called Rinia, which was situated across from the army house. When it became dark, they continued the same operations. We could -- we only saw the flames coming out of various houses in the city. They -- we heard rifle shots. I could see that. I could hear that because my guards were nearby where these -- near the army building.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Well, didn't you say a moment ago that in fact it wasn't a unit, it was group of criminals? Wasn't that what you said?

A. I said they belonged to this unit called Frenki.

Q. Isn't it clear to you --

JUDGE KWON: Just a moment. Mr. Peraj, did you personally know the name of Franko Simatovic or as to what he was doing at that time?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I knew only the name, only the name. I know nothing of what he may have done.

JUDGE KWON: Thank you. Yes, please go on.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. From what you're saying here yourself loud and clear, isn't it clear to you that it is impossible for a group of that kind to be any kind ⁴⁷⁰⁰ of regular unit, especially not an elite unit of the security forces? Isn't that clear to you?

A. I didn't say that it is a unit of the regular army or something of the sort. I only said that they acted together as a unit, called Frenki. That was how it was known.

Q. Well, somebody gave them that name or they gave themselves that name, but it couldn't have had anything to do with the security service as such. Is that clear to you, as an officer of the army at that time?

A. I -- I am afraid I don't understand.

JUDGE MAY: Did the unit have any connection, that you could see, with the regular forces?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. As you just said that it couldn't have had any connection with the regular forces in response to the question asked by Mr. May, and as you said previously that it was obviously a group of criminals, and as you were in charge of security, why, then, didn't you arrest them?

A. Efforts were made to arrest not only them but others who committed crimes in the city. But it was impossible. I said earlier that the commander of the barracks went there, but he failed because they were so many in numbers that we didn't know what problems we might expect from them.

Q. You said that for the MUP, it was the colonel of the Yugoslav army who was responsible and that his name was Djosen, if I read the name correctly here. Djosen. Now, what does a colonel of the Yugoslav army ⁴⁷⁰¹ have to do with the MUP, the Ministry of the Interior? How do you explain that observation of yours?

A. Colonel Milan Djosen, he was a commander of the garrison and of the brigade of Gjakove.

Q. So he wasn't in charge of the MUP, the Ministry of the Interior?

A. At war times, the commander of a garrison becomes the number one person in that garrison. This applies to the police and to other forces.

Q. Did Djosen order you to address the criminals?

A. Not to arrest them but to stop the hotel serving them beer and to send them away from that hotel, to make them go to some other place where they were supposed to be stationed.

Q. All right. There's no sense in pursuing that topic, but I hope that everything is clear.

You mentioned Generals Pavkovic, Lazarevic in your statement. However, as it is not clear of the context you mention them in, can we take it that you never actually met Pavkovic and Lazarevic personally?

A. I met Pavkovic at least 200 times, but Lazarevic less often because he came later to Prishtina.

Q. But let's clarify the character of those meetings. You were in charge of security, providing security for the command building. Now, the fact that you met -- did you meet him when he was coming in and out of the building and you would see him, or were you reporting to him as head of security to tell him that the situation was normal, reporting in that way, or did you just see him going in and out of the building? So is that how you met him? Yes or no. ⁴⁷⁰²

A. I met him, as I said, because during my stay in Prishtina, I was looking after the garrison, and I reported every morning about the situation in the garrison, and he would summon me to give me jobs to do during the day, so I had regular contact with him. And also with Lazarevic. He was his deputy in Prishtina when I was there.

Q. Were they regular and proper official contacts which an officer in charge of security would have with his -- with the commander in chief for that area?

A. Yes.

Q. In your statement, you said that some volunteers from Russia arrived. And subsequently this morning, I saw in some of the corrections that you were making that was read out by Mr. Ryneveld, that you corrected that statement and said that there were nine people, that there was a doctor amongst them from Russia. So this group, according to the corrections you made to your statement, it would appear was a sort of humanitarian group. Yes or no.

A. It was a group that was armed and in camouflage uniform. They were volunteers, and they had reported as volunteers. And we received them in the basement of the palace of culture in Gjakove and registered them and allocated them units to go to. And this unit was taken to Koshare, on the border.

Q. All right. And is it true that the commander of your unit refused to receive them, to receive the request for them to remain in Djakovica?

A. The commander told them, through the administrative officer that was there, and I was very close to the commander when he said, "No. You ⁴⁷⁰³ must go into combat if you are volunteers, because we have plenty of people to loot in the city."

Q. All right. That means that he deployed them as volunteers along the border in Kosare to supervise the border?

A. There was fighting taking place there.

Q. You're talking about Kosare there, and I assume you're talking about the border point of Kosare -- the border post of Kosare.

A. That's right.

Q. All right. Now, you say that during the NATO aggression, meetings were held of the army and MUP and the Territorial Defence. Did you at any time, and if so in what capacity, attend meetings of that kind?

A. I was at these meetings several times. And they told me to go and check the guards. And sometimes I would come in by accident and see the meetings going on.

Q. Well, your statement doesn't show that you attended any official meeting with -- that was attended by such people.

A. They were more like briefings and consultations, because the time and circumstances didn't permit any proper meetings. They were merely meetings for information and allocating duties and the like.

Q. All right. Is it logical that at a time of war, the responsible officers of the army and police exchange information mutually, precisely the way you put it just now?

A. It's normal. It's in the normal course of business. If everything else had been normal.

Q. All right. You said that in the area of Kosovo, there were ⁴⁷⁰⁴ 150.000 soldiers deployed. You never saw this figure officially, you never heard it officially, and you did not hold the kind of position that would make it possible for you to know that for sure. Is that right or is that not right?

A. My colleagues said this, my senior colleagues, that there are about 150.000 troops in Kosova.

Q. All right. You say that as for operations against the KLA, there were persons responsible in the army of Yugoslavia. Are you claiming, when you say this, that the MUP did not have any clashes with the KLA?

A. MUP was involved in more conflicts than the army. These are conflicts with the KLA.

Q. Certainly, clashes with the KLA. I just wanted to check what this explanation of yours meant, that it was the army that was responsible for the KLA. You did not mention the MUP. Of course this was against the KLA.

Now let's move on to the next question. You try, in your statement, to explain or, rather, provide some information about the army of Yugoslavia. For example, about the mode of information, about, for example, information from Nis going to the Ministry of Defence in Belgrade. If you're already dealing with these facts and figures, could you please describe who sent information to who. Or to begin with, who was Minister of Defence at that time who received information from Nis, who had information from Nis sent to him?

A. Information came from the -- went from the lowest rank to the highest rank, according to the command structure. Of course, every ⁴⁷⁰⁵ barracks in Kosova sent reports to the commander of the Pristina Corps. The commander of the corps to the army in Nis and from thence to Belgrade.

Q. All right. Now you're stating -- all right. You're actually explaining now that information flows were regularly within the regular chain of command; is that right?

A. That's right.

Q. All right. You said that technical equipment arrived in Djakovica from Republika Srpska. Is it correct that you do not know this for sure? Is it correct that this is only your assumption?

A. There are grounds for thinking this because, according to an agreement which you know better than I do, the weaponry was downsized, and the units were specified, especially the tank units and the heavy military equipment. So if -- if one unit gave heavy equipment to another, I heard that these units had equipment that they brought themselves.

Q. All right. Do you know that, at that time - at this time that you are testifying about - just like today, after all, the entire territory of Republika Srpska is under SFOR control in the military sense of the word?

A. I'm not sure that it was like that.

Q. All right. Do you assume that under such circumstances, there is a possibility for tanks, personnel carriers, combat vehicles to be transferred from Republika Srpska to the territory of Kosovo without SFOR knowing anything about it, without SFOR seeing it, making it impossible, et cetera?

JUDGE MAY: Yes.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I said I am not sure that they ⁴⁷⁰⁶ brought the arms with them, but I am fully certain that I communicated with that unit that belonged to the Republika Srpska, which was stationed in Rezina, a place called Rezina, east of Gjakove.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. All right. You have been talking about armaments from Republika Srpska, this heavy equipment, et cetera. This is just a product of your thinking process. It is not something that you know for sure; isn't that right?

A. I know that this unit was from the Republika Srpska, and they had tanks and other weaponry.

Q. Yes. But I am asking you something completely different. You just assume that these tanks and other weapons came from Republika Srpska. Yes or no. That is your assumption. This is not your knowledge; isn't that right? Yes or no.

A. I said -- I didn't say I was certain. I left, provided for two possibilities, either that they brought the weapons with them or took them from some units in Serbia.

Q. All right. That precisely confirms, as far as I understand, what I've asked you about. This is a product of your thinking process, not something that you know for sure; isn't that right?

JUDGE MAY: What he says is that he knows or is certain about the unit coming from the RS. What he doesn't know about is where their weaponry came from. Now, that's the distinction. It seems we've exhausted the topic.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right. I think we've exhausted ⁴⁷⁰⁷ it too, because I think that this is very clear.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. As a matter of fact, you say that in the area of Djakovica, there were 170 tanks. Is it correct that you don't know that figure for sure, that this is just your assumption yet again?

A. Only in a day, an old sergeant who was responsible for the tanks deployed on the ground, a staff sergeant, he said, "I supplied 40 tanks only today." I told him, "There are many tanks, aren't there?" He said to me, "There are about 170 tanks alone." And he was responsible for supplying the tanks with fuels.

Q. I did not understand, or perhaps the interpretation is unclear. The way it's been interpreted, it says that he said to you, "Today I have issued -- today I issued 40 tanks." Is that what you said?

A. Yes. I think it -- no. There is a mistake in interpretation. He said a tank in the sense of sent fuel for 40 tanks. "I provided fuel for 40 tanks today."

Q. I understand. That's the confusion, because the word "fuel" was missing from the interpretation. But in the statement, you do not mention at all that he said that in Djakovica there were 170 tanks.

A. It doesn't mean that -- I may have not mentioned it, but I know it very well.

Q. All right. Is it correct that you do not know for sure where the command posts were during the NATO aggression? For example, the command post of the Pristina Corps. You only make assumptions and mention that in your statement. ⁴⁷⁰⁸

A. The part of the corps command which was situated in Gjakove, it was stationed in the old barracks at the beginning. Then later, they were transferred to another building which was near Cafe Lajci. That is the name. It had a very good cellar, and they stayed there until the end.

JUDGE MAY: We shall have to -- we shall have to adjourn now. The time which we can be in the courtroom is now up. It means this: Mr. Peraj, will you be back, please, on Monday morning. We shan't be sitting tomorrow in this case, but would you be back, please, on Monday morning at 9.00, to conclude your evidence. Can you remember --

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

JUDGE MAY: -- during this and any other adjournment, not to speak to anybody about your evidence until it's over, and that does include members of the Prosecution team.

Mr. Milosevic, we've considered the time available. This is a witness where, clearly, you should have longer than the usual time. You can have three-quarters of an hour more on Monday morning, to make a total of two and a half hours with this witness.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, but please bear in mind that this is not a Rule 92 bis statement, because only at the beginning, before he moved on to reading the summary, the only thing that he is otherwise entitled to, the representative of the other side examined the witness for all of 40 minutes. In fact, this turned into a regular examination. And therefore, I think that you cannot restrict my time.

JUDGE MAY: We cannot go on. We have to adjourn. Three-quarters ⁴⁷⁰⁹ of an hour is the time what we have in mind for Monday for your cross-examination.

Mr. Ryneveld, you may want to consider the other witnesses next week who are insider witnesses, as to whether it's appropriate they be 92 bis or not. Certainly the Trial Chamber will be looking at that carefully.

We will adjourn now. Nine o'clock Monday morning.

--- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.45 p.m., to be reconvened on Monday, the 13th day of May, 2002, at 9.00 a.m.