Milosevic Transcript 2002-05-23

⁵³⁶⁶

Thursday, 23 May 2002

[Open session]

[The accused entered court]

--- Upon commencing at 9.04 a.m.

JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Nice.

MR. NICE: A few preliminary matters first. The Prosecution would seek to recall Dr. Baccard to give further evidence in relation to the bodies of the women found in the well. We forecast that the evidence he could give in direct evidence would only take about ten minutes. His evidence will fit with other evidence going to show where the women came from but will be the only evidence going to show the manner in which they died and would go to show that they were alive when they were thrown into the well and would go to show, to some extent, in respect to two bodies that were capable of examination in sufficient detail, either that they very probably had been or may have been sexually assaulted before being thrown into the well to die.

So it's important evidence, and it won't take very long to give, and in our respectful submission, the doctor could properly be allowed to give that evidence before he leaves, which he has to today, I understand.

[Trial Chamber confers]

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Nice, we had an indication that you may make this application. We understand the importance of the evidence, but nonetheless, we are applying strict rules, strict rules to the length of time which the accused can have and strict rules to you as timing, and part of that procedure must be that we move along with the witnesses. To ⁵³⁶⁷ allow this witness to be recalled on a matter which should have been prepared beforehand and should have been part of his witness statement will take up the best part of an hour, I suspect. It's also evidence which, as far as I can see, has not been disclosed before, although I may be wrong about that.

Nonetheless, we are going to apply strict rules to you as we apply them to everybody else. We understand it may cause inconvenience, but nonetheless, the Prosecution must be ready before it calls its evidence, like anybody else.

MR. NICE: The evidence has in fact been disclosed in advance. The precise history of the oversight whereby the evidence was omitted the first time is not something I can deal with immediately. The Prosecution, I think, must make its position clear now, as it will have to in subsequent discussions about timing, that we will respectfully say that there has to come a time when the mere interests of the time of the case must be balanced against the interest of having the full evidence before the Chamber.

We will do all that we can, as we have been from first to last, to deal with this matter expeditiously, but we would respectfully say that there will inevitably be occasions when things don't go perfectly, and we would invite the Chamber not always to say that such imperfections should lead to the exclusion of evidence.

The second point I wish to make --

JUDGE MAY: No, let me deal with that since you make the point. The interests of time are not mere interests. They are in the interests ⁵³⁶⁸ of justice and the interests of justice are that this case is finished expeditiously.

Secondly, of course there are occasions when the interests of time must give way to other considerations, and the Trial Chamber is fully alert to that. We will consider any applications you have in due course to call other evidence, but it must be made plain that this case is to be finished on time, and that means that the parties, both parties, must put on their case with the maximum of expedition.

Yes. The next point.

MR. NICE: The next point relates to expedition, a topic, of course, to which I know we're returning generally next week, I think. K5, who is a witness in waiting and one that, for example, we may be able to take tomorrow if the other two witnesses were, happily, to be finished by then, is one in respect of whom the Chamber has made no order about adducing his evidence under 92 bis. I think the Chamber indicated on an earlier occasion it was provisionally not minded to grant the 92 bis application, subject to further discussion and argument; and in the interests of economy, may I just explain why the Chamber might think it appropriate to take his evidence under the provisions of 92 bis without necessarily ruling on the matter immediately, although we would need to have his statement subject to the 92 bis provisions today, which would involve our negotiating with the Registry about it. Would Your Honour just give me one minute?

[Prosecution counsel confer]

MR. NICE: These are the reasons why 92 bis provisions might be ⁵³⁶⁹ appropriate: The time constraints, to which we've already made allusions; the fact that his evidence goes to acts and conduct of people other than the accused; and then as to the body of his testimony, the Chamber will recall that his testimony covers acts of arson, grenade attacks that he was obliged to engage in and aware of performed against the Albanian community one way and another.

Now, that evidence, although of course it's important evidence, is nevertheless corroborative of the allegations of destruction of property, intimidation, and targeting of high profile Kosovo Albanians that has been given in general and specific terms by other witnesses. So those are the reasons why the Chamber might think that it is an appropriate witness for the provisions of 92 bis, but, Your Honour, that's as far as I'm going to go in relation to it.

JUDGE MAY: It may be convenient to raise something in private session. Can we go into private session, please.

[Private session]

(redacted)

(redacted) ⁵³⁷⁰ Page 5370 redacted, private session.

⁵³⁷¹

(redacted)

[Open session]

THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're back in open session.

JUDGE MAY: On the issue of 92, whether he's appropriate for 92 bis, it may be sensible if we confer for a moment. ⁵³⁷²

[Trial Chamber confers]

JUDGE MAY: We've considered this. This is an exceptional witness in the nature of the evidence which he gives, which is unlike any other evidence we've heard. Given the background and the nature of the evidence, we think it should be given in full and not in statement form.

MR. NICE: We will prepare accordingly. I'm grateful for that ruling. I was in error when I said that he was not being granted voice distortion. In fact your order of the 22nd of March permitted both facial and voice distortion.

JUDGE MAY: Very well.

MR. NICE: As far as I'm aware, the next witness I'm going to be calling, Baton Haxhiu, it has been raised with me the possibility of reversing the order of witnesses. Mr. Ryneveld's dealing with that. I'll ask Ms. Graham just to go out and make sure it's going to be Baton Haxhiu next.

JUDGE MAY: Actually, if we could stick to that because too much variation makes it very difficult for everybody.

MR. NICE: I gather he's in the witness room. I'm sorry.

JUDGE MAY: Yes.

MR. KAY: It's just on K5. It may help the proceedings if both parties agree that the Court has the statement of the witness in full. It might make it easier to navigate through his evidence, which is -- the statement is so detailed that I can foresee there will be problems without it.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. Well, we have that statement. ⁵³⁷³

MR. KAY: Yes. You've had it already.

JUDGE MAY: We've had it.

MR. KAY: And the summary.

JUDGE MAY: And we've got a revised summary.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] In this connection with the next witness -- what's his name? Baton Haxhiu, yes. I think that it is quite clear that, according to your rules, he could not testify according to Rule 92 bis because he mentions and says in his statement -- talks about his statement -- in his statement about his alleged contacts with me, with the chief of security and so on and so forth. So he can't come under Rule 92 bis. He must give an entire, complete statement and testimony. And my second remark is: Why was this witness known as Witness K28 up until now? And why have these double listings for the witnesses both as secret and --

JUDGE MAY: You can ask him about that if you want. That's not a matter for us.

MR. NICE: I was going to say, as I had indeed forecast yesterday, that there is one paragraph in the addendum to the statement which I'll take you to which would fall outside the potential for 92 bis procedure, and if the Court has the addendum, it's under the: "I would add the following: I first met Mr. Milosevic ..."

JUDGE KWON: We haven't received that.

JUDGE MAY: We haven't had that.

MR. NICE: I'm sorry if you haven't received that. It was dealt with -- ⁵³⁷⁴

JUDGE MAY: And the proposal is?

MR. NICE: That paragraph to be given in live.

JUDGE MAY: Yes.

MR. NICE: It's a press conference where ...

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] One more thing, please, that I wish to say. I don't mind what you're going to decide, I just wish to draw your attention once again to the violation of the Rules, because this is an additional statement, and as Mr. Nice said a moment ago and it was provided to me last night, after the end of business yesterday, and statements must be provided at least a certain amount of time before they are read. That is one point.

Secondly, I was given all the material in English once again although we have a Trial Chamber ruling that I must be supplied with the documents in my own language. The other side has English as their mother tongue so I am receiving documents in the mother tongue of the opposite side, and that is a fine illustration on the small issue of the equality of arms of the two sides. That is to say that I am being provided with the material in the mother tongue of the opposite side let alone all the other --

JUDGE MAY: Let's hear what the Prosecution have to say about this. When was this second statement? I see it's dated the 22nd of May.

MR. NICE: I think the addendum was only done yesterday in the process of preparation in the usual way where witnesses are taken through the material. These are matters he had to add. When we introduced the 92 bis procedure that we've been adopting with considerable judicial economy ⁵³⁷⁵ some weeks ago, it was on the basis that there might be occasional additional points to be made or corrections to be made, and as I understand it, although I haven't been in court for these witnesses, broadly similar practice have applied and there is nothing at all unfair in him adding -- in his adding to his previous statement by these one or two additional matters. The accused can no doubt deal with them. As to the English language version, we understand that the B/C/S translation will be with us shortly. We had a language assistant working on it all night.

[Trial Chamber confers]

MR. NICE: Your Honour, can I say the translated version is now available.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. Let that be handed over.

MR. NICE: And might I, I hope without inconveniencing you, just add this point: To allow this additional material to be given, one way or another, is no different from what happens with witnesses who give evidence in full viva voce but whose proofing summaries add material exactly of this kind to their pre-existing statements in a way that's inevitable when witnesses come to the moment of giving evidence and are focused on the relevant history.

Applying the 92 bis provisions to an addendum of this kind is simply a sensible use of our procedures to achieve judicial economy. We would, of course, be content, subject to the restrictions of time, simply to take addendums in full viva voce but there's no need to, in our respectful submission, in a case like this. Although the passage ⁵³⁷⁶ involving the accused directly should be given directly.

JUDGE MAY: The issue really is whether the accused should have more time to prepare for cross-examination on this material. The answer may be to allow the evidence to be called and then, if the accused wants more time for cross-examination, we would have to consider that as a matter of fairness since he's not had time to prepare for this. Mr. Milosevic, we'll hear the witness, and you could cross-examine on the other statement. If you want to ask for more time to prepare for cross-examination on this one, then you shall -- we will consider that application if you think there's some matter which you need some time for preparation.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Let me tell you straight away I'm not asking for anything and I don't need more time. It's all the same to me. I'm just drawing attention to daily violation of the Rules that occur here in this room.

THE INTERPRETER: One, two, three? One, two, three?

JUDGE MAY: Yes. No doubt it was the volume on my controls.

THE INTERPRETER: One, two, three.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. I have it now, thank you. You're not asking for more time. Very well. Your comment about the daily violation of the Rules is, of course, wholly wrong and inappropriate.

We'll call the witness.

MR. NICE: Thank you.

[The witness entered court] ⁵³⁷⁷

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. THE WITNESS: Thanks.

WITNESS: BATON HAXHIU

[Witness answered through interpreter]

MR. NICE: Your Honour, I will take the short evidence in chief from this witness in a couple of minutes' time. Before I do so, can I remind the Chamber that by his two statements, to which we will refer later, the witness gives an account of his having been involved in the founding of the newspaper Koha Ditore, and indeed he is a journalist in due course to receive an award in the United States of America at the 9th Annual Press Freedom Awards ceremony where he was awarded for his commitment to the defence of press freedom in Kosovo and throughout the world.

His statements cover matters of which we've already heard in part, and sometimes substantially, including the history of the education problems and the education agreement in Kosovo, the non-violent demonstrations by students and others that led to protests in October 1998, which involved violent police intervention, and in the judgement of the witness, reaction thereafter by Albanians.

He can speak, of course, of the violence perpetrated at the offices of the newspaper where he worked, of his own arrest and interrogation, and of the processes of negotiation between Kosovo ⁵³⁷⁸ ^{BLANK PAGE} ⁵³⁷⁹ Albanians, including the person we've seen as a witness, Bakalli, and others that followed.

He can deal with the meetings involving, amongst others, the man Stanisic, and indeed he's a witness who observed the participation in events by the last witness but one before this Tribunal, the witness Tanic.

He can explain how the Serbian delegation at those negotiations indicated its implacable opposition to certain proposals and can remind the Chamber of the Burnt or Scorched Earth policy that was referred to by the Serbian side. He will be able to remind the Chamber of how it was that authority for negotiation appeared to be vested in and only in ultimately the accused and the man Stanisic who attended at a second meeting in December of which the witness can speak, in the course of which Stanisic said that the chief of police in Kosovo, Sreten Lukic, had convinced the accused to break up the students' peaceful demonstration by use of force, Stanisic saying that he could not decide anything on his own, although being emphatic that the proposition for a republic in Kosovo would never be accepted to those nationalistic circles surrounding the accused who were prepared to go to war.

He, as a witness, expresses the view that the KLA was the product of Serb repression, of an inert international policy and, it may be, of the conservatism in the approach of President Rugova, again a witness from whom you've heard. This witness is one who, with no involvement on his own part or on the part of his family, lost five members of his family on his father's side, including a 9-year-old boy, in the course of the ⁵³⁸⁰ conflict.

Examined by Mr. Nice:

Q. With that summary, your full name, please?

A. My name is Baton Haxhiu.

JUDGE MAY: The statement ought to be admitted, the original statement.

MR. NICE: Your Honour, yes. I was going to turn to that.

Q. Did you, Mr. Haxhiu, sign declarations as to the accuracy of two statements that you have made?

A. Yes.

Q. The first being a statement prepared at interview on the 20th, 21st, and 22nd of August of the year 2001, and the second being an addendum prepared as recently as yesterday?

A. Yes. The first was taken down in Prishtina on the said date, the second yesterday. That's correct.

Q. The second makes one or two corrections and amplifications, deals with the significance you see in certain documents, and deals with one face-to-face encounter you had with the accused. Turning to that, were you, as a journalist, present at a press conference in Ljubljana, Slovenia, in the late spring or early summer of 1990?

A. Yes. It was in March or April of 1990. It was a news conference organised after the meeting held by the six presidents of the former republics of the former Yugoslavia, and I was there in the capacity of a journalist, represented then the newspaper Epoka. And I asked two ⁵³⁸¹ questions of the accused.

Q. The questions and his replies, if you please.

A. Since I had read the book written by the accused where, on page 146, he had said that all issues are open issues, from the border to the kindergartens and the creches, then taking my queue from that statement, I asked the accused: "When are you, Mr. Milosevic, going to get rid of chauvinism and enable the Albanians of Kosovo to determine their own status and win the status of the Republic of Kosova?" And he answered, "This will never occur because the Albanians there are in minority and they don't have the right to self-determination and we are not going to allow secessionism in Kosova and do everything we can to prevent that from happening."

Q. You say there were two questions you asked. Was the other one of any significance?

A. No.

Q. Thank you.

THE INTERPRETER: Can you please switch the microphone on, please.

MR. NICE: My apologies. Yes. The book to which the witness refers has been located in the building. The passage to which he refers has been translated. They're both being brought to court pretty well immediately. And, Your Honour, with your leave, I would just ask two other questions arising from the supplementary material.

Q. In addition to the book to which you've referred, do you regard one or two other documents of particular significance, documents that were ⁵³⁸² published at that time? If the answer to that is yes, can you, but very shortly, in a sentence or so, explain what the documents were and their significance, they being documents that you know we don't have here in the building in English. We do have them, I think, available in Serbian.

A. [Interpretation] Yes. There are three documents which have been published in 1996. The first is called "Unfinished Peace," compiled by a group of authors. Then it came out in the form of a book. It's about the visit they made in the region in 1996. They met the accused, and they found out that the situation of the two ethnic groups and the relations between Serbia, the regime of Milosevic, and the parallel system in Kosova were at a deadlock. During the meeting, they found out that the Serbs are incapable of maintaining a tolerant stand towards Albanians and negotiating with them.

Another book which observed the same thing was another book speaking about the meeting with Albanian and Serb leaders and warning that the situation in Kosova was on the brink of war. Another document was that which was prepared on the basis of a meeting held between the Albanian and Serb leaders in New York, and it noted that the Albanians and the Serbs are extremely away from each other and from coming to terms regarding the definition of the status of Kosova. These were sufficient reasons to note that the situation in Kosova was serious and the political process was degenerating. And for this, Belgrade was to blame, and the accused as well, who had started -- who continued, I would say, to dramatise the problem of Kosova and transform it into his own private affair. ⁵³⁸³

Q. I invite you to pause there. You've identified the documents in general terms, more specifically in the statement, and they're available here for consideration by the accused or the Chamber, if necessary. You've explained their significance, that settlement seemed difficult or impossible at that time. Just then tell us this: Penultimate paragraph on the addendum statement, in the course of your work as a journalist, how complete was your survey of the relevant politicians? How many of them were you able to meet?

A. To be frank, Koha Ditore was the only institution free of any influence either by the Serb regime or the Democratic League of Kosova. We were an entirely independent institution, and we tried to reflect the opinions of all parties in order to make clear the prevailing views. Personally, I have conducted 21 interviews with all the Serb opposition and ruling party leaders. That is the Socialist Party, including Mihajlo Markovic, Radomir Bijodic [phoen], former Prime Minister, Vukanic -- I can't -- I don't want to number them here, but there are a total of 21 interviews, and in all of them, with the exception of two or one of them, I think, the others said that the problem of Kosova cannot be resolved without the engagement of the accused and another name very close to him, Mr. Stanisic.

Q. All right.

A. That all the interviewees --

Q. That's, I think, all I need for the time being.

A. Okay.

Q. Did you attempt to interview the accused? Did you attempt to ⁵³⁸⁴ interview the accused's wife?

A. In fact, I considered it as a very serious challenge for myself to conduct an interview with the accused, because he was the main participant in all the events in -- from 1987. But despite my insistence, I have always received a negative answer or no answer at all.

Q. Thank you, Mr. Haxhiu, you will be asked some further questions.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. An exhibit number for the statements.

THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this will be Prosecutor's Exhibit 169.

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Milosevic, it's for you now to cross-examine this witness, bearing in mind that much of the evidence is about background matter. We've already expressed a view about that, that the relevant matter in this case concerns the indictment, and any preliminary matter is only of significance insofar as it relates to that. The political views of the witness are irrelevant, and therefore, a political argument will not be of assistance to the Trial Chamber. So if you would take this as shortly as you think proper.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Does that mean that the cross-examination will be limited to one hour?

JUDGE MAY: Yes. This is a 92 bis witness. There was a bit added. The normal rule is one hour. We will consider at the end of it if there's any significant matter which needs covering, and also whether the hour has been spent to proper effect. So that means an absence of argument and repetition.

Mr. Haxhiu -- just one moment. Just one moment. ⁵³⁸⁵ Mr. Haxhiu, could you bear in mind, please, when answering questions, that time is limited and, therefore, if you would answer as shortly as you properly can, that would be of assistance.

THE WITNESS: Okay.

JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Milosevic.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I wanted, as a preliminary, to put a question to you, because you said if the questions are appropriate. Do you mean that some of my questions were inappropriate?

JUDGE MAY: Some of them, yes, because you tend to argue with the witnesses and to repeat what's been said and go over the same ground several times.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. May, I would like to get an answer to my question. I only insist on getting an answer. I am not aware of having quarreled with any witnesses, because these false witnesses that are coming to testify do not merit me disputing -- having a dispute with them.

It is now ten to ten. I'll see what I can do. Cross-examined by Mr. Milosevic:

Q. You gave a statement to the investigators of the Prosecution, did you not?

A. Yes, I did, a statement that was recorded in Prishtina.

Q. You spoke to an investigator whose name is Fred Abrahams; is that right?

A. Yes. Yes. And apart from him, there was also someone else present at that meeting. ⁵³⁸⁶

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Would you please explain to the witness, if I'm asking such direct questions, that his answers have to be yes or no. I did not ask him about the presence others but only about Fred Abrahams. His answer is yes, so I can move on.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. Bear that in mind, if you would, Mr. Haxhiu.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Did that person introduce himself as an investigator of the OTP?

A. Yes. The other person who was there present introduced himself as by this name or in this capacity.

Q. [Previous translation continues]... about the other person. However, in your statement, you say that you gave that statement to the International Criminal Tribunal. Isn't that right?

A. Yes.

Q. And the person who interviewed you, did he introduce himself as an investigator of the Tribunal or an investigator of the Prosecution?

A. He introduced himself as an investigator of the Tribunal.

Q. Thank you.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Gentlemen, Messrs. May, Robinson, and Kwon, I wish to indicate something because Fred Abrahams, the person who appears here in the role of an investigator that the witness is referring to, that same said Fred Abrahams, is a witness testifying on behalf of Human Rights Watch here.

JUDGE MAY: Yes, we noted that and in due course you can ask Mr. Abrahams about it if he gives evidence.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] No, I'm not asking Mr. Abrahams, I'm ⁵³⁸⁷ asking you whether someone who works at the same time as an investigator, someone who is following all trials, and witnesses are not supposed to follow trials, and who is a journalist of Human Rights Watch to appear in the role of a witness here. In how many roles can a person appear in? Only not in my case, apparently.

JUDGE MAY: Let's deal with that when it comes to Mr. Abrahams' evidence.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, indeed.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. You gave your statement in English. That is what you say in the first paragraph of your statement. But in the last paragraph, on page 10, it says, certification of witness: That the witness [sic] was read out aloud to you in the Albanian language.

A. I gave the statement in English. That's fact.

Q. Well, how, then, was it read out to you in Albanian?

A. These documents, which is done in English, is also translated in Albanian in this case. Every witness has a right to ask for that.

Q. I am glad to hear that. Do you think that that applies to Serbian as well?

JUDGE MAY: That's not a matter for him.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. If you made your statement in English and it was read out to you in Albanian, does that mean that the statement was not read out to you at the time you gave it but after a certain period of time, sometime later?

A. I gave the statement in my own home. It was recorded there. Then ⁵³⁸⁸ it was read to me in my office at Koha Ditore.

Q. After how many days?

A. I don't really remember. I don't think it was important. I really can't say how, exactly how -- when was that, after how many days.

Q. In any event, several days later; is that right?

A. Yes, that's right.

Q. You graduated at the faculty of law at the university in Pristina in 1992; is that right?

A. Yes.

Q. However, it says in your statement that you graduated in 1991, that you concluded your studies in 1991. Why the difference?

A. I did my studies at the regular university of Prishtina, but some outstanding exams which I had, I gave them in a parallel university, those exams which I couldn't take during the regular course of studies because we were driven out of the offices of the faculty of law where I was a regular student.

Q. And when were you chased out of the premises of the law faculty?

A. It was not that we were driven out, actually, but we were not allowed to enter it in October 1981 -- in 1991. There were police forces in front of this faculty building as well as in front of other university buildings.

Q. And you are claiming that the police would not allow Albanian students to enter the faculty premises in 1991?

A. Yes, that's correct.

Q. Please answer my question: Is it true that it was not that ⁵³⁸⁹ tuition was suspended but there was a boycott by Albanians in response to a call by separatist Albanian politicians in the country and abroad to boycott everything under state control; in education, in health, in public media, in economic enterprises and so on. Is that correct or not?

A. No.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, may I have a document here which shows that in 1990 some municipalities of Kosova, all the professors were withheld their pay, and after that, 680 professors of Prishtina municipality were likewise withheld their salaries. And this went on for 2.000 professors in Prishtina. I have documents here with me to corroborate what I'm saying as to the number of professors who have been -- who have been -- tied their hands. I have documents here. I don't see it as a boycott. It seems unreasonable for me to boycott tuition and education.

JUDGE MAY: Very well. We -- Mr. Haxhiu, we have the point. At the end, the Prosecution can re-examine, and if they want to bring out any points, they will.

Yes, Mr. Milosevic.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. So you don't know anything about the boycott from the period you're testifying about. You know nothing about the boycott I asked you about, nothing at all?

JUDGE MAY: He says it wasn't a boycott.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I answered this question. There wasn't a boycott. I'm a hundred per cent sure there was no boycott. ⁵³⁹⁰

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Very well, then. And do you know why some teacher does not receive his salary? Do you know that salaries are usually not received when one doesn't perform one's duties and that salaries are linked to work? So are you claiming that those teachers and professors in schools and universities that were not receiving salaries were performing their duties and still did not receive salaries, or were they not performing their duties?

A. Even when they were -- when I was at school in 1990, in Decan and Podujeva and Vushtrria, the Serbian government stopped the teachers' salary. This started in 1990, let us not forget. Later this was reflected in all the towns of Kosova. I believe that the Serbian government will have evidence of this.

And in 1991, only 17 per cent, only 17 per cent of schools were able to accept Albanian students, only 17 per cent of the schools of Kosova. The university buildings and high school buildings were banned to Albanians because each of them were watched by two or three policemen in front of the schools. I was a participant in these events and I am a journalist.

Q. All right. Don't repeat what you've already said. You claim that the policemen didn't allow you to enter. What I asked you was: Do you claim that the professors that did not receive their salaries, that they carried out their work duties and, in spite of that, did not receive their salaries? That was the point and gist of my question. Did they perform their working duties as teachers in the schools? Were they doing their ⁵³⁹¹ ^{BLANK PAGE} ⁵³⁹² job properly and did -- or weren't they doing their job and that's why they didn't receive salaries? Which of the two?

A. I think that this is a game with words. They were unable to do their work if they were unable to enter the buildings. And when they started going to private schools, private houses, and they received their salary from the 3 per cent that was paid by the Albanians in the government of Mr. Bukoshi in exile.

Q. All right. So you're saying that it wasn't that they didn't receive their salary because they didn't perform their work, but they didn't receive their salary because they were thrown out and it was made impossible for them to do their work, do their job; is that it?

A. I can only say one thing. The Official Gazette of Serbia laid down clearly what the school curriculum -- I can't remember the exact date, but it laid down what the plan -- the curriculum of Kosova should be. Let me give an example. In the music schools --

JUDGE MAY: We're now going some way from the point. Yes, Mr. Milosevic. Let's move on.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. You mentioned the school curriculum. Was the school curriculum the same for all children in Serbia?

A. In the Prishtina musical school, you introduced about 400 songs that were in the Serbian curriculum, and this in a population that was about 90 per cent Albanian. Is this an argument to bring in 400 songs into the school of music? Let me not -- let me not even mention the issues in history lessons and other subjects of that kind. ⁵³⁹³

Q. Well, apart from music, were there any other problems? You mentioned history. History, you said. So music and history, is it?

A. Yes.

Q. And tell me, please, do you know how many tens of thousands of Albanian children went to the schools where tuition was in Albanian right up until 1999? Are you aware of that? Do you know about that?

A. I don't know of any Albanian, any single Albanian going to the schools organised by the Serbian government. I don't know of a single one. If you know one, give me the evidence.

Q. So they weren't going to state schools.

A. It was impossible. It was impossible. The schools were blockaded for the Albanians.

Q. I say they weren't. Very well. That's what you claim. Okay. Now, in your statement, you speak about the fact that Rugova's representatives of the DSK party controlled the Bujku paper and that they manipulated the information distributed to Kosovo's Albanian population, propagating the illusion that Kosovo would one day achieve its independence; is that right?

A. I said that -- you have taken this out of context in my statement, but I can say that the newspaper Bujku, in a kind of way, propagated the policies of the LDK, the Democratic League of Kosova.

Q. All right. So before you started work to establish a new paper, this idea was propagated, that Kosovo should achieve independence?

A. This idea was not propagated by Bujku, but it was quite simply an idea that every Albanian in Kosova had, which was obvious. It wasn't ⁵³⁹⁴ propagated as somebody's idea, but it was the idea -- it's part of an everyday mentality of the people who have their ambitions and goals to achieve, the idea of independence.

Q. Independence. And in that regard, you had a clear awareness of the fact that in Kosovo there were Serbs living there too as well as Turks and Muslims and Roma and Gorani, as well as the others. What about them? Did you consider that that was of no importance?

A. I think that in Kosova, or in a democratic political system, the majority decides in a referendum and that a part -- and it is clear that the majority ethnic group support the idea of independence and that the Serbian minority does not.

Q. Yes. But Kosovo is a part of Serbia. Is that something that you have in your awareness, in your consciousness? Kosovo is not a state for you to be able to speak about a majority community or a minority community. Kosovo is a part of a state, and the name of that state is Serbia.

A. I do not know that the state of Serbia is represented in Kosova. Kosova is in the process of forming its own statehood, and Serbia, for the moment, has no presence in Kosova, whether institutional or physical. And what was once an illusion -- so now the return of Serbia to Kosova is now an illusion, just as the independence was once apparently an illusion for us.

JUDGE MAY: We're now getting a long way from the indictment, Mr. Milosevic. Let's get back to the topic of this trial.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] ⁵³⁹⁵

Q. Please. Would you answer my question, this question: Do you understand by that that you are now free?

JUDGE MAY: No. That's an irrelevant question.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. And when you say that Serbia cannot meddle, do you imply the occupation, a state of occupation at the moment of Kosovo and Metohija?

JUDGE MAY: That also is irrelevant. Mr. Milosevic, deal with the time with which this indictment is dealing with, not irrelevancies.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. So from your statement, it would emerge that in a situation where independence was being propagated and in the situation in which you say you know that the Serb authorities would not allow independence - so those are the premises that you talk about - and also faced with a situation in which you know, as you yourself say that the Serb authorities will tolerate a parallel system which the Albanians have, therefore, what then, in a situation of this kind, does your option mean to accept disturbances of this kind for Kosovo to move ahead, risk shaking up the situation?

A. Let me only remark that the Serbian regime and the police had for years humiliated the Albanians and had assaulted their dignity. They had entered into every home. However, you, at the same time, tolerated a parallel system in Kosova which did not offer a danger of changing the situation that you had created.

The second element -- element, you tolerated what we might call the -- Mr. Rugova's 32 square metres of independence. And this little ⁵³⁹⁶ enclave of independence was subjected to extreme pressure. There was the pressure of murders, of torture, and of crimes committed by your police. So you were playing a double game.

And a third factor was the international community which found this situation a comfortable one, on the one hand to --

Q. [Previous translation continues]... I'm not asking about the international community now. What I'm asking you is this: I was asking you about your readiness. You say you were ready to accept violence, to opt for violence and shaking up the situation. So you were ready to opt for violence as a means of achieving your political goal. Yes or no. Yes or no.

A. Excuse me, I didn't say that in my statement. I said that Kosova had to change the status quo, and the only institution that was -- which was able to move in any way was the newspaper Koha Ditore, and it was able to bring new things into this process, which didn't mean violence but activism. Because the political process in Kosova had totally degenerated.

Q. All right. You say that in 1991 -- you say that in 1991, the Serb police closed down the student paper Bota e Re and that you moved to the Zeri paper. How come the police closed down the Bota e Re, the student newspaper, and it didn't do this to Zeri or Bujku and the others that were well known at the time for their nationalistic and separatistic orientation and so on?

A. There were two interventions in Bota e Re. The first one was because we published three caricatures and the police intervened, and then ⁵³⁹⁷ an article entitled "Kosova is not Serbia," and then the police intervened and imposed compulsory measures, and you, the Republic of Serbia, imposed a deputy of Assembly of Serbia as editor of Bota e Re. I will not -- for personal reasons, I will not mention this person's name.

Q. And what happened? Was perhaps this publisher a Serb?

A. What importance is that, when you introduce compulsory measures, whether he was an Albanian or a Serb?

JUDGE MAY: Yes, this kind of argument isn't going to assist us. Let's move on.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. May, I'm asking questions, questions that refer to what the witness talks about in his statement.

JUDGE MAY: Yes, and you get into an endless argument. You have got, so far, to page 1, paragraph 3 in the English, of his statement, and you've been cross-examining for nearly half the time you're allowed. I suggest we move on.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Did you leave Bota e Re because that same institution published the Serbian paper Zeri, so you wanted this paper to become extinguished, this student paper? Yes or no.

A. I don't understand the question.

Q. The question is: Did you leave so that Bota e Re could become extinguished because it -- there was a parallel edition of Novi Svjet in the Serbian language put out by the same institution? Therefore, you extinguished this institution and moved on to another one which was a ⁵³⁹⁸ purely Albanian institution where there was no parallel paper printed in the Serbian language. Is that right or not?

A. Bota e Re was an institution where only Albanians worked. On the other hand, there was Novi Svjet where only Serbs worked. I didn't go to Zeri because there were only Albanians there, I went for other reasons which I said, in fact.

Q. All right. Very well. Now, you say in your statement that in 1991, Television Kosovo was closed down. I don't know that Television Kosovo ever existed. I know that Radio Television Pristina existed, for example, within the composition of Radio Television Serbia, but Radio Television Kosovo, that -- did it exist? Did Radio Television Kosovo exist at all?

A. Excuse me for this semantic nuance, but there was -- Prishtina Radio Television did exist and I said Radio Television of Kosovo. In fact, it was Prishtina Radio Television that was closed and 1.300 workers were dismissed.

Q. All right. And what about Radio Television Pristina, which is within the frameworks of Radio Television Serbia just as Kosovo is within the frameworks of Serbia? Did it continue after those dates that you make mention of by broadcasting programmes in Albanian, in Serbian, in Turkish, in Romany? So what I'm asking you is did it have, throughout this time, that is to say from the time that you mentioned, did it broadcast all those programmes both in Serbian, Albanian, Turkish and Romany, in all those languages, where the editors who were Albanians, Turks, Romas, Serbs, et cetera? Did it or did it not? ⁵³⁹⁹

A. The programme was absolutely ridiculous. I just cannot imagine how a state like Serbia could sink so low as to employ people who were unable to read in the Albanian language.

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Haxhiu, if you would spare us the comment and just concentrate on the facts, please.

THE WITNESS: But he made a comment.

JUDGE MAY: It doesn't matter. I'm asking you if you would refrain from comment and just give us the facts.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. So is it yes or no? I asked you did the Radio Television Pristina have all these programmes and in all these languages, the languages of the nationalities living in Kosovo? Yes or no.

A. It had programmes only in Albanian -- Serbian and Albanian and a five-minute programme in Turkish.

Q. All right. But in Serbian and in Albanian. It had programmes in those two languages and you confirm that, do you?

A. The Albanian programme was ridiculous.

Q. Now, do you know about the network -- that's another question, whether it was ridiculous to you or not. That's a matter of criteria. We're not discussing that here now.

JUDGE MAY: Don't waste time on things like that, Mr. Milosevic.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. What about local stations? Did they exist? Those which broadcast in Pec, Prizren, Kosovska Mitrovica, Orahovac, Djakovica, Gnjilane, that broadcast programmes there, did those local stations exist? They didn't. ⁵⁴⁰⁰ All right. With editorial offices and journalists and editors who were Albanians and all these that I mentioned?

A. There was not a single radio station of that kind existed.

Q. All right. Which were the only ones, you say? Ah, I see, there were none, not a single one. Now, you say that the paper Bujku, that was under the control of Rugova's LDK, manipulated information and that it propagated the illusion that Kosovo would achieve independence and that therefore you were ready to accept the risk of shaking up the situation; shaking up the situation, disturbing the situation.

A. You have the translation wrong.

Q. Well, usually those doing the English don't make mistakes.

A. I said we were in a position to promote the process and lead it forward.

Q. Yes. Yes. I understand what you're trying to explain. Now, you say that those who gained diplomas at the parallel Albanian university had no prospects for getting jobs or moving on professionally because the state did not recognise those diplomas. That's what you say. Now, do you personally know of the case or the example of a single state that recognises the diplomas, even those from legal universities, before they are registered and recognised and certified? Do you think that a right has been violated there?

Q. Is there any state that banishes all its pupils and -- pupils and students from its school buildings? You asked for the reasons, and I give you the consequences.

JUDGE MAY: Let us deal with the question. The question was the ⁵⁴⁰¹ diplomas.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, he answered that more or less, and it's not a vital point, but he did answer it indirectly.

JUDGE MAY: Very well. Let's try and move on from the early 1990s.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. You talk about demonstrations. And you even say that the war in Kosovo began on the 1st of October, 1998, when the students held their first peace protest and that the goal of the protest was the application of the agreement that was signed in September 1996 by Milosevic and Rugova, and then you say that the Serb side did not implement what had been agreed upon.

Now, as I assume you know that it was precisely in the application of that agreement that tens of thousands of square metres were given the technical faculty, the Albanological institute and so on were handed over, and that the Serb side did in fact implement this, I'm asking you quite specifically now and concretely whether certain elements among the Albanians perhaps did not want to have the agreement applied because the agreement was signed in their name by Ibrahim Rugova whom you yourself did not recognise because, as you used to say, through his policy - and you say that on page 1 of your statement - that the DSK or LDK, whose head he was, propagated just an illusion that Kosovo would be independent and that it was necessary to move forward. Now, you --

JUDGE MAY: Now, shorten this question. It's quite impossible to deal with a question which has lasted a minute and more. What is the ⁵⁴⁰² question?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] He can answer because --

JUDGE MAY: No.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] -- he differs from other --

JUDGE MAY: No. There are at least two questions in that, if not more. One of them was that the Albanians did not want to implement the agreement.

Now, Mr. Haxhiu, is that right or not?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's not right. We very much wanted the agreement to be implemented, because if it were not, the process would be radicalised and the whole -- also the level of tolerance would degenerate down to zero.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. I'm not talking about you personally now because you're not testifying about yourself personally. I don't think you have anything to testify about yourself personally. I'm asking you about the radical elements who endeavoured to produce violence in Kosovo. Now, were they opposed to the fact that Rugova's agreement should be successful, that the agreement signed by Ibrahim Rugova should be successful? Yes or no.

A. I don't know what you're implying by "radical" forces. I know that we were all concerned for the agreement to be carried out, because this would show -- we see that the political process in Kosova was radicalised and the intervention against the students was fatal for the future of Kosova. It was the students who restored a fragment of the Albanians' lost dignity and disputed the occupation that you imposed in ⁵⁴⁰³ 1989.

Q. Very well. You're now under occupation. You were not occupied then. But you were under a similar occupation during Mussolini and during Hitler. There's not much difference. Probably you felt free in those days as well.

JUDGE MAY: This is a very long way from the indictment, indeed, and it's time to adjourn.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Page 3 of your --

JUDGE MAY: We're going to adjourn now. It's time for the break. Mr. Haxhiu, just to clarify one matter, you have clarified it in your second statement: Your arrest, I take it, and the various meetings took place in 1998; is that right? Not 1997.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It took place in 1997.

JUDGE MAY: That's the date of the first protest, is it?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] On the 1st of October, the police entered the premises of Koha Ditore.

JUDGE MAY: That is 1997.

THE WITNESS: 1997, yes.

JUDGE MAY: Thank you very much.

THE WITNESS: You're welcome.

JUDGE MAY: During the adjournment, Mr. Haxhiu, don't speak to anybody about your evidence until it's over, please.

THE WITNESS: Okay.

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Nice, I ought to clarify the ruling on Dr. Baccard ⁵⁴⁰⁴ ^{BLANK PAGE} ⁵⁴⁰⁵ and make it plain that if you want to recall that witness, then it must be done by way of an addendum to his report served in the normal way and so everybody has the time to consider it and prepare, and in due course, if you want to do it, we'll consider whether we'll allow him to be recalled or not.

MR. NICE: Thank you.

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

--- Recess taken at 10.32 a.m.

--- On resuming at 10.54 a.m.

JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Milosevic. You've got three-quarters of an hour more, which means you'll have nearly an hour and a half with this witness.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] So another three-quarters of an hour; is that right?

JUDGE MAY: Yes.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well. Let me try and be expeditious in covering these remaining questions that I have.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. So after this agreement that we referred to a moment ago, you continued to fear a radicalisation of the situation with respect to the attitude of the Albanians towards that agreement and in respect to Kosovo in general; isn't that so?

A. Yes, that is right.

Q. After these demonstrations that you referred to, you said that it was clear that there was no possibility for a peaceful settlement in ⁵⁴⁰⁶ Kosovo with the Serbs and that that was the view of the Albanians. You find that on page 3 of your statement.

A. Yes. I said after the unnecessary brutal intervention of the police against the students who were staging peaceful demonstrations, then I didn't see any other way out than the further radicalisation of the situation in Kosova. This was my personal view and analysis of the situation.

Q. Very well. Do you personally believe, because you say that was your personal opinion, that the student demonstrations in which four persons were taken into custody and when there were certain physical contacts between the police and the students, do you believe that that was the moment when the Albanians in Kosovo were beginning the war? Was really that sufficient for the war to begin?

A. I think that a process was needed to tackle the radicalisation of the situation. But in fact, there was a brutal intervention of the police. That was not the only case that contributed to the radicalisation of the situation. I can encounter here -- I can enumerate here many instances to prove that the radicalisation of the situation started from 1987 until the time came for the emergence of the KLA.

Q. Very well. But if on the 1st of October, 1998, you organised the demonstrations with the aim of implementing the agreement on education, tell me, then, why do you think there were demonstrations in Pristina and other places in Kosovo? For example, in 1981, which lasted for quite some time, when at the time 800 elementary and secondary schools were working, at the time more than 600 Albanian, more than ten faculty departments with ⁵⁴⁰⁷ separate tuition --

JUDGE MAY: We're now going backwards. Just one moment. Mr. Haxhiu, just one moment.

Mr. Milosevic, we're now going backwards in time, and we've had another beginning of a question.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'm trying to link certain things up, and my direct question is:

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Is it true, then, that the aim of the demonstrations on the 1st of October, 1998, was not the education agreement but, as in 1981, Kosovo Republic or an independent Kosovo? Yes or no.

A. I didn't say that the participants in these demonstrations did not aspire to independence at a point in time but I said that they protested being banished from entering the premises and protesting the insult perpetrated against them for a long time. I can talk to you about the demonstrations staged on the 1st of October.

Q. Very well. You also stated that in those days, that is in 1998, you had not even heard of the so-called KLA, and you make no mention of it in your statement. Do you know what kind of crimes and do you know of any examples of terrorism carried out by this organisation that you hadn't heard of on the 5th [sic] of October, 1998, which you indicated as being the date when the conflict in Kosovo started?

A. I didn't say that I didn't know anything about the KLA in 1998, but I said up to the moment that the students started their demonstrations, I knew nothing about the existence of the KLA. ⁵⁴⁰⁸

Q. So that is October 1998.

A. No. It is October 1997, not 1998. The demonstrations started in 1997, October the 1st, but the education agreement was signed in 1996.

Q. The 1st of September, yes.

JUDGE KWON: Excuse me. When was the date when you were arrested? Is it 1997 or 1998?

THE WITNESS: 1997.

JUDGE KWON: Thank you.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. So up to then, up to those demonstrations, you hadn't heard of a single killing, kidnapping, or any other crime or act of terrorism by the KLA, and you hadn't heard of the KLA.

A. Yes, indeed. I never heard of KLA up to the 26th of November, 1997. That was when I heard and I wrote for the first time my first article on the KLA, titled "Someone Has Been Fighting in Lubovec."

Q. Very well. You have devoted almost half of your statement to conversations that, together with Bakalli, as you say, had with people from the State Security Service. In those conversations, did you represent anyone in your organisation or were you participating as an ordinary citizen?

A. I was arrested. I was interrogated in the building of the state security. After many questions, which lasted for two hours, then one of those present there asked me, "Is there someone from your side - from the Albanian side, that is - who can be our interlocutor?" I answered that, until now, all the dialogue and conversations conducted have been ⁵⁴⁰⁹ unsuccessful because they have been conducted by people who have been on the sidelines, and if you are really serious about holding a dialogue with us, then I can take civic courage and I will assume also my personal and public responsibility to find out -- to ensure that we establish such a dialogue, for many reasons. We had the example of Bosnia, Croatia, the murders there --

JUDGE MAY: Just try -- Mr. Haxhiu, just try and concentrate on the questions. So the answer is that you were not representing anyone in an organisation but participating as an ordinary citizen.

THE WITNESS: As a citizen. I had a responsibility for that.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. You also said that in those conversations -- about those conversations, you regularly informed Mr. Hill, in the US embassy in Belgrade, and Mr. Norman, also a diplomat in the US embassy with whom you cooperated throughout that time.

A. We did not cooperate. We had friendly contacts with the aim that we prevent the outbreak of a war in Kosova. That was our goal. I don't like the play of words of saying "collaboration" so it sounds rather more like a Balkan conspiracy than something which is really of interest to discuss. It is true that I had discussed this issue with Hill, Bujar Bukoshi, Fehmi Agani and others, but we discussed a crucial issue; how to stop the war from breaking out in Kosova. That was the crux of the matter. And each and every one were interested to prevent that from happening, all these people that I mentioned.

Q. Very well. So you're explaining this as not being cooperation but ⁵⁴¹⁰ friendly relations, and I understand your explanation. But let us now clarify this point regarding your arrest.

You said that you were taken to the premises of the State Security Service. However, it emerges from your statement that this was an information interview. So you were not arrested.

A. It was right. When I was taken there, I realised that it was an information talk which, in Kosova, was a common phenomena. Tens of journalists underwent similar procedures like me. And I may say that those who were with me in that room behaved very correct with me.

Q. So they treated you correctly. They had this conversation with you to gain information. You were not arrested. They were courteous with you, as you yourself say in your statement, the only thing was that you were a bit nervous.

A. Yes, that's it, because in light of the prevailing situation and the way I was taken from the editorial office premises, it was rather aggressive. The police came there to fetch me. But when we actually arrived there in that building, they were, as I said, very correct towards me.

Q. Very well. So whatever I have just said is correct. The policemen told you clearly then that they didn't want any conflict, that they wanted to take steps to avoid a conflict and so on.

A. Yes. That was my impression.

Q. Please answer my direct question now: Did they ask you to establish contact or was this something that you offered to do?

A. No. They simply asked me if we could find the proper way to start ⁵⁴¹¹ negotiations. I promised that I will try, and then, for this, I needed to have my civic, public responsibility and courage, because in fact there was no one to stand up for Kosova. And we who knew, who were informed of what was going on, who were working in the newspaper, we received information from Serb, Albanian, international sources and we knew that it was impossible to undertake an uprising against a state machine and a military power like Serbian one was. And having this civic responsibility and courage, I said -- I promised them that I will see what I can do, because I was someone who had some influence, and I worked in an institution which was independent, like the Koha Ditore is. And Veton Surroi was another editor who also had a great influence at that time. So therefore, this was why I accepted to try and find someone who could negotiate between the Serbs and the Albanians. So I think I had enough arguments to try and do that.

Q. Will you please give me a direct answer to my question, and it is a very simple one with a yes and no: Were you a cooperator of the state security or not?

A. No, never. I only met your security service people three times; once in Bakalli's home, once in Brezovica, and another time when they took me and interrogated me.

Q. Very well. And they told you explicitly that they wanted to assist in establishing a dialogue to avoid a conflict; isn't that right? That's what you say?

A. Yes.

Q. However, you said that the situation was extremely tense and that ⁵⁴¹² you were afraid of an open dialogue precisely because of the existence of extremist groups which would not approve of such a dialogue; isn't that right?

A. We tried. I gave you the reasons why I tried to do; because of what had happened in Bosnia, because the Serbian state was very powerful militarily, and there was no one to stand up for Kosova. We had tens of arguments why we should enter into dialogue, and none of -- no arguments against it. This was why we had -- we felt we had to start dialogue. And I think this dialogue did not start because people around you didn't want that to happen.

Q. Yes. But you say on page 4 that you were afraid of a frank dialogue because of extremist groups.

A. I think that in April or May 1997, efforts were made to establish this dialogue with the Serbs. Mr. Agani tried to do with that Mr. Duhanovic and Tanic, but efforts were unsuccessful in New York and in other attempts made. Since the intervention against the students had provoked a revolt, a large scale revolt in Kosova every open form of dialogue in Belgrade or Prishtina we thought would be unsuccessful. I stated this at the peace institute in the United States, the State Department, Voice of America, in Serbian/Croatian language in an interview I gave to that radio.

Q. I understand, but I was just drawing your attention to what you said, that you were afraid of a frank dialogue because of the existence of extremist groups. That is in your statement.

JUDGE MAY: He's given his explanation. Let's move on. ⁵⁴¹³

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. So you attended the conversations conducted by Stanisic with Bakalli and you.

A. Yes. But before that, we held another meeting with Gajic and Hadic, whom we never invited nor asked to come, but they offered to come, thinking -- we thought that Mr. Stanisic is part of the group. But when we saw them coming to Bakalli's home, we couldn't turn them back.

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Haxhiu, just deal with the questions you're asked, please.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Did Stanisic make any threats against you at those meetings or was he -- did he treat you decently and enter into a dialogue with you?

A. [Previous translation continues]... Hadic were very severe with us. I think they came to Bakalli's home to show their force. They referred to projects which were shocking to us. Stanisic was something else.

Q. So Stanisic did not threaten you.

A. No, he didn't. Only Hadic kept pointing his finger at me.

Q. I'm talking about the meeting with Stanisic. Very well. So Stanisic did not threaten you with any kind of violence against the Albanians. Isn't that right?

A. Let me go back and make a digression. Stanisic said that we won't accept the option you offered, which was Kosova Republic. He said there is no one around Milosevic who will accept this alternative, and I am saying you that if you pursue it, we will end up in war. That was ⁵⁴¹⁴ expressly what Stanisic said. But he also said that, "I will personally see to it that you have your university and academy. But as to the status of Kosova Republic, forget about that. There are nationalist people around Milosevic who will invoke a war if you ask for that."

Q. Please. Please. I asked you a very clear question. Stanisic did not threaten you with any kind of violence against the Albanians during those interviews.

JUDGE MAY: He has given his answer.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] But I am asking this because he is the only participant apart from Mr. Bakalli, Mr. May. And Bakalli explained here that Stanisic allegedly threatened them.

JUDGE MAY: You put the matter -- you put the matter to him and he has --

Just one moment.

THE WITNESS: Yes.

JUDGE MAY: And he's answered in the words which Stanisic used. Now, that is an answer to the question.

Now, Mr. Haxhiu, what do you want to add, briefly?

THE WITNESS: Just I want to answer this: [Interpretation] Mr. Bakalli said here that not Stanisic but Gajic and Hadic said -- and threatened 600 and -- 463 villages which would be burnt, "If you did not give up the options you put forward." Stanisic did not mention the burnt villages, but it was the two representatives who came at the meeting with Stanisic. I can say that they were both fat bureaucrats, and their position was a stupid one. ⁵⁴¹⁵

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Very well. But Stanisic was the main speaker, not they, and he did not make any threats to you, and we can confirm that and move on. To go back to Koha Ditore, you say that in March 1999, it was punished. On the 22nd of March, it was fined 500.000 dinars. You called this a disgrace for the international minister, who started proceedings in the court in which you were fined; isn't that so?

A. I was sentenced to four -- 435.000 marks equivalent in dinars, and I consider this to be a disgrace for a minister of information. More over, the judge who sentenced me told me that he was obliged to give me the sentence because this had come from Belgrade. And this was the main issue for me, because he had no evidence at all.

Q. It says that you were fined 500.000 dinars. That is what you told the Beta agency.

JUDGE MAY: What page?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Let us ask the witness.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Were you fined 500.000 dinars?

JUDGE MAY: No. I want to find it in the statement.

THE WITNESS: Mr. May, in the second statement --

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Isn't this a statement on his part when he says it is correct that he was fined 500.000 dinars?

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Milosevic, we will get on better, if you are cross-examining on a statement, if you tell the Court where it is that you're referring to. It's fair to the witness, but it's also important ⁵⁴¹⁶ that we can follow the points that you're trying to make. Now, I've yet to find where this is.

MR. NICE: Can I help? The addendum has a reference to the fine on the second page, the third paragraph.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. Thank you. Yes, go on.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well. The witness has confirmed that he was fined 500.000 dinars.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. And as far as I was able to understand from information I received, 410 was the fine for your newspaper and 110 you personally.

A. I don't know what the dinar equivalent is, but that seems to be accurate.

Q. So 500.000 dinars, the equivalent in German marks. If you remember in 1999 the rate of exchange was 13 dinars to one German mark, so it could have been a couple of tens of thousands of marks. Isn't that so? So not 200.000 marks, as it says here, if I said it -- if I saw it correctly. Whether it is in the addendum or somewhere else, I don't know, I'm not sure.

Yes, in the addendum.

JUDGE MAY: Yes, we have the point. We have -- we have the point. Now, let's move on.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. So we've cleared that up as well. The newspaper was fined because of articles it carried, and the media wrote that the proceedings were ⁵⁴¹⁷ ^{BLANK PAGE} ⁵⁴¹⁸ instituted because the article provoked a national intolerance. Isn't that right?

A. Information we got from the court, that is true, but we don't know with what article we incited racial hatred.

Q. So you were punished for provoking national intolerance and hatred, and in your statement to the Beta agency, you called it a disgrace for the minister of information of Serbia. Isn't that right?

A. Yes.

Q. So less than a year after that, on the 9th of February, 2000, the head of the civilian mission in the UN, Mr. Kouchner, issued a decree, saying that anyone who publicly provokes hatred, conflict, or intolerance between ethnic groups will be fined heavily, up to a prison term of five years, and in special circumstances, it can go up to eight years, and if it is systematically done, up to ten years of prison. So I assume you're familiar with that decree.

How then do you feel as an intellectual, a journalist, a free journalist, a fighter for the freedom of the press, consider this fine of a couple of thousand German marks, you call this a disgrace, and here you have this same matter sanctioned by --

JUDGE MAY: This is turning into a speech. Now, what is the question? Put it shortly.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. The question could roughly be the following: How did it happen that in less than a year you should be transformed to such an extent that the fine of 400.000 dinars for you -- for your newspaper and 110.000 ⁵⁴¹⁹ dinars for you personally, you call it a disgrace, and a decree that provides for punishment up to ten years you consider acceptable?

A. The question of Kouchner has never been the means to punish any journalist because there has never been any need, just as no Serbian government ever sentenced Hashim Thaci for his news conferences. And we reported Hashim Thaci's news conferences in our newspaper. So why should I be convicted for carrying them in the paper?

JUDGE MAY: We're now moving into the realms of irrelevance. If you want to ask him about that particular incident, you can, but trying to compare it with other matters does not assist. I suggest we move on.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well. Let us move on so as not to waste time.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Is it true that you were informed about the beginning of the bombing and that you then went to Tetovo, Macedonia, and continued to publish your newspaper there?

A. To tell the truth, after the 18th of March, I wore a shirt reading "NATO, just do it." And even today, it seems to me incomprehensible why we didn't sign Rambouillet and --

JUDGE MAY: You were asked, Mr. Haxhiu, about going to Tetovo and continuing to publish. Now, will you please deal with that question and that alone.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. I left Kosova on the 2nd of April, and I was in a cellar in Kodra e Diellit neighbourhood, and there were -- with 30.000 inhabitants of that neighbourhood. We were all ⁵⁴²⁰ expelled on the same day, with a family and a child whom I did not know, and we travelled to Tetovo by car and came out in Macedonia. In Macedonia, I organised the newspaper Koha Ditore in exile, and this was distributed to the refugees in the camps in Macedonia and in Albania.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. We finally got an answer to my question. You fled to Macedonia and you continued to publish the newspaper in Macedonia; isn't that right?

A. I didn't flee. I was expelled. The whole neighbourhood was.

JUDGE MAY: Let us not argue about that. He said he was expelled. It's quite plain.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Only five days after the beginning of the NATO aggression on the 29th of March, there was a report that you had been killed. Do you remember that?

A. Yes. I saw it on television when I was in the cellar. And I think it was Komodor Velbi [phoen] who made a statement saying that, in Kosova, Fehmi Agani, Baton Haxhiu and three other intellectuals had been executed. I heard the report as other people did. I don't know where the information came from.

Q. Very well. My question is: At the time, you were in Macedonia, and on the 7th of April --

A. No, no, no. No. On the 29th, NATO stated that I was dead, at a news conference. I at that time was in a cellar in Kodra e Diellit in Prishtina, with three families. ⁵⁴²¹

Q. On the 7th of April, you stated for the independence that you could not deny the report on the radio because you had to hide for five days in a basement in Pristina. That's what you stated. And if on the 7th of April you were already in London and you made yourself heard in London, does that mean that you went to London straight from that cellar or did you first go to Macedonia?

A. After the cellar, we were four days in the hills near the border with Tetovo, and we left Kosova, and on the next day I went to Germany and met German Foreign Minister Mr. Fischer, and immediately from Germany I flew to London and met Mr. Cook with a group of intellectuals, and then until the 18th of April I went to France and met the French Foreign Minister. And I didn't stay a single day in Macedonia after arriving there.

Q. When did you deny this false NATO report that you had been executed by the Serbs? When did you deny that report?

A. I denied this on the 6th or the 7th of April on Deutsche Welle, at the 1530 broadcast, because the telephone links with Prishtina were cut and it was impossible to phone. And third, I was very frightened of announcing that I was alive. This is obvious.

Q. All right. What you want to say -- what you're saying is that you were late in denying it, not because you were saving credibility of NATO information, these false ones, but because physically you weren't able to make a statement earlier, before the 7th of April?

A. It seems a rather sad statement to make, but everybody in Kosova at that time was dead. We were impotent, in cellars, and with no idea of ⁵⁴²² what would happen to us. Anybody who was announced as being dead, this was a useful and relevant kind of information at this time.

Q. All right. Tell me this: In what capacity were you in the state of Virginia in July 2000; as a member of the delegation of Albanians or as a journalist? In what capacity?

A. There were two meetings, in Eli House in Washington and at Lansdowne.

Q. I was just asking you in what capacity.

A. I represented civil society. I have the documents with me, and you can see what I presented in -- at Eli House and at Lansdowne.

Q. All right. On the 26th of May, 1999, you took part, in the throes of the bombing in Yugoslavia, in Ljubljana at a meeting called Who is that Singing There? It was the fund opened by the association of Slovenia while your paper was coming out in Macedonia, and at that time you praised the NATO bombing; is that right? You supported it. Now, do you consider, Mr. Haxhiu, with all these activities of yours, that you were a part of the scenario not to support any kind of negotiations or, rather, to give a pretext for the NATO pact aggression against Yugoslavia? Do you consider that you were part of that scenario and a participant in that scenario?

A. Can I ask something? Why did not you, the Serbian delegation --

JUDGE MAY: Can you just try and deal with his questions. What is suggested, it appears, is that you were a part of -- part of a scenario, it's described, that was set up, which seems to be some sort of conspiracy which was set up to give a pretext for the NATO aggression, as it's ⁵⁴²³ called, against Yugoslavia. Now, was there any conspiracy, plan, or pretext of that sort?

A. Absolutely not. Absolutely not. This is the Balkan mentality. People in the Balkans always think of conspiracies. Life in the Balkans is a conspiracy. And --

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. All right. Not to waste time. You said no, so let's move on. Now, at the time you're describing on page 5 of your statement, you say: "It was clear to all the Albanians that to demand full independence could lead to war and that moderate Albanians had the position that to demand independence can lead to war."

A. We considered that the problem of the status of Kosova would be solved by a process, and the insistence on immediate independence led to conflicts, and we asked for a process in a very sophisticated and continual fashion, and indeed a dignified manner.

Q. All right. You indicate the existence of great demands for independence and that an obstacle to the public negotiations was fear of extremist groups therefor, that is to say groups in favour of the use of violence in order to achieve their political goals; is that right or not?

A. I would like to explain. Please do not take matters out of context. We are not dealing with extremist forces here or the threat of extremist forces. We are dealing with your lack of will and your -- the lack of will on your staff to solve the problem of Kosova. That's clear. You personally dramatised and made an icon out of Kosova as a problem, and the obstacle was here. ⁵⁴²⁴

Q. All right. So what I'm claiming is not correct; is that it?

A. No.

Q. Very well. Now, as you mentioned the Koha Ditore paper, is it correct that Ibrahim Rugova called upon the citizens of Suva Reka to join the KLA and give contribution to the fund to finance the KLA and that this was in the summer of 1998 in that paper, through that paper?

A. Rugova did not like to mention the KLA, and Rugova mentioned the KLA after the war, and this statement does not exist.

Q. But in the talk you said you had with the representatives of the security service, as far as I was able to understand on page 7, last paragraph, they mentioned armed Albanians fighting against the state; is that right?

A. The KLA was not mentioned. Armed groups were mentioned.

Q. Fighting against the state. Well, the KLA is the so-called KLA because it was a terrorist organisation, in fact. That's quite clear.

A. That's your idea. I think that the KLA was the product of the incessant repression by the Serbian state, and a group that, in a way --

JUDGE MAY: We're not going to go into that. We're not going to go into that for the moment, the various characterisations. You were asking about the meeting. Yes.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. All right. You say at the end of 1977 [sic], no Albanian wanted to accept any kind of autonomy or any kind of negotiation except about independence; is that right?

A. Right. ⁵⁴²⁵

Q. So in 1997.

A. Right.

Q. Very well. The ultimatum for an independence was something that every Albanian wished for, and you knew that any solution to the status quo of Kosovo would lead to an open conflict, and you talk about that in the appendix to -- addendum to your statement, and it is the Prosecution number 030363047; is that right?

A. Could you put the question again? Because it's not very clear to me.

Q. Well, it has to do with the fact that you said that no Albanian wanted to accept anything but independence; is that right? And then --

A. There were -- there was an element of flexibility in this, but there was not a lot of courage.

Q. All right. Through violence, then. And that conflict is something that you wished for and wished to provoke. Is that right or not?

A. Who?

Q. With some structures in the West. Is that right or not?

A. No, no. No, no. This is ridiculous.

Q. It isn't. All right. Now, it was your position that regardless of who was at the head of Serbia, that the problem was in fact Serbia and that it was the Serbian mentality when it came to the relationship towards Kosovo. So your position was that I was created by Serbia.

A. Yes. There was an article I published in a book called "Kosova" in Washington -- ⁵⁴²⁶

JUDGE MAY: Very well.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. All right. You've answered my question.

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Haxhiu, we're getting away from the indictment. Mr. Milosevic, your time is coming to an end. You can ask one more question.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have five more minutes, as far as I can see here, Mr. May.

JUDGE MAY: No, you haven't. You have one more question and then you will have had your 45.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. I must now refer to the addendum to the statement in English that I received last night, with just a few points, just a few points, please. I'm not going to take up much time in discussing it. So you said that you saw me in Slovenia in 1990 and you were among a group of journalists when there was the conference of six representatives of the republics of the former Yugoslavia.

A. We were just this kind of distance from one another.

Q. All right. As a journalist asking questions, then. And you say here that you asked me a question, and it was: "When would Kosovo Albanians be handed self-determination in Kosovo Republic?" That's what it says here in the statement.

A. Yes.

Q. Now, a moment ago when you were talking, you said that you had asked me, "When are you going to leave behind the chauvinist positions and ⁵⁴²⁷ give us Albanians the right to self-determination," et cetera, et cetera, which is something that you don't make mention of in your statement and I'm sure you couldn't have asked me something like that at the time using those words and that language but let's go back --

A. Of course look at the transcript, because you are -- a hundred per cent you were asked this question.

Q. All right. Now, please, do you consider that national minorities, that ethnic minorities in any country can, by expressing their rights to self-determination, secede from that state?

A. This is a dogmatic view. I don't think we should dwell on this.

JUDGE MAY: The views of the witness are not relevant. Now, you've got one more question.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. All right. Do you know how many European states would fall apart if their national minorities had the right to self-determination?

JUDGE MAY: If those are the questions you're going to ask, I'm bringing this to an end.

Mr. Kay, have you any questions? No. Mr. Milosevic, you've had more than enough chance. Yes, Mr. Kay.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have three more minutes, and it refers to --

JUDGE MAY: No. I'm going to ask Mr. Kay if he has any questions.

MR. KAY: Yes. Questioned by Mr. Kay: ⁵⁴²⁸

Q. I'm looking at the second statement of the witness, served 22nd May, and I'm looking at the passage which reads as follows. I'll read it out for your benefit, Mr. Haxhiu. "It is my opinion that the birth of the KLA was the product of Serbian repression towards Albanians, of inert international policy, and of Ibrahim Rugova's desire to preserve the status quo. After the Prekaz massacre in 1998, the KLA grew from a very small number to more than 20.000 men under arms." And it's that matter that I want to ask you questions about. Do you understand? It seems that there was a rapid growth of the strength of the KLA from 1998 to 1999. Is that right?

A. Yes, that's right.

Q. When you say that there were 20.000 men under arms, in what context do you mean that? Twenty thousand as a military force or 20.000 dispersed between military and living as civilians? Can you explain that to the Court?

A. I may explain it. In 1997, when I wrote an article in my newspaper, I didn't see more than 100, let's say, KLA soldiers. Following the Prekaz and Likoshan massacres, the revolt spread out all over Kosova and everyone thought it could find solutions by taking to the mountains and they rallied around this armed group which was called KLA. We think that this was the first step to restitute a lost dignity and fie the occupation, Serb occupation of Kosova. And the growth in number of the KLA is due to the murders perpetrated against children, women, elderly. This is the response of every Albanian who thought that some resistance should be put up to the Serb regime. ⁵⁴²⁹

Q. You've given us a lot of background there. I'm interested in detail. So please don't repeat the background again as we waste time.

A. Okay.

Q. We understand what you would say, all right? So 20.000 men, then, is that men in the hills, with weapons? Is that what you mean? Not citizens living in villages? How do you put that figure of 20.000?

A. A group of journalists, international journalists, and some of us visited the mountains near Malisheva. There was a burial ceremony there. We saw a long line of people -- of soldiers and males who were waiting to be -- to join the KLA. I can't say accurately whether -- if there was -- if there were 20.000 people, but something like that. It was in May 1998.

Q. Twenty thousand men under arms, and presumably the support for the KLA, including those not under arms, you would put as a bigger figure again?

A. I didn't say that all of them were armed, but some of them were sympathisers. Some were members of the KLA. Some were dressed in civilian clothes, some of them were dressed in military uniforms and with the KLA logo.

Q. Thank you. You answered my last question there.

MR. NICE: A few matters arising in relation to the questions asked by Mr. Kay.

Re-examined by Mr. Nice:

Q. The restoration of dignity by the KLA - it's also in the second statement you made - what had removed the dignity of Kosovo Albanians?

A. The dignity of the Albanians was broken. They were debased in ⁵⁴³⁰ ^{BLANK PAGE} ⁵⁴³¹ Kosova. They started in 1987. Just to give you some examples, constitutional amendments --

Q. Very short.

A. The constitutional amendments by force, the isolation of 300 intellectuals, banishing students from entering school premises, systematic repression, and the entry of police forces in every house, failing to implement the education agreement, the generation of the political process in Kosova, the fleeing of 500.000 Albanians from Kosova up to 1997 because they didn't find employment there, and the brutal intervention against the students; all this led up to the establishment of the KLA which in some way restored our dignity and contested the occupation, Serb occupation of Kosova.

Q. Thank you. Back to a few questions arising from questions of the accused. It was suggested at one stage that you had been ready to opt for violence. Just yes or no, had you personally been ever ready to opt for violence?

A. No, never. Never were we in favour of violence. We always were in favour of peaceful solutions. I have done this also in my site that I have opened on the Internet to promote Serb/Albanian dialogue.

Q. You were anxious at one stage in the questioning to say something about the Albanian language television programme. I'd like you to confine your answer to one sentence and preferably a short one: What was the characteristic of the Albanian language television output that you found unsatisfactory?

A. I think when it -- the television was closed and replaced by the ⁵⁴³² Albanian speakers. I don't know where they found those people, but the syntax of the Albanian language they used was outdated, incomprehensible, and the translations were absolutely translations using a Serb syntax.

Q. Was it an output that was likely to impress and cheer Albanian listeners or not?

A. This was done in the framework of a Goebbels plan initiated by Serb nationalists and translated in Albanian by Albanian speakers who were working in the Radio Television of Prishtina.

Q. The man Tanic, you spoke of his being involved in negotiations. To what degree was he a serious participant in these negotiations?

A. Tanic was -- we were together with Mr. Tanic and a group of Serbs in 1992 in Orid [phoen] at a conference organised by Boris Vukobrad, in Paris. I never met that person ever since, but the way he talked about the problems seemed -- gave me the impression that he was well-informed about the situation and the Kosova issue because he had a friend in Belgrade who was an Albanian journalist, and --

Q. [Previous translation continues]... was he actually -- was he participating in the discussions in a serious way?

A. Yes.

Q. Is it correct in answer to a question from His Honour Judge Kwon, a detail about --

A. Mr. Nice, [Interpretation] he was -- Mr. Mihajlovic and Tanic kept constant contact with Fehmi Agani as of 1993, and as the man who kept the contacts between them was Farim Strihiu [phoen], an Albanian journalist in Belgrade. ⁵⁴³³

Q. You corrected a date about your arrest, or you clarified a date about your arrest. Just for the avoidance of any doubt, in your statement, you speak of your understanding being that the war began on the 1st of October of a particular year. What year do you say it was that the war really began?

A. Politically speaking, the war started after the intervention of the Serb police against the students in the fictitious sense of the word but in real terms, it started with the massacre perpetrated against Likoshan.

Q. At the meeting with Stanisic and the two more heavily-built men who made threats that you described as not serious, did Stanisic expressly dissociate himself from the threats of the other two men, including the man Hadic?

A. Stanisic was aware of all what was said by Gajic and Hadic. Mr. Hadic was very arrogant, very brutal, and he turned towards me and said, "If you make this public, then you will end up where you deserve." Mr. Hadic -- in fact this group that is composed of two bureaucrats, was very brutal.

Q. [Previous translation continues]... did Stanisic dissociate himself from the threats to which they referred?

A. No. No, absolutely not.

Q. Then two last questions, one about the fine. There was a certain amount of room for uncertainty, I think. You've set out in your addendum statement, in Deutschmarks, a figure for how much you say the newspaper was fined and how much you were fined. The accused has drawn your ⁵⁴³⁴ attention to the figure of 200.000 Deutschmarks. Can you remember or tell us how much the fines were?

A. Mr. Nice, you cannot understand the inflation rates -- rate then in Yugoslavian state. Deutschmark kept fluctuating. Within a day, this inflation, for example, was 40.000 -- worth 40.000 Deutschmarks that day. On the next day or after two or three days, it went down to 25.000 Deutschmarks. So under these conditions, it's very difficult for me to give a precise figure.

Q. But as to whether it was a very substantial sum of money, as 200.000 Deutschmarks would always be, or a much more modest sum of the scale the accused is suggesting is reflected, what do you say? Was it a substantial fine or a comparatively trivial one?

A. It was very high fine. Earlier on, two other newspapers in Belgrade were fined. I think it was Vreme and Danas, if I'm right. I'm not sure about Danas. The third newspaper to be fined and warned to be closed down was Koha Ditore, but we were unable to pay that amount of money.

Q. I think the fine has never been paid, has it?

A. No.

Q. The judge told you that he had to fine you because he was told to do so by Belgrade. That's the way you put it in evidence. Did the -- without guessing, first of all, did the judge explain things in any more detail than that or were these exactly the words he used?

A. I said Bajram Kelmendi was my lawyer two days before he was murdered, and he addressed Mr. Kelmendi. He said, "Mr. Kelmendi, I know ⁵⁴³⁵ that this is not right, not just, but I have received orders from Belgrade and I have to carry out the order." Even though it was Sunday, a holiday, they took us to the judge's office to communicate the decision that we were fined because of an article.

Q. Did you - just yes or no to this, please - did you understand what he meant by saying that Belgrade had given this instruction? Just yes or no.

A. Yes, we understood.

Q. Right. It was just yes or no. Would that understanding be based on previous experience of a similar kind or would it be based on a general understanding of the political situation at the time?

A. I think that there were similar occasions going on -- cases going on in Kosova courts.

Q. Do you have - and again just yes or no - do you have any hard evidence to show where the instructions from Belgrade were coming from, whether they were coming from the judiciary, from the administration, from an individual, from another body? Just yes or no, do you have hard evidence to say where the instructions were coming from?

A. No. I can't say, but this is what he told us. "I have orders from Belgrade." He didn't show us any proof or any evidence.

MR. NICE: I'm obviously content to go and ask the next question but in the circumstances unless the Chamber wants me to, I don't think I will.

JUDGE MAY: No.

MR. NICE: ⁵⁴³⁶

Q. And finally, you were asked about connections to NATO at the time that you'd been reported as dead when you were in fact in hiding. At the time that you were in hiding, did you have any connection, practical, whether by radio or otherwise, with NATO or any members of NATO?

A. I have never had any connections with NATO, neither did I have any physical possibilities to communicate with my neighbour, let alone with NATO.

MR. NICE: Those are all the questions I ask arising from the cross-examination.

Questioned by the Court:

JUDGE KWON: Mr. Haxhiu, up to quite recently, you were known to us under a pseudonym as K28. Do you know that?

A. No.

JUDGE KWON: Didn't you apply for the protective measures?

A. [No translation]

JUDGE KWON: Were there any threats or danger in regards to your testimony?

A. No. There has never been any threats because I've never had anything to hide. Some media has written some prattle about me.

JUDGE KWON: If Mr. Nice could assist us.

MR. NICE: I'll make clarify that. I'll make inquiries and clarify, perhaps after the break, and I'll certainly I'll retain the witness long enough to ensure that anything that arises from the clarification can be dealt with.

JUDGE KWON: Thank you. ⁵⁴³⁷

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Haxhiu, that apart, in case there are any questions about that, but apart from that, that concludes your evidence. Thank you for coming to the International Tribunal to give it. You are now free to go.

THE WITNESS: Thank you.

[The witness withdrew]

MR. NICE: The next witness is one to whom I had hoped to speak this morning before he came to give evidence. In the event, I haven't done so and haven't been able to ask him a couple of questions arising from his summary that I would prefer to do. I don't think it's possible. And the summary has just been served. It's a rather long summary but I'm happy to tell the Chamber that nearly all of the material in the early pages has been covered by other witnesses and so I'll be able to go through it very quickly. It's one of those statements that might conceivably have been dealt with on a partial 92 bis basis but we decided, in light of his position, not to. So I was going to wonder if the Chamber might consider taking a slightly earlier than usual break.

JUDGE MAY: Yes.

MR. NICE: May I make a correction to something I said this morning in relation to Dr. Baccard's possible giving of evidence about the other report, other forensic report. I said that that evidence had been disclosed. The position is that it was disclosed in full and in colour to the amici on the 6th of February. At that time, a black and white copy only was served on the accused because he wasn't looking at or using his materials at all and it was thought better to save the colour version for ⁵⁴³⁸ provision to him at a time when it became more likely to be useful to him. His approach has, of course, now changed, as we now know. We will -- we are in a position and will serve the colour version on him today.

JUDGE MAY: But as far as I understand it, Dr. Baccard's comments are something knew; is that correct?

MR. NICE: Correct. They'll have to be the subject of a further report if we decide that we wish to seek to add his evidence at a later date.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. Well, that seems to me the proper way to deal with it.

MR. NICE: And if we do that, if we do that today, we'll be in time within 30 days from now.

JUDGE MAY: Very well. We'll adjourn now. Twenty minutes.

--- Recess taken at 12.02 p.m.

--- On resuming at 12.24 p.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: If you would like to take a seat.

WITNESS: ADNAN MEROVCI

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

Q. Your full name, please. Can we have your full -- it may be a good idea if the witness puts the headphones on, I think. I know you ⁵⁴³⁹ understand English.

A. It's okay. It's okay for me.

Q. Very well. Could you tell us your full name, please.

A. My name is Adnan Merovci.

MR. NICE: Your Honour, the summary that's been provided in 12 pages, I think it is, is one that I can deal with, I think, very summarily so far as the first six or seven pages is concerned. As to background, I hope I may be permitted to lead.

Q. Were you born in the Vucitrn area, studying electrotechnical engineering at Pristina, graduating in 1981, thereafter working for the Associated Bank of Kosovo in Pristina?

A. That's right.

Q. In 1983, did you start compulsory military service which you completed, returning to your job in the bank until 1990, when you were dismissed in circumstances we'll hear about shortly? Correct?

A. That's right.

Q. And as we're going to discover, you were, for several years, the personal assistant to Dr. Ibrahim Rugova, the witness who we saw a few weeks ago?

A. That's right.

Q. By way of clarification and in order to explain why I'm skipping over certain paragraphs, Your Honour, although the witness deals with the Kosovo Polje events in paragraph 2, Mr. Merovci, were you actually present there yourself or not?

A. No, I was not present personally, but I followed it in the media. ⁵⁴⁴⁰

Q. In which case I can go to paragraph 3, the background of ethnic tensions.

Before you lost your job, while you were still at work, in work was there any deference of one side to the other? If so, how? Or of one group to the other.

A. At the time we're talking about, that's after 1981, relations at work and human relations between the Serbs and Albanians were tense. And the Albanians respected the Serbs in daily life and at work. Personally, I worked in an office with members of the Serbian community, and we were very polite to them. I can cite only one example in a group whenever a meeting was held and there was only one Serb was present, the Serbian language was used so that one person in the middle of ten others should not feel discriminated against.

Q. Paragraph 4 but over the page. Television output, did it have any effect on relations between Albanian Serbs -- Albanians and Serbs? I beg your pardon.

A. At this time, propaganda in the mass media had its effect. It was propaganda dictated from above, and it was propaganda that treated the Albanians as second-class citizens, and it favoured the Serbs and described the Albanians as a people perpetrating injustices against the Serbs. This is what it was like.

Q. Give us, just in a sentence, what if any would be the effect of such output on relationships at work in a mixed community on the day or days following output of the type you've described.

A. In fact, at this time, relations were at a minimum and might be ⁵⁴⁴¹ described as proper on the surface, but they were in fact tense because of the events of these times and because of the propaganda that was directed from above. And any event that happened was described in a false way and this had an effect on working relationships.

Q. We've heard a great deal about the revocation of Kosovo's autonomy, and we've heard of the arrest of the man Vllasi. After his arrest, was there a movement of Serbs into Kosovo?

A. As I said, the initiative, the constitutional changes were issued for public discussion, and the people of Kosova expressed their discontent at the prospect of these changes. And at this time I was employed in the bank and was a member of the Independent Trade Union which mainly dealt with workers' rights. And we, too, as bank workers, expressed our discontent at the constitutional changes, the changes to the constitution of 1974.

Q. You mentioned in your statement and in the summary the speech at Gazimestan, but again were you present? Just yes or no.

A. If -- if I may be allowed, the previous question you mentioned Vllasi, who was the political boss of Kosova and the man who in the political structures mounted the greatest opposition to the constitutional changes, and he paid with prison for all the things he did.

Q. Yes. But we've had this evidence, you see, from elsewhere.

A. Okay. [Interpretation] As for Gazimestan, this was an event of a nationalist character. It was an event involving --

Q. [Previous translation continues]... follow what may seem to you to be tedious instructions. Yes or no, were you there? ⁵⁴⁴²

A. No, I was not.

Q. We've had the evidence from other witnesses, so unless you're asked about it by the accused, I'll move on.

We know of the creation of the LDK party. Did you become active in it from an early stage, and indeed, did you take the position initially as part-time assistant to Dr. Rugova while you were still working at the bank?

A. From the foundation of the Democratic League of Kosova on the 21st of October, 1989, I was an activist or a part-time activist. And when I was dismissed from my job, I became a very involved activist, involved full-time in the work of the LDK.

Q. Let's move towards the loss of your job, but first of all, tell us this: At work, were you a member of the trade union, and indeed did you hold office in the trade union at the bank?

A. Yes. We tried -- we tried hard to defend workers' rights because this was a period when the rights of Albanian workers, too, were threatened.

Q. At this time, 1989, were there measures that I think you described as emergency measures in place, and if so, what effect did they have on Albanian employees at work?

A. This was a time when the Serbian regime wanted to take economic control of Kosova, and in this sense, in the bank where I worked, emergency measures were imposed, and as a result of this step, about 300 workers were dismissed in the entire organisation of the bank, and only 60 Albanians were left, and not one Serb was dismissed from his job at this ⁵⁴⁴³ ^{BLANK PAGE} ⁵⁴⁴⁴ time.

Q. A couple of other things: The measures of which you speak, did Albanians have to indicate their acceptance of those measures in some particular way?

A. In fact, these measures were of an entirely political character, and the imposed management was directed by the regime and tried by means of some simple operations, supposedly merely of a contractual nature, to dismiss the Albanians en masse. I could produce evidence of this. In one case, the imposed authorities tried -- tried to dismiss all the workers from the bank.

Q. Back to the question: How did the Albanian workers have to show they acknowledged, if this is the case, these emergency measures?

A. The Albanians understood these measures as being political ones, even though, in the bank where I worked, they tried to explain them as a part of -- part of the bank accountancy measures.

Q. It's my mistake for not being clear, obviously. I'm going to move on. It may not apply to people in the bank but was there anything a person had to wear to show their acknowledgement of measures?

A. Sixty workers were left from 400 previously, and they were all mainly experts in their professions without whom the bank wouldn't have been able to work. And I was one of them to start with, for a few days --

Q. All right.

A. -- because I used to work in the computer centre.

Q. I'm not making myself clear. My fault, Mr. Merovci. We're just going to move on, I think. ⁵⁴⁴⁵ Despite the cut in number of Albanian employees, were other workers taken on in the bank, and if so, what nationality or what group were they from?

A. At this time, there were cases in which other employees were taken on, and these were Serbs. And not a single Albanian, as I said before, was ever employed later, and not a single Serb was dismissed. On the contrary, we have cases in which other Serbs were engaged.

Q. Where did these new Serbs find to live when they got a job in the bank?

A. Could you repeat the question, please?

Q. Yes. These incoming Serb workers at the bank, where did they find to live?

A. These people who were employed, we're now talking only about the time when emergency measures were taken, because some Serbs indeed even came before this time as part of the programme to bring Serbs to Kosova, and there were Serbs brought from Serbia; and in my office, sometime around about 1986, a colleague of mine came who knew nothing about the job but who had every privilege, and he was not competent and decided to leave himself. His name was Budimir Kavacic, and he was a chemist.

Q. Mr. Merovci, again probably my fault, but the simple question was where did they find to live; how did they find apartments, matters of that sort? And you've replied how they had every privilege.

A. They came and lived in flats assigned to them by the company, mainly outside Kosova.

Q. Now, you lost your job, as you've already told us. What was the ⁵⁴⁴⁶ cause, what caused you to lose your job?

A. I was involved in the computer centre, and I was removed along with all the other Albanians in the bank because of the bank clearance system, but a few days before, my supervisor summoned me to his office and said that, "You will have to choose between your job and politics," because he had seen me on television with Mr. Rugova. And my response was, "This has no effect on the work I do, and my political activities are free and are my personal affair." But after this, the following day I received the decision on my desk for my dismissal.

Q. Albanian police officers, were any of those to lose their jobs? Were any retained? And if so, on what terms?

A. The police of Kosova, which had been largely Albanian, most of them left their work, refusing the orders brought by Belgrade. There were some who were dismissed in various different ways.

Q. Paragraph 13. Dr. Rugova was to become president following a referendum. And did you become his full-time assistant or personal secretary?

A. In 1992, that is after the referendum, there were presidential and parliamentary elections, and I was a person who was a close colleague, in the technical sense, of Mr. Rugova. I was his personal secretary.

Q. As to the result of those elections, how do you say they were dealt with by the authorities in Belgrade? Were they -- were they recognised? Were they tolerated? How would you describe it?

A. The Democratic League of Kosova was formed as a result of the tolerance extended to the pluralist system in the old federation. It was ⁵⁴⁴⁷ what you might call a bona fide party. And after this, elections were held, but these elections were not accepted by the regime and nor were they internationally recognised. But nevertheless, these elections were a continuation of the institutions of Kosova under the previous system so that there would not be an institutional vacuum. And the absolute majority of Kosova citizens organised elections at which the LDK and Rugova won a majority and Mr. Rugova won an absolute majority as president of the Republic of Kosova.

Q. Paragraph 14. In the late spring or early summer of 1995, did you find yourself in the police headquarters of Pristina?

A. That's true. In 1995, I was summoned by the Serbian secret service in Prishtina to what was called an interview for three days, three successive days.

Q. The apparent objective of those interviewing you being what?

A. The pretext to summon me was an absurd one and was not what the real purpose of the interview was. The real purpose was to ascribe to my work and through me to the -- to Dr. Rugova and to implicate Dr. Rugova in a supposed creation of a Ministry of Interior which was not part of the Republic of Kosova at all.

Q. You were interviewed for three days but you were not detained further?

A. I was held for three days, and after three days, I was released without being imprisoned.

Q. Were you presented with any document to sign in the course of this exercise? ⁵⁴⁴⁸

A. At this time, my position near to Mr. Rugova was very important to the security service, and most Albanians summoned to interviews of this kind were offered the chance of cooperating with the security service. And it was sort of offered to me but in a more subtle way.

Q. All right. We'll move on from that. In September 1995, did you find yourself involved with the police when you did land up spending time in custody?

A. Yes. In September of the same year, that is 1995, I was summoned by the same service. I refused to go there without having an official warrant. Then they warned me that they would resort to other means and ways. And one day the police stopped me on the street and told me to go there, and from there I -- there I was arrested. After the arrest -- this was a Thursday. It was not a coincidence, but it was deliberately done to detain us there during the weekend. And on Monday, they continued -- they said I would be staying -- and they kept me there for 30 days on the pretext that I was in possession - I don't remember even today - on possession of arms, of an arm, that is, three, four years ago. In fact, I offered to buy an arm, which was never found on me, was never confiscated, and was never used by me but in a statement of a person whom I don't know --

Q. We don't want to retry the whole issue. Were you eventually imprisoned for six months?

A. Yes. I was imprisoned. My lawyer, the late Bajram Kelmendi, appealed for my release, and I was released after 60 days. And my family to pay to put in my houses as a guarantee for my release. ⁵⁴⁴⁹

Q. And was the conviction dealt with on appeal and was it overturned?

A. After this time, the second instance court refused -- revoked this punishment. Then I was sentenced to six months of probation, but it was revoked by the second instance court on account of absence of evidence.

Q. Okay. We're going to move on from that. Thank you. Paragraph 16 I can deal with briefly. We've heard about the education agreement, we've heard about the meeting of Dr. Rugova and the accused at the White Palace. I think you went there but you stayed outside with the accused's chief of security; is that correct?

A. Yes, that's correct.

Q. Paragraph 17. By 1998, were you concerned that you and Dr. Rugova were being followed from time to time?

A. Yes, that's right.

Q. Could you calculate what was the reason for your being followed?

A. I think that we were being followed by secret services which knew everything about our activity in details. I have noted that. The Democratic League of Kosova was a legal party, and it made use of this possibility for conducting legal activities, which in my view were a jewel, I would say.

So in this way, there were very few pretexts or reasons for mistreating me.

Q. Why do you think they were following you or why were you being followed?

A. Because I was a key person in the technical structure of the president, the then-president of the Republic of Kosova's office. ⁵⁴⁵⁰

Q. I think you can speak, if asked, about the treatment you received at the Macedonian border on your return to Kosovo from trips abroad.

A. Yes.

Q. Don't worry about that now. Just yes, and if anybody wants to know, they can ask you.

A. Yes.

Q. Likewise at paragraph 19, did you become aware of what seemed to you a build-up of troops of the VJ near Suva Reka at one stage?

A. Yes.

Q. Again, you can answer detailed questions about that, if asked. Was there an agreement between the accused following meetings or following meetings of Dr. Rugova with the American Ambassador Walker? Was there an agreement to withdraw troops?

A. The agreement between the accused and the -- Mr. Rugova, there wasn't at that time. It was an agreement between the accused and Mr. Holbrooke, in fact.

Q. Were you -- were you aware of the terms of that agreement?

A. I was aware as much as I could through the media. I knew that it was an agreement on reducing as much as possible the Serb forces in Kosova, and on allowing a Verification Mission of the OSCE led by Mr. Walker.

Q. Did you get regular reports from the Kosovo information centre that enabled you to check whether the accused was sticking to the agreement?

A. The centre for information in Kosova was an institution to provide ⁵⁴⁵¹ information to the public in all areas, mainly about the developments at that time, and we had correspondence covering all the parts of Kosova.

Q. Were the terms of the agreement the accused had made with Ambassador Holbrooke being honoured?

A. In fact, this agreement was never made public to -- in details, but only it was referred to. Opinions were given about it. And we saw that a commission of the OSCE verification in Kosova was established.

Q. Very well. You went to Rambouillet as head of the Federal Secretariat, I think?

A. Yes. I was part of the delegation.

Q. We've heard a lot about that so we're going to go over to page 6 and paragraph 23. Was everybody bar one person of the Albanian delegation ready to sign the agreement at the conclusion of the talks?

A. In the first attempts made by the Kosova delegation, which worked jointly with the others, there was in fact minimal consensus reached, with the exception of Mr. Thaci, who had his reservations and who for some days kept postponing the signing of this agreement. In fact, it was not signed at that meeting. It was -- a letter of intent was signed, saying that the actual agreement would be signed in two weeks' time, after consultations to be held in Kosova.

Q. Yes. During that period of time and between then and the later meetings in Paris, I think, did you notice a change in the level of troops in Kosovo?

A. At this two weeks' period, which in fact turned out to be three weeks, despite the Holbrooke agreement, the Serb forces made use of this ⁵⁴⁵² period to occupy Kosova. Normally, these forces came mainly in the night. And I can prove their deployment with the reports of our correspondents who kept reporting on their movements all over Kosova.

Q. Same period of time, did you notice a change in the composition of the police units or in their presence in the area?

A. The Serb forces and what we could see in the streets intensified the so-called notorious checkpoints, as they call them. The structure of the police force was various, that is in terms of uniforms and technique and armaments they used or carried.

Q. Very well. Typically, how were they dressed, the police who you noticed at this period of time?

A. They were police donned in uniforms, in combat alertness. They wore green uniforms, blue uniforms, while the special forces usually wore green uniforms.

Q. So then we come to the Paris meeting. We've heard about that so I needn't trouble you with it save for this: Following the meeting, did you travel to Brussels and meet General Wesley Clark? Paragraph 27.

A. Personally, I didn't travel there, but the other group went there.

Q. I needn't trouble you with that. On your return from Paris, I think you went first to Tirana in Albania.

A. Yes.

Q. You went and found your way back into Kosovo. Did you notice Albanians already leaving the territory?

A. During my trip from Skopje to Prishtina, through the border of Hani i Elezit, we were the only ones travelling, going into Kosova by car. ⁵⁴⁵³ And we saw many cars leaving Kosova. They were mainly cars belonging to foreign organisations and civilians who were leaving Kosova with their families.

Q. Did you notice VJ personnel at tunnels on the highway?

A. Yes. But they were invisible, so to say, because it was a latent period, we then trying to pretend that everything was in order in Kosova, but in essence, the situation was quite different.

Q. What did you actually see the VJ personnel doing?

A. They were hiding, mainly in the mountains. I saw them on the road from Hani i Elezit to Prishtina, and in one instance, they stopped us at the crossroads leading to Viti. They conducted a routine check on us.

Q. Did you see them doing anything at any tunnel, please?

A. When we entered Prishtina, we saw that Prishtina was unlike before, with a fear prevailing everywhere. And we saw the presence of Serb forces like never before.

Q. And you can't remember anything special about what they were doing at any tunnel?

A. Are you talking about the day when we returned? This is all I saw. If you are asking me about the period up to the beginning of the NATO airstrikes, because we returned on the 21st and the bombing started on the 24th. During these three days, the situation was very tense and insecurity reigned everywhere. This was due to the demonstration of military and police force and their movements and activities, as I said, which were never seen before.

And to be more specific, they were present mainly in public places ⁵⁴⁵⁴ where people usually go, because --

JUDGE MAY: I don't think we're going to get this particular point. It's impossible.

MR. NICE: No. We'll move on.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. Move on.

MR. NICE:

Q. Paragraph 29. When you got back to Pristina, did you see any irregular or paramilitary forces, and if so, what were they doing?

A. Yes. We saw people carrying different weapons, civilians, people without hats with green jackets, as if they belonged to some formations, with their weapons on their shoulders, or sometimes they carried it on their hand and demonstrating, making their presence very obvious.

Q. What, more particularly, if anything, were they doing to property or to people?

A. During those days, in public places, in bakeries where people lined up to get loaves of bread or in various restaurants, coffeeshops, they started to show off their force and to destroy these places that belonged to the Albanians in Prishtina. This was the time when many explosions occurred and many restaurants and coffeeshops were destroyed which belonged to the Albanians.

Q. Had there been a cellular telephone system available to Albanians until then?

A. Communication with mobile phones was interrupted for Kosova. This happened mainly after the beginning of the NATO airstrikes.

Q. Very well. ⁵⁴⁵⁵

A. As well as the fixed telephone lines.

Q. 24th of March, the beginning of the bombing, did several prominent Albanians lose their lives? If so, can you name those who did?

A. After the NATO bombing, that night, the late Bajram Kelmendi was killed with his two sons. He was arrested in his own home, and he was liquidated --

JUDGE MAY: We've had evidence about this.

MR. NICE: Yes.

Q. And were others killed? You've listed them in your --

A. Yes. The wisest and most outstanding people promoting peaceful movements were killed; Latif Berisha, Agim Hajrizi from Mitrovica.

Q. And what was the effect of those deaths on --

A. The aim of the deaths or murders was to strike terror among the population by killing those wise men, as I said.

Q. Paragraph 32. Did there come a time shortly after the bombing started when Serb MUP turned up at Dr. Rugova's house? And I think you let them in; is that right?

A. Yes, that's right.

Q. Now, Dr. Rugova was upstairs and you stayed downstairs, so what you'll tell us will be new. Don't take long over it, but just tell us what happened to you and what did you hear these Serb MUP people saying?

A. The neighbourhood where Mr. Rugova lived was called Velania, and after the neighbourhood was purged of its inhabitants, the turn came for Rugova's house. An armoured unit came. The number of the police and soldiers was somewhat around ten, I think. They broke down the doors of ⁵⁴⁵⁶ ^{BLANK PAGE} ⁵⁴⁵⁷ his courtyard and the door of his home. I came down of the upper floor and I told them that there are people here, and then I raised my hands up in the air. I was maltreated by them. And when I told them that this is the house of Mr. Rugova, they said that, "We are doing your job, and this is the man who has been the first to ask for NATO bombing."

Q. How long were you kept there by these people?

A. On the ground floor I was mistreated, as I said, beaten for about an hour, and then they ordered me to call the entire family that was upstairs, which were Mr. Rugova and his family, two of his cousins with their families, myself, my wife. We all went down and for four hours we were detained there without water, without bread, without allowing us to go even to see to our natural needs. And there were even young children, a baby of six months old. A policeman --

Q. We've heard a little about this. I think -- were you subsequently instructed as to what you were to do next?

A. May I --

Q. Yes. Later that day, did somebody else arrive and instruct Dr. Rugova what he was to do next?

A. Yes. Later - it was about four hours later - a police official came, and I asked him what was his name. He said, "Jankovic from Suva Reka."

Q. I'm going to cut you short because we've heard about this. You can give the detail, if necessary, but the upshot of it all was that on the following day, the 1st of April, in accordance with what you were told to do, you left, under police escort, for the White Palace in order to see ⁵⁴⁵⁸ the accused; correct?

A. Yes, that's correct. It was in the evening.

Q. Right. Then at the White Palace, because we can get straight there, the Judges don't need to hear the same account twice, save in respect of important matters. At the White Palace, the beginning of the encounter with the accused, I think you were out of the room and you were with the accused's chef de cabinet, Goran Milenovic; is that right?

A. Yes, that's right.

Q. When did you join the meeting? Top of page 9.

A. Yes, I joined the meeting --

Q. Tell us, please --

A. -- during the last part.

Q. Tell us, please, what passed between you and the accused, if anything.

A. I was invited by Mr. Rugova to be present at that meeting, and he asked me about a press release that the accused asked him to sign. I said that the press releases usually are not signed. Usually they are not signed. And then I communicated with the accused and raised my concern over the dismissal, over the expulsion of the Albanians from Kosova, which at that time was about 700.000, and that -- I told him this is something which must threaten him too. I told him of my concern over the liquidation - at least this is what they were said to be - of some collaborators of Mr. Rugova - Hajrizi, Kelmendi - and the accused ironically took a pencil and wrote the names on a packet of cigarettes and said that, "I will see how to find out what has happened to them." And ⁵⁴⁵⁹ then when we were discussing why Albanians were leaving Kosova, I said that there are two arguments we have to focus on; why Albanians -- we have to find out why Albanians are leaving Kosova and going to Montenegro when bombing is going on there, and why not a single Serb from the northern part is leaving Serbia when they are, too, afraid of NATO like us but still not leaving their place.

These were two arguments which I presented to him while he was claiming that Albanians were leaving Kosova because of NATO and not because of, in fact, his police and military forces.

Q. When you refer to the north part, you're referring to Vojvodina?

A. Yes.

Q. And at that time, was bombing being suffered by those in Vojvodina as it was in Kosovo?

A. The bombing was throughout the territory of Montenegro, Serbia, and Kosova.

Q. Yet were any of the inhabitants of Vojvodina fleeing in the way that they were fleeing from Kosovo?

A. There was not a single case that I have heard of. And I have never heard of any citizen, apart from the Albanians, leaving Kosova. The Albanians left Kosova because of the repression and the special kind of warfare and the expulsion of the Albanians, house by house, giving them five minutes' time to get out.

Q. Did the meeting at which you were present include some reference to further progress by way of agreement, possibly by way of an interim agreement? ⁵⁴⁶⁰

A. The accused attempted to use Mr. Rugova at this meeting as -- for some kind of political propaganda, but at this meeting too, Mr. Rugova said that a third party is vital and this -- and after Rugova's political liquidation, his physical liquidation would not be an important matter.

Q. Yes, but whether for purposes of political propaganda or otherwise, was something said by the accused about an agreement?

MR. NICE: Paragraph 35, for the Court.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If this is this press statement that is under discussion now, that Rugova said that a peaceful path was necessary, and our main part on this side was our permission to leave Kosova. I personally asked for a mechanism so that -- we were being kept as hostages this day, and I asked for our release and asked for telephone connections, and the accused agreed to this.

MR. NICE:

Q. Well, that meeting came to an end. There was the question of the press release. Was one issued?

A. This press release, I am not a witness to its publication because at this time, we didn't get the media at home - our satellite antenna was cut off on the first night - but I heard that it was published in the media.

Q. The following day, the 2nd of April, where were you, back in Kosovo?

A. We returned on the same day, that's 1st of April. And on the next day, the landline telephone was working, and the first call I made, under arrest, was to call Ambassador Hill in Skopje and tell him about what had ⁵⁴⁶¹ happened and about the way the police and army had entered the house and about our journey to Belgrade.

Q. Did you, incidentally, have a phone call with the chef de cabinet, Milenovic, on that day?

A. On at that day, yes. We had calls from the chef de cabinet of the accused who offered or, rather, insisted that we should meet Ratko Markovic. But we said that these meetings are fruitless because there is no political process under way here, and what is happening is a battle for life or death.

Q. What did Milenovic say would have been the purpose of your meeting Ratko Markovic?

A. The accused, his chef de cabinet, said, "You should meet to talk about various issues which might have been a continuation of the meeting with the accused on the previous day." But as I said, I was a person who, in our communications, refused very determinedly to meet Markovic.

Q. Moving on a couple of days. Were you at Dr. Rugova's house when you received a visit from Nikola Sainovic?

A. Yes.

Q. Was this the first time you'd met that man or had you met him before?

A. It was the first time that this person had come to the house.

Q. On that day then, the 4th of April, was it -- I'm putting the date to you, I should have asked you for it. Do you remember if the 4th was the right date or was it some other date?

A. Yes, it was the 4th of April. ⁵⁴⁶²

Q. Sorry. What was the purpose of his meeting on that day?

A. He came, no doubt on orders of the accused, in order to continue the previous meeting and to issue a press statement for the public and to create the illusion that there was some kind of "political process," in quotation marks.

Q. Was any sort of statement issued - just yes or no - that day?

A. I don't believe so.

Q. The next day, did anything happen? Did you have any meetings on the following day?

A. On the 5th of April, they brought the Russian ambassador and a meeting was held, and it -- one might say the topic was an implicit one. Our demand was for our release, and we asked the Russian ambassador to use his influence on the accused to secure our release. This meeting was also followed by the media brought by the regime, and at a meeting with journalists, the -- it was arranged for the journalist of Der Spiegel, who was in the house for us -- with us, was sent away.

Q. You say "they." Who headed this visit?

A. This meeting was organised by people I mentioned earlier, and the meeting was between Mr. Rugova and the Russian ambassador.

Q. Yes. You say the people you mentioned earlier. Who in particular turned up on this occasion from the Serbian authorities?

A. If one might speak politically, it was led -- led by the accused Sainovic. It was mainly him. And a person who was appointed by the state security, Ljuba Joksic.

Q. Now, as to Sainovic on this occasion, did he appear to have ⁵⁴⁶³ authority to act or did he appear to need to refer back to any other superior authority?

A. I consider that this person was entirely delegated and commanded by the accused and was unable to decide anything off his own bat.

Q. And on what do you base that? Was there anything said or done?

A. Because at every possible meeting, I told him, "You are the deputy president of the Yugoslav government, and you could take a decision for my release," but he was never able to give me an answer to this question. Then he would disappear for a few days.

Q. Did he ever say where, other than in him, authority lay? Did he ever say to whom he had to refer?

A. Yes. On one occasion, he said -- he said that after a day or two, a decision will be made and I will communicate it to you.

Q. When -- that was the 5th of April. When did you next see Sainovic?

A. I met Sainovic at intervals. I don't remember the date now. But there was also the meeting with the accused Milutinovic in Belgrade.

Q. And when was that roughly and by whom was that organised?

A. This meeting was organised on the insistence of others, without our -- without our consent. It was organised by Sainovic and someone from the state security by phone and with the help of repeated visits. But our response was that we are not ready for these meetings, but we were subjected to pressure with all kinds of strange scenarios at night, firing through the windows and the balconies at night, and this was a way of putting pressure on us to agree to this meeting. ⁵⁴⁶⁴

Q. Can you give us the date of the Milutinovic meeting?

A. This was on the 28th of April.

Q. Is that the only meeting that you had with Milutinovic?

A. Could you repeat that, please?

Q. Was that the only meeting you had with Milutinovic?

A. No. There was the first meeting in Belgrade, and the second meeting was in Prishtina.

Q. The first meeting in Belgrade, when was that? Can you give the date of that?

A. I can't remember exactly.

Q. I see you're looking at something; I didn't appreciate that. What are you looking at?

A. Excuse me. The second was on the 28th. The first must have been around the 20th of April.

Q. And at the first meeting, what was Milutinovic's attitude towards you? What did he want? What did he want to tell you?

A. At this meeting in Belgrade, the discussion concentrated on -- on rather trivial issues, because it was -- it was generally understood that this so-called political process would yield no results. And we were asking every day for -- to be released, and they said that because Rugova does not have any close collaborators nearby, we will allow Merovci to go to Skopje to communicate with colleagues of Rugova there, because there were no normal conditions for work. And we responded rather unfavourably to this proposal at the beginning.

Q. Just taking this first meeting then very shortly, one last or two ⁵⁴⁶⁵ last points. Was anything said by you or by Milutinovic at that meeting -- I beg your pardon. Was anything said by either you or by Sainovic at that meeting or about the time of that meeting about your status as arrested or detained people?

A. I could illustrate this with some evidence. At this time, that is the second meeting at Prishtina, I came up with --

Q. I think --

A. -- what I might paraphrase was --

Q. My mistake. Just go back to the question. Did Sainovic say anything about whether you were arrested or not or your status or anything about talking about it?

A. He didn't talk about our status, but he often said that we were free, but we insisted that he should act on what he said, and we asked that there should be no incidents during the evenings which so frightened the children.

Q. All right. Well, I'm going to move on. Were you able, at some date, to travel to Skopje under police escort?

A. Yes.

Q. And in Skopje, who did you meet?

A. I went to Skopje against my own will, but I went there, and first of all I met all the diplomats, the foreign diplomats, Ambassador Hill, Ambassador Huntzinger. I met Ambassador Walker, Ambassador Petritsch. I also met Mr. Herald Koch, the Assistant Secretary of State for human rights.

Q. And I think you returned to Kosovo, and you had your second ⁵⁴⁶⁶ meeting with Milutinovic later in the month of April.

A. Yes. I returned on the 21st, after two or three days, and I was the only Albanian to enter Kosova. And during my stay in Skopje, I also gave quite a lot of interviews, which I have here.

JUDGE MAY: Please pay attention to the question and just deal with that, would you?

MR. NICE:

Q. Now, Milutinovic had arrived from Belgrade, I think, for the meeting.

A. Yes. On this meeting of 28th of April, this meeting was again organised in Prishtina against our will.

Q. Was there damage to be seen in Pristina at that time, damage to buildings?

A. At this time, Prishtina was a mysterious place, without anybody on the street, only with paramilitary and military police forces. And all the Albanian shops and businesses were broken into and demolished.

Q. Did Milutinovic say anything about the damage that he could see, and did you tell him anything about what was happening?

A. At these meetings, I personally expressed my indignation at what was happening, and I told him this humanitarian catastrophe of the movement of people under the pressure of the police and the military and these acts of destruction are appalling. And I asked for our immediate release and appealed to him as President of Serbia and as a member of the Serbian government, for an immediate decision to release us and to allow us to go in peace. And Milutinovic said that he would bring us a reply ⁵⁴⁶⁷ within 24 hours. And indeed we did receive a reply after about two days. The answer was that we had to go to Belgrade on this issue and reach an understanding with the accused.

Q. Let's move forward from that meeting. In May of 1999, was there a meeting with a man -- arranged by the man Joksic in Belgrade where you met Sainovic?

A. On 4th of March, we met the people you mentioned and the accused.

Q. On that occasion, what was said by the accused?

A. This was a very short and formal meeting, and it was mainly communicated to us that we would leave for Italy, but there was a very nasty undertone. Rugova was asked to leave his family, and we didn't allow this, but the next day, Rugova's family was brought and we flew to Italy.

Q. Did you say anything to any of the other parties at this short meeting about Racak?

A. At one point, the accused Sainovic, during his unpleasant visit to the house, there was the opportunity to talk about various topics, and I told him that, "Your name is being mentioned in -- unfavourably in connection with the Racak massacre, and one day you might be faced with a charge about this." And he said that this is a game being played by Walker. And this got out into the media and was cited as evidence that the -- this person's orders were behind the Racak massacre.

Q. Just a couple of other details covered in paragraph 44 of the summary.

Before the 24th of March when the bombing started, were different ⁵⁴⁶⁸ signs put on houses of one kind or another?

A. Yes, there were cases in which apartments were occupied. These were Albanian apartments in which Serbs and policemen and soldiers were housed. And this was a time when every Serb able to bear arms was mobilised, and there was not a single Serbian Kosovan in Prishtina who wasn't mobilised, and these were put into Albanian apartments with signs outside saying, "This is a MUP apartment." As evidence of this, I can say that there were cases in which Albanian families who were unable to -- unable to move used this trick to save themselves from the expeditions of the police.

Q. Were there rumours circulating at the time about what had happened to Dr. Rugova, rumours that weren't necessarily true?

A. Yes, there were rumours a little while earlier that Rugova was killed before his house was occupied. As you know, it was mentioned, even when Mr. Rugova testified, a very bad pamphlet circulated as if it was allegedly signed by him. And I would say that before this pamphlet appeared and circulated, Mr. Rugova issued a press release along with -- to the Der Spiegel journalist, and she has got the recorded interview whereby he appealed to the Albanians not to leave Kosova. And this refutes the content of this pamphlet that I mentioned.

MR. NICE: That's all I ask of this witness. And, Your Honour, I'll be grateful for one minute to explain the outstanding issue in relation to the previous witness before the end of the morning. So it will only take a minute.

JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Milosevic. Do you want to start tomorrow? ⁵⁴⁶⁹

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Since we have another seven minutes, I don't want to have those seven minutes wasted. I assume you would count them into my time anyway.

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

Q. [Interpretation] Before we begin chronologically to review this statement, my first question would be one that is linked to the text of the notes on the talk with Adnan Merovci in Rome, which was disclosed to me by the opposing party under number 03014582.

In the Serbian translation, on page 3, there's only one sentence which I would like to quote. Before that, in the paragraph prior to that, it is said that in Pristina, they reviewed the question of departure as if they had been told that they with leave, that the families would go separately so as not to be treated as refugees, and other explanations which apparently they were given in Pristina, and then we have the following sentence: "At the last meeting with Milosevic, Merovci raised this question in Milosevic's presence, saying that the families should go with him and Dr. Rugova, and Milosevic responded that that was okay." So, Mr. Merovci, is this what happened?

A. No.

Q. But that is stated in what I was given from -- by the Prosecution as notes on the meeting in Rome. Notes of conversation with Mr. Adnan Merovci in Rome.

JUDGE MAY: It didn't matter whether the notes were given by the Prosecution or not. The witness denies that that was what was said. ⁵⁴⁷⁰

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Would you be kind enough to tell me, then, what was the subject of the conversation when you came to see me in Belgrade if it was not Rugova's and your departure? What was the subject of discussion if not that?

A. As I -- I said it earlier in my explanation.

Q. Yes, but I'm asking you. So let me be more specific. At that last meeting, was anything else discussed but Rugova's departure together with his family and also your own from Kosovo and Metohija?

A. I said earlier we discussed nothing else than the attempt to separate Rugova and myself from our respective families and that we reacted to that firmly. This is all I have to say.

Q. Wait a minute, please. Let us make things quite clear. Was anything else discussed at that meeting except your request to leave Kosovo where you felt you were threatened?

A. We had -- we had requested earlier, and we heard from Milutinovic that we had to go to Belgrade to discuss this issue with you. We came and what happened that I said earlier happened.

JUDGE MAY: Was anything else discussed? Was there a discussion about anything other topic? That's the question.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. So you came only to discuss that you or, rather, Rugova and you, someone accompanying him, should leave Kosovo and Metohija because you ⁵⁴⁷¹ didn't feel safe there. That was the only topic of discussion, was it not?

JUDGE MAY: The witness has said that. Now, rather than go on again, we'll adjourn now. It's coming up to time. Mr. Merovci, could you bear in mind, please, during the adjournment -- would you be back at 9.00 tomorrow morning to conclude your evidence, and would you bear in mind during the adjournment not to speak to anybody about it, and that does include the members of the Prosecution team. Thank you.

MR. NICE: Can I just deal with the previous witness and His Honour Judge Kwon's question?

The position is that protective measures were requested on the 14th of November on the grounds of safety and security of the witness, and I think, though I haven't been able to track everything down, I think this would be on the basis of perceived risk arising from his contact with particular individuals, some of whom have been named in his evidence. Following the grant of those protective measures and a request by the Chamber that we should be more specific or should be specific in our seeking protective measures, my recollection is that all witnesses were contacted again, and that led to the motion of the 15th of March, having in its first footnote an observation to the effect that this witness and one other would not be requiring protective measures and would be giving evidence in open session.

So it was sought out of an abundance of caution, and the witness was right that he had not sought them himself personally. ⁵⁴⁷²

JUDGE MAY: Thank you. We will adjourn.

--- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.45 p.m., to be reconvened on Friday, the 24th day of May, 2002, at 9.00 a.m.