⁸⁷¹¹

Friday, 26 July 2002

[Open session]

[The accused entered court]

--- Upon commencing at 9.01 a.m.

JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Nice.

MR. NICE: Your Honour, just three short administrative matters that I ought to have touched on yesterday but they may assist the future conduct of the trial. One perhaps more substantially in one sense than the others. If in the event we do not need the full three weeks in September that you allowed, and that's quite likely if Mr. Lilic's evidence and the problems associated with it won't be ready by then -- I can easily see circumstances arising where that would be the case and where perhaps the Kosovar Albanian witnesses, de la Billiere, Coo and tidying up witnesses won't occupy a fortnight -- will the Chamber advance the start date of the balance of the trial by whatever period might be appropriate, say, another week? If it doesn't do that and if it sticks to its May 2003 close date, then we will have lost a week and we'd obviously be anxious not to lose a week.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. The purpose of the two-week break between the cases is to give the time for preparation to the accused and others. So the start date of the next part will be two weeks after the closure of the first one.

MR. NICE: Your Honour, that's extremely helpful. The second two points relate to problems of -- not problems, but issues of publicity and difficulties I know that the press have had. One ⁸⁷¹² relates to 92 bis packages, as we call them, that become exhibits, and the other relates to exhibits generally which of course are only ever placed briefly on the overhead projector. I wonder if you would authorise us, with your staff, to negotiate, perhaps with the Registry, to ensure that these materials can be made available to the press at the earliest opportunity. And, of course, so far as 92 bis evidence is concerned, it's much more difficult -- or it's difficult for the press to follow the full significance of this evidence of a 92 bis witness if they don't get the package until a long time after he or she gives evidence. It could obviously assist them if they could have it either contemporaneously with the witness coming into court, or even if they could have it ahead, perhaps subject to some embargo on use until and unless the witness actually gives evidence.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. A suitable arrangement should be made. Clearly, if there is to be any question of material being supplied before the witness gives evidence, that's a matter which will require careful consideration. Normally after the event, it would appear to be there's no difficulty. The statements are part of the evidence in the case. It's important that anyone should be informed of it.

MR. NICE: Very well. I'll try and set a system up.

[Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

JUDGE MAY: Yes.

MR. NICE: That's all, Your Honour. Thank you very much.

JUDGE MAY: May we have the witness, please. Would you get the witness, please. ⁸⁷¹³ How much longer, Mr. Nice, do you anticipate you will need?

MR. NICE: Less than an hour.

[Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

JUDGE MAY: I'm told the witness is on his way. He hasn't yet arrived.

We'll adjourn. Five minutes.

--- Break taken at 9.08 a.m.

--- On resuming at 9.20 a.m.

[The witness entered court]

WITNESS: RADOMIR MARKOVIC [Resumed]

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

Q. Mr. Markovic, you told us yesterday about the joint command and the political body that supervised it. Was General Pavkovic involved in either of these bodies?

A. General Pavkovic, you mean? General Pavkovic, yes, he was in the joint command.

MR. NICE: Your Honours, I'm in the middle of paragraph 15.

Q. After NATO bombing started, can you help us with whether there were any paramilitary groups in Kosovo or not?

A. No. In Kosovo, there were no paramilitary groups. All the volunteers who wanted to go to Kosovo were duty-bound to go through military treatment, that is to say, the army of Yugoslavia, and they were deployed in the units of the army of Yugoslavia.

Q. Does it follow from that that all armed personnel in Kosovo would ⁸⁷¹⁴ have been under the control of the army at that time?

A. Yes.

Q. So far as the MUP, we've already heard about the subordination of them. But so far as the MUP is concerned, were its special units present in Kosovo after the bombing started?

A. Yes. All members of the Ministry of the Interior, sooner or later, went through a period in Kosovo; therefore, the members of the special units as well had to stay in Kosovo for a while.

Q. Turning to coordination of operations between the MUP and the VJ there: Prior to NATO bombing, what was the method of coordination of MUP and VJ operations in Kosovo?

A. Well, there was this joint command that included members of the political body, the army of Yugoslavia, and Ministry of the Interior. They adopted joint decisions and the coordination between and among them was carried out by this political body.

Q. Do you know how regularly the body met?

A. I think every day. I think they had meetings every day.

Q. By whom was it chaired?

A. It was chaired by Mr. Sainovic.

Q. And from whom did Sainovic get his instructions?

A. I don't know who he got his instructions from, but I assume that it could have been from the president of the state, because such a high political body can only be coordinated from the top echelons of power.

Q. Did you have a conversation with the accused at any stage touching on Mr. Sainovic and his role in Kosovo? ⁸⁷¹⁵

A. No. I personally never talked to President Milosevic about the role of Sainovic in Kosovo.

Q. We've already dealt with many of the close associates of the accused. Who at the time that you were in office were his closest associates? It may just help us if you just give us a list who, in your judgement and experience, were his closest associates.

A. At any rate, the top leaders in the country. That was Milutinovic, as president of Serbia; then Mirko Marjanovic, prime minister; Dragan Tomic, president of the assembly; Sainovic; and practically all the federal and republican leaders were in contact with President Milosevic.

MR. NICE: I think we can probably turn on now to paragraph 20.

Q. I want to ask you about a few individuals who you may be able to help us with and their relationships one to another or with the accused. Was there a man Radovan Stojicic, also known as Badza, and another man, of course, known as Arkan?

A. Yes. Radovan Stojicic, nicknamed Badza, he was Deputy Minister of the Interior, head of the public security sector. There was also Zeljko Raznjatovic. There was. He's deceased. Zeljko Raznjatovic, nicknamed Arkan. During part of his life --

[Technical difficulty]

A. -- actions in Croatia and in Erdut.

[Technical difficulty]

JUDGE MAY: We're getting the French on the English channel.

THE INTERPRETER: Can you hear the English channel now? ⁸⁷¹⁶

JUDGE MAY: We're also getting the French channel coming in.

THE INTERPRETER: Is it only English now?

JUDGE MAY: Yes. Let's go on.

MR. NICE:

Q. How did those two men get on? What was their relationship, please?

A. Yes. Stojicic and Raznjatovic were friends. They did get along, because in that period, while Stojicic was staying in Slavonia, Raznjatovic was at the camp in Erdut and they had direct contacts.

Q. To what position did Stojicic, Badza, rise?

A. He rose to the position of deputy minister. So practically he had two posts: Deputy Minister of the Interior of Serbia and head of the public security sector.

Q. How did he get on with -- what was his working relationship with the accused?

A. At that time I did not see any of their contacts, but I assume that as Deputy Minister of the Interior he would have had to have contacts with Milosevic.

Q. Can you just throw some light on relationships by the experience you had when I think you wanted to remove some weapons from one of Arkan's units? Do you remember that?

A. Yes, I remember that. That was in a period when not units, but it was his personal security. They had long arms. They were equipped with long arms. And citizens noticed that, and they reported on this. I was head of the Belgrade Secretariat. My duty was to react to that, and I ⁸⁷¹⁷ communicated that to the Minister of the Interior, Zoran Sokolovic, and he instructed me to convey all of this to Radovan Stojicic, that he would take care of that with Arkan, because they are on good terms and it is easier to deal with it that way.

Q. What actually happened to the arms?

A. They were disarmed.

Q. By whom, in the event?

A. Well, I think it was an agreement reached between Radovan Stojicic and Zeljko Raznjatovic and that he acted on the orders of Radovan Stojicic that practically they returned these weapons themselves.

Q. Just move on, then, to Jovica Stanisic. How did he get on with Arkan, and Badza?

A. He got along with Badza extremely well. They were the closest associates and they worked on the same job. As for Arkan, I don't know what kind of contacts -- contact Jovica Stanisic had with him, because I was never present during a single contact of theirs.

Q. Do you remember an occasion when the accused gave you an instruction in relation to Arkan, sometime before, of course, Arkan died?

A. Yes, I remember.

Q. Can you tell us about it and when it was?

A. President Milosevic instructed me to call Zeljko Raznjatovic and to draw his attention to the following: That he had to legalise everything he did, that is to say, to bring it all within a legal framework. I was also supposed to talk to him about the wounded that he was supporting, and I had to see what his requests were and to make it possible for him to ⁸⁷¹⁸ continue doing that.

Q. Two other slightly disconnected points, one relating to Arkan. Was there a group of Arkan's Tigers called the Super-Tigers?

A. I don't know about that.

Q. Was there any group of Arkan's paramilitaries that became transferred to the RDB, please?

A. Yes. After the centre in Erdut was disbanded, one part of the members of those units who were called the Tigers of Arkan were transferred to the JSO special unit. I don't know how many of them.

Q. Now, of course, I think -- did you then take some actions in relation to that reserve unit yourself?

A. When I came to head the sector for state security, I disbanded that unit and reorganised it. Over two-thirds of the members of these unit were released. Actually, I dismissed them. And then I transformed the unit itself. I'm not sure that it was those who were transferred from Erdut. Those who were on the reserve force, for the most part, and those who did not meet the necessary requirements in terms of quality for being members of a special unit, I mean in terms of psychological and physical ability.

Q. In the course of taking this action, did you see a map that indicated whereabouts that unit had been deployed?

A. Yes. In the centre in Kulla, there was a memorial room where there is a big map, and on it are charted all the places where the unit was stationed, from its inception until the present day.

Q. What did it show about the places where that unit had been ⁸⁷¹⁹ deployed, please?

A. Bosnia, Krajina, Croatia, Kosovo.

Q. Having dealt with those somewhat disconnected matters, I return to the focus of our evidence this morning, Kosovo. How was the accused kept informed of events in Kosovo, please?

A. I've already said that. The head of state received information from several channels: The military intelligence, the public security, and the state security.

Q. Can you recall any particular meetings where he spoke of his need to be informed about the situation there?

A. No. It was a duty to inform the president of the state of all events in Kosovo, and not only in Kosovo; about all important events, in the case of which it went without saying that the head of state had to be informed.

Q. At such meetings, was General Pavkovic present?

A. Yes. General Pavkovic was present several times at these meetings, and he mostly reported on the activities of the army in Kosovo.

Q. Were his reports detailed or summary in form?

A. No. His reports were very detailed and very accurate.

Q. Was Milutinovic present from time to time at these meetings?

A. Yes, but very seldom.

Q. When he was present, how did he and the accused interact? Who took the lead?

A. The meetings were always held at President Milosevic's, so he was the one who chaired the meetings. ⁸⁷²⁰

Q. Was Sainovic present from time to time, and was a man called Obrad Stevanovic present?

A. I cannot say exactly that both of them were there, but I assume they were because either Vlastimir Djordjevic or Obrad Stevanovic were always present, depending who was in Kosovo and who was in Belgrade.

Q. I want to turn to the word "asanation". Was there a meeting where that was discussed?

A. Yes, at one of these meetings, where a report was submitted to President Milosevic about the situation in Kosovo and about other matters. Some member of the army of Yugoslavia said that "asanation" should be carried out, "asanation" of the terrain in Kosovo. President Milosevic agreed with that.

Q. Did "asanation" include, amongst other things, dealing with corpses and buried bodies?

A. As far as I know, "asanation" means the removal of chemicals, mines and explosives that are left behind, as well as killed livestock, and also killed persons. So that meant treating the wounded and the dead.

MR. NICE: Another exhibit, please, Your Honour. It was dealt with, forecast, rather, in the evidence of Mr. Karleusa and is to be dealt with by this witness.

JUDGE MAY: This word "asanation", what language is it supposed to be? It's been translated into English as asanation.

MR. NICE: I'm sorry. I haven't looked it up in an English dictionary and it's my mistake. I picked it up from here. I don't know. Perhaps the witness can help us. ⁸⁷²¹

Q. Do you know what language "asanation" is?

A. I think it's an international term.

Q. Very well. Mr. Saxon, with his usual industry, did look it up, with a nil result, couldn't find it. But in any event, I think we can pick it up from the exhibits.

Mr. Markovic, again, usual format, please. Usher, if you would be so good. The format is we put the -- when the overhead projector is in operation ... If you get another copy of the exhibit, please, so that the witness can have his own. We lay the original on the overhead projector initially, as it is, so that they can -- so that those viewing can see what the document is. It's a typed document with some handwritten signatures on it. Thank you very much. And we can see the signatures on the front page. And then at the foot of the page, if you'd move down. Thank you very much. And then the document is signed at the next page. Please, would you just turn over. And then at the last page. Thank you very much. Then if you could put the English version on the overhead projector so that those viewing may read it.

Mr. Markovic, this is a statement, I think, that you made in respect of this meeting; is that correct?

A. Yes. I already spoke about this statement to the investigators of The Hague Tribunal, and I said that this statement does not fully correspond to what I had said. Rather, this is a free interpretation by the officer of the state security sector who conducted an interview with me as we were trying, together, to come to certain facts as to what had happened. ⁸⁷²²

Q. Right. We'll get your comments on it at the end. We can see that it's a statement by an authorised officer of the MUP of Serbia pursuant to the articles of the FRY law. It was taken on the 2nd of June of 2001. And it says this:

"Regarding the latest developments and articles in the press about a refrigerator lorry containing Albanian civilians' corpses, with explicit suspicions that systematic and, in principle, very well-organised attempts to conceal the scope of crimes and remove the vestiges were made during the war in Kosovo and Metohija. I know that there was a working meeting in Beli Dvor, on the ground floor, in the library, where a long table for working meetings is and where Slobodan Milosevic --

[Technical difficulty]

MR. NICE: French interruption. I wonder if we're back to English. Shall we try again?

JUDGE MAY: Yes. Try again.

MR. NICE: -- meeting in Beli Dvor on the ground floor in the library where a long table for working meetings is and where Slobodan Milosevic most often held meetings in March 1999. Vlajko Stojilkovic, as the Minister of the Interior, Vlastimir Djordjevic, as the public security department head, and I, attended the meeting. Most likely the meeting was dedicated to the Kosovo issue and attended by, besides the above-mentioned people, VJ representatives, although I cannot say that with absolute certainty. In addition to the main topic of the meeting, at the very end of the meeting, Vlastimir Djordjevic raised the issue of the removal of Albanian corpses in order to remove all civilian victims, if there were ⁸⁷²³ any, who could become objects of an investigation conducted by The Hague Tribunal. In that respect, Milosevic ordered Vlajko Stojilkovic to take all necessary measures to remove the corpses of the Albanian civilians that had already been buried. I stayed out of the conversation on this topic, since none of the orders had been addressed to me. I know that Stojilkovic assigned General Dragan Ilic to carry out this task and that Ilic went to the territory of Kosovo and Metohija, accompanied by a team of appointed associates. Personally, I would not let the state security department get involved in this morbid affair of the exhumation and transport of corpses. So far as I know, the public security department and VJ members took part in that. Vlajko Stojilkovic gave Dragan Ilic and Vlastimir Djordjevic an order to take these measures directly. Obrad Stevanovic, Dragan Ilic, Branko Djuric, Sreten Lukic, Dragisa Dinic, and probably all other MUP department heads of the time are also familiar with this order. In informal conversations that took place before the conferences of department heads and working meetings, so-called mopping up in combat areas in the territory of Kosovo and Metohija was often mentioned. I know that Dragan Ilic was dissatisfied with the actions taken by the MUP in this region, and that was the reason why, on several occasions, he complained to me how difficult this job was, how unprepared he was to handle such abominations, and he also complained of resistance encountered on the ground and put up by the people who should help in identification of the locations where the Albanian civilians' corpses were. In this context, Ilic told me that he had been greatly helped by MUP Colonel Goran Radosavljevic and his men, who had helped him ⁸⁷²⁴ to carry out the assignment. Dragan Ilic also complained of the uncooperativeness of officials who had not helping in fulfilling the task. Ilic once told me that the cooperation with the VJ had improved after a while, that is, that the coordination of activities had been established. Ilic speak about Vlastimir Djordjevic in especially unfavourable terms, since he handled this problem with extreme superficiality, which displeased Ilic greatly. Looking back, I remember a detail that Ilic also complained of the way and method in which this task had been carried out, mentioning the discovery of a refrigerator lorry containing civilians' corpses in the Danube, which was the result of Djordjevic's bad organisation. I did not want to have conversations on this topic, so I sent Ilic to Stojilkovic as his immediate superior in this assignment. I would like to reiterate resolutely that the state security had nothing to do with these events. I am also familiar only with the fact that corpses were, besides being thrown into the Danube, cremated, but Dragan Ilic has more detailed and intimate information on that. When asked about my potential knowledge regarding the action carried out with regards to this matter, I solemnly declare that the state security department had nothing to do with these tasks and that I do not know whether an action was taken regarding that at all, and I also do not know who ordered and organised the takeover of the corpses." Mr. Markovic, I think, as we can see on the original, there's then three names with signatures, one of which is yours. Is that correct?

A. Yes.

Q. And indeed, each of the three pages of the original document bears ⁸⁷²⁵ your signature at its foot?

A. Yes.

Q. In the course of the document, you make it clear that you stayed out of conversations on this topic and that the state security department was never involved and that you did not want to have conversations on the topic. Is that still your position today as true?

A. I said to investigators of The Hague Tribunal what is true in this statement, and I pointed out to them more than once during our interview that this is a liberal interpretation of the employee, of the officer who made this report. He emphasised certain things that I did not speak about. I spoke about the mopping up and my conversation with Dragan Ilic. Those are the only two things I know about. I know that mopping-up was ordered. I said what mopping-up involved and who was appointed on behalf the Minister of the Interior to carry it out. All the rest are rumours, stories he spread among his colleagues about the problems he encountered and the processing of corpses in Kosovo, which must have been certainly an unpleasant task.

Nobody, not he and not I, ever spoke about these corpses and the need to transport them out of Kosovo and treated according to the proper criminal procedure and the law.

Q. The meeting that you spoke of there, you speak of Vlastimir Djordjevic being present, and various other people by names. Is that true?

A. Yes.

MR. NICE: Yes, Your Honour. That's all I, I think, want from ⁸⁷²⁶ this witness. Let me just see if there's anything that Mr. Saxon thinks I've omitted. And I've got some information on the word you were asking about. Perhaps the document we just produced ought to be given an exhibit number.

THE REGISTRAR: Prosecution Exhibit 283.

MR. NICE: Your Honour, Mr. Shin, alert to your concerns about the word that we have been dealing with, or likely dealing with, "asanation," tells us this much, or alerts me to this much, that we can find it -- really, it is a Serbian word. The rest of the explanations he gives me coming from dictionaries of one kind or another I suspect are matters that are better dealt with by either witnesses or experts. But if you're concerned to trace it yourselves through research, the first place to look is a Serbian dictionary. Thank you.

You'll be asked some further questions.

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

Q. [Interpretation] Radomir, you read countless reports which, along a variety of lines, were submitted by members of the state security sector and which, through respective administrations, were all funneled to the central headquarters; is that correct?

A. Yes.

Q. Since heads of state security services of every country are usually the best-informed people in that country, and especially in view of all those reports, did you ever get any kind of report or have you ever heard of an order to forcibly expel Albanians from Kosovo? ⁸⁷²⁷

A. I never got such a report, nor I --

JUDGE MAY: I'm going to interrupt you, for this reason: That both you and the accused speak the same language. Everything has got to be interpreted. So would you pause between his question and your answer. And Mr. Milosevic, will you remember to do the same, kindly. Yes. If you'd give your answer.

A. No, I never heard of such an order, nor have I seen such an order, nor was it contained in the reports I received. Nobody, therefore, ever ordered for Albanians from Kosovo to be expelled.

Q. Did you receive any information which would point to such a thing, to the existence of an order, a plan, a decision, a suggestion, or a de facto influence that Albanians from Kosovo were to be expelled?

A. No, I never heard of such a suggestion. I know of no plan or design or instruction to expel Albanians from Kosovo.

Q. And at the meetings that you attended, not only those where the army and the MUP were represented, but also the senior staff meetings of the ministry, which I suppose were chaired by your minister, and meetings in my office, is it true that completely the opposite was said; we always insisted that civilians should be protected, that civilians should be taken care of, so that they are not hurt in the course of anti-terrorist operations. Do you remember that?

A. Certainly. The task was not only to protect Serb civilians, but also the Albanian population and citizenry. Members of the Ministry of the Interior had the task and duty to protect both groups of civilians in Kosovo. ⁸⁷²⁸

Q. Do you remember, Radomir, that in all the reports of the generals who had been on tours in Kosovo - and this is precisely a confirmation of what I'm trying to say - on multiple occasions, many examples were given of members of the KLA being allowed to flee, together with groups of civilians, only because the police never opened fire in situations where some of the civilians could have been in danger, despite the fact that members of the KLA were clearly visible among them? Do you remember those reports?

A. I remember that. There had been a number of examples of members of the KLA wearing civilian clothes on top of their uniforms, and in situations when they thought their life was in jeopardy, they took off their uniforms and mingled with the civilians.

Q. Now let's go one level below. I don't mean in the sense of hierarchy, in the system of values, I mean. Have you ever received a report during your entire tenure as a civil servant, as a citizen, or head of the state security service, have you ever received a report or heard that I myself, or any of my associates, or any politician, ever encouraged or incited discrimination against or expelling or persecution of ethnic Albanians in Kosovo?

A. No, I've never heard or seen anything like that.

Q. And did you hear anyone else, either from the police or the army, ordering, inciting, planning, or suggesting in any way that civilians, ethnic Albanians in Kosovo Metohija, should be killed, discriminated against, persecuted, or anything like that?

A. No, I've never heard anything of the sort. I said a moment ago ⁸⁷²⁹ already that our task was to preserve lives and the security of civilians in Kosovo, both Albanian and Serbian.

Q. During all the time that we are discussing here in this room, did you ever have in front of you a report of any kind to the effect that members of state or public Security Services have committed some sort of war crime as part of a plan carried out by the state security service or the public security service or the army or anyone who was armed?

A. No. No crimes. I had no information about crimes. There had been a number of crimes perpetrated by individuals in Kosovo, among both the army and the police. Those perpetrators who were identified were duly prosecuted, and we saw in one of the documents yesterday, in item 8 it says that: "All perpetrators of any criminal offences committed in Kosovo had to be prosecuted duly."

Q. Is it true that whenever there was a suspicion or it was obvious that a member of the police or the army had committed any sort of criminal offence, there was no discussion at all? Legal measures were taken immediately, in accordance with the law, criminal reports were filed and went through the due process?

A. I believe that over 200 such criminal reports were actually filed against members of the service, and they were prosecuted. It is also known from reports of the army of Yugoslavia that they did the same thing, and the number of their own criminal reports was close to ours, if not higher.

Q. Do you remember, conditionally speaking, I can't call them large meetings, but speaking of meetings held in the office of head of state, a ⁸⁷³⁰ meeting of 10 to 15 people is a large meeting. During that at such meetings I always said that it is part of the Serb tradition that a prisoner of war is something sacred, an unarmed man is something sacred, that we should preserve our honour and that that can only be done if war criminals in a state of war try to commit a crime, that every such crime had to be punished immediately?

A. Yes, I remember that. You didn't say that just once; you said that on many occasions, and I remember that as well as everyone who attended those meetings.

Q. I will read out to you from some of my notes. I don't assume you remember each and every one of these documents, with you do you remember the orders which were then circulated around the Ministry of the Interior? They went down from the general command, downwards, concerning the procedure for treating captured terrorists, and said that even they should be treated in keeping with the rules of international humanitarian law, the laws and customs of war, and the Geneva Conventions. Do you remember that order?

A. Yes. Members of the MUP applied all the laws and rules which were mandatory under such circumstances, and they treated even terrorists, in keeping with Geneva Conventions.

Q. Do you remember, for instance, a special order from the Supreme Command concerning a ban on torching civilian Albanian houses, seizing property, et cetera?

A. This was discussed more than once, and specifically there was this ban on which you insisted, as well as the leadership of the MUP and the ⁸⁷³¹ army of Yugoslavia, that houses in Kosovo must not be set on fire and nothing must be stolen.

Q. There was a special order that everyone should be treated humanely, including any member of the enemy forces who surrendered, and their lives should be spared. I'll read out to you some of these things. Perhaps you don't remember all of them, but there are orders to the effect that perpetrators should immediately be brought between the competent court martial, the order that in the course of combat operations, provisions of the international military law must apply at all times. These summaries were available to everyone and notified to everyone?

JUDGE MAY: Yes. Let the witness answer.

A. I don't remember these orders individually, but I remember the subject we've just discussed. I remember your general approach and the position of the army of Yugoslavia and the Ministry of the Interior, that is, to respect all provisions of international law on the territory where combat operations were taking place, and concerning the treatment of captured members of terrorist organisations. I don't remember individual orders, because they didn't reach me, for the most part, me personally, I mean. They were directed to the Ministry of the Interior.

Q. All right. Let's move on. You submitted your report to the Minister of the Interior and you made them at staff meetings of the ministry, regular meetings, chaired by the Minister of the Interior. Is that the regular procedure followed by the ministry, that is, the top leadership of the ministry?

A. Yes, that is the regular procedure. Every Tuesday, at the office ⁸⁷³² of the Ministry of the Interior, in the headquarters of the ministry, senior staff meetings were held, attended by members of the Ministry of the Interior, including the head of the state security sector and his deputy.

Q. When you came to my office, Vlajko Stojilkovic, yourself, and others -- or let me speak about you alone. When you came to see me, is it true that most often you were together with your minister; that is, the Minister of the Interior and head of the state security sector, in light of the issues that were discussed, and very rarely, from time to time, you came alone to clarify a certain issue which was within your purview? Is that correct? Is that a fair description?

A. Yes, that's correct.

Q. In the same way, you also called on the president of the Republic of Serbia, the prime minister of Serbia, providing them with relevant information, not to speak of your contacts with your own minister. I am not going to speak about your in-house matters. Your communication was certainly more frequent. But those were the regular relations; is that correct?

A. Yes.

Q. As for these reports, last night I saw in the media that it says information, et cetera, et cetera. Of course. I received information, just like the President of the Republic of Serbia, the Prime Minister and before that of course the Minister of the Interior, I received daily information from the service that was then photocopied and sent to us for our own information. Is that correct? ⁸⁷³³

A. Yes, that is correct.

Q. As for Kosovo, these reports contained information -- you can perhaps add something to this. I am saying what is my own assertion -- about the security situation in Kosovo, about weapons coming in, about the information that was being received, about the existence of the KLA, about crimes that they committed. Is that correct?

A. For the most part, that is what the information contained.

Q. Is it correct that, to the best of your knowledge, and also the knowledge acquired by your service - I'm not referring to your personal knowledge; I'm referring to your knowledge in the capacity of head of this service, and on the basis of the reports received - was there terrorism in Kosovo?

A. Yes, there was terrorism in Kosovo.

Q. Is it correct that a large number of our policemen and soldiers, and then civilians too, both of Serb, Montenegrin, Albanian, and other ethnicities, got killed in Kosovo during terrorist actions?

A. Over 200 members of the Ministry of the Interior were killed in Kosovo. Over 300 of them were wounded. I think that over 300 members of the army of Yugoslavia lost their lives in Kosovo as well. Among them were civilians too.

Q. Is it correct that in Kosovo the police defended the citizens and their property from terrorism?

A. The police had the task - I already said that - to protect both the Serb and the Albanian population, because terrorists often turned on their own people, and they insisted that they either join the ranks of the ⁸⁷³⁴ KLA or participate in some other way in these terrorist actions. The people did not accept that. And very often it would happen that they would seek protection of the members of the Ministry of the Interior.

Q. That is one of the questions that I wanted to put to you, because otherwise both military commanders and police commanders at these meetings reported that entire villages that were purely Albanian sought protection from the police in order to be protected from the terrorists, from the terrorist lootings, kidnappings, et cetera. Is that correct?

A. Yes, that is correct. Such reports did come in from the army of Yugoslavia and the Ministry of the Interior. We discussed that, and the instructions were to help such people.

Q. To the best of your knowledge, although you, Radomir, were not involved in politics ever in your life, but to the best of your knowledge, in view of the position that you held, do you know that we did everything to find an agreement, to reach an agreement, so that the dispute in Kosovo would be resolved by peaceful means and that all of you were instructed to take particular care of the security and safety of Ibrahim Rugova and others because there were showdowns between them too and even their lives could have been in danger? Is that correct?

A. Yes. The representatives of the government of Serbia I think went at least 14 times to negotiate with the Albanians in Kosovo, and they did not come there, and I know that President Milutinovic went at least twice with regard to that particular matter, to Kosovo. And I also know that Rugova's life was protected. It was endangered, precisely by his own people, the Albanians. And after that, after his life was saved, ⁸⁷³⁵ literally, he was brought to Serbia, and after that he was allowed to go wherever he wanted to go, both he and his family. I don't know where he went. And the members of our service even took care of them in Kosovo. I heard that he denied that, but this is correct.

Q. All right. Is it correct -- I think that we should clarify a general point. Is it correct that not a single employee of the MUP -- I'm putting this question because constant reference is being made here to some kind of crimes that were committed by the army and the police, and my assertion is being challenged that the army and the police were defending the country, not committing crimes. Is it correct that not a single employee of the MUP, according to the existing laws, and also according to the concrete instructions that they had received, were not supposed to carry out any order that was contrary to the law?

A. Members of the Ministry of the Interior act in accordance with laws that are in force. That is to say, what is binding upon them is primarily the Law on Criminal Procedure, and also the law on employment in the interior. These are the most important regulations that regulate how members of the service are supposed to act. They should not carry out a criminal act even if they were issued such an order.

Q. But they should also not, not, react, even if a crime is committed in their presence, even if an order was issued to that effect?

A. Absolutely. This was regulated by law.

JUDGE MAY: Just a moment. Interpreters. Remember the interpreters, Mr. Milosevic.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] ⁸⁷³⁶

Q. A policeman who sees the commission of a crime, even a misdemeanour, the commission of a misdemeanour, a pickpocket doing whatever, not to mention rape or a murder, whatever, he doesn't have to wait for any kind of order. It is by law that he is supposed to react in the case of such a perpetrator. Is that correct or not?

A. Yes, that is correct.

Q. Reference was made here to the effect that some individuals were outside the borders of Serbia. I'll come to that. But I want to clarify something else before that. Is it correct that there was not a single decision to this effect, or order, that members of the MUP of Serbia be sent anywhere outside the borders of Serbia?

A. I am not aware of any such order. At my time, when I was head of the state security sector, there was no such order in existence.

Q. I want to clarify something, because with regard to certain matters, when time is disregarded as a factor, then they look different. You talked about Radovan Stojicic, Badza, and you also said that for a while he was in eastern Slavonia. Is it correct that in eastern Slavonia he was a volunteer, not a representative of the Ministry of the Interior?

A. As far as I know, he was commander of the Territorial Defence, which constitutes a formation of volunteers.

Q. Let us just look into another important matter. At that time -- because this is being linked to the fact that he was Deputy Minister of the Interior and head of the public security sector. At that time he did not have any links whatsoever with the position of the head of public security or the position of Deputy Minister of the Interior, at the time ⁸⁷³⁷ when he was there as a volunteer.

A. Yes. It was only after that that he was appointed to that position. At that time he was a member of the special units, or he was an advisor to the Minister of the Interior in relation to special units.

Q. Something was said here about manning the special terrorist unit and also something that had to do with volunteers and that this was organised by Arkan. Is it correct that that unit, to the best of your knowledge, had its criteria, individual criteria, in terms of employing persons, or rather, that this was no takeover of Arkan's unit? Each individual who was taken into service was looked at on an individual basis?

A. Yes. They were not taken over as a unit. All of those who met the criteria, the requirements of the Ministry of the Interior, were taken into the unit, that is to say, only those who met the requirements that were put by the Ministry of the Interior.

Q. In response to some questions here, you referred to the following: That you reorganised that unit when you came to your position, that you scaled it down, that you changed its structure, et cetera. Did anybody interfere as far as that was concerned?

A. No. I did that in agreement with the Minister of the Interior, and I had permission to do that.

Q. So nobody was exerting any influence on you in terms of retaining someone or taking somebody else in or to scale down or not to scale down? You did that in accordance with your own assessment as to the scaling down of that unit? You thought that was necessary, that it should be defined ⁸⁷³⁸ exclusively as an anti-terrorist unit, et cetera, and that is how you carried this out, without anybody's special influence or pressure to do anything?

A. No, there was no pressure. This was a conclusion of the senior staff meeting of the state security service. We agreed that that is what we should do. I proposed that to the minister. The minister agreed. And nobody brought any pressure to bear on me.

Q. Apart from these regular communications between the minister and you and your deputy, did anybody from the outside interfere in any of the internal matters of the state security section?

A. No. This was within the competencies of the Minister of the Interior only. Whatever he observed and whatever he intended to have done with regard to both sectors, he would carry out. But of course when consulting the staff and the head of the state security. So this was an agreement that was pursued without any pressures, simply by way of agreement.

Q. You mentioned a map. He was asking -- I mean the other side, Mr. Nice, asked you to explain some map. As far as I understand this, this map shows the places where various members of that unit which was established later, where they fought as volunteers somewhere, and in various places, not where the unit, as a unit of the Ministry of the Interior, was used in these activities. Do you have any idea about that?

A. I did tell the gentleman, the investigators of The Hague Tribunal, to have a look at that map for themselves, because I assume that it is there until the present day, because the unit is still in existence. At ⁸⁷³⁹ that time I was not head of the state security sector, and I do not know where, in which places, members of the special unit were at different points in time. It is possible that this was some other unit that was transformed later. It is possible that these were people who, for the most part, came from that part of our country, former country, that is, and that after that they established a unit for special operations.

Q. After that, as far as I understand matters, a number of them were taken into the unit for special operations, according to the criteria that met the requirements of the service itself.

A. Yes.

Q. Psychologically, physically, and in every other way, in terms of membership in an anti-terrorist unit, I assume.

A. Yes. I point out that I am not competent to discuss that period, because this is a period when that unit and the service, the sector, were headed by Jovica Stanisic, and he will certainly be in a better position to speak about that.

Q. And now with regard to what Mr. Nice asked you, is it correct that we did have information at our disposal that Raznjatovic, who, as a volunteer, with his comrades, did take part in combat operations, primarily as a patriot, not as a criminal, as it is being ascribed, had certain illegal operations that he was involved in, that is, information that we received, and he justified this by saying that he needed money in order to help the families of his wounded and killed comrades.

A. Yes, that is the information that we received.

Q. And now, in relation to that information: Did I not give an ⁸⁷⁴⁰ instruction to you? Before that you were head of the police, of the capital city, and you had the greatest experience and you held such a high position. I asked you to call him in and to tell him that no illegal activity could be tolerated, irrespective of reasons that are humanitarian nature, and that he has to turn to legal operations only? Is that correct?

A. That was your instruction.

Q. I did not say that he should legalise crime. I said that no crime would be tolerated and that he could be involved in legal matters only; is that correct?

A. That is correct, and that is what I said to The Hague Tribunal's investigators.

Q. They usually twist things the way in which suits them, so that's why I want this to be quite accurate?

JUDGE MAY: A that's not a comment that is proper for you to make. Yes.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Did you get any report on the activity of paramilitary formations in Kosovo before the NATO bombing?

A. No. I said that a short while ago, that as far as I know, there were no paramilitary formations in Kosovo.

Q. Did you hear, regardless of the fact that of course there was an order to that effect, did you hear me personally insisting that not a single paramilitary formation should be allowed to exist? Because it's usually a band of robbers, that every, each and every one of them had to ⁸⁷⁴¹ be arrested, disarmed. And to finish with this topic, because every now and then we hear that they volunteered -- I said that if they volunteered, then they had to be regular members of the army of Yugoslavia, that no gangs may be admitted into the army as a group. If they volunteered in the first place, they had to be deployed in various units, as individual members, to avoid any possibility of abuse. Did I say that?

A. Yes, and that's precisely what I told the gentleman from the group of the investigators of the Tribunal. I said that all the volunteers went through the due procedure of admission and became regular members of the army of Yugoslavia.

Q. And before you became head of the state security sector, before you assumed that position, did you have any information about any alleged war crimes on the territory of the former Yugoslavia in which members of the state security service, the SUP, or the army of Yugoslavia would have been involved?

A. No. Since I was a member of the Ministry of the Interior and I had a senior position in that Ministry of the Interior, I would have known, I suppose.

Q. Well, even before that, you were head of the public security in the capital, and Deputy Minister of the Interior. You would have known about such things.

A. That's correct. As head of the Belgrade Secretariat, I was not Deputy Minister of the Interior, I was below that level. It was only later I became deputy minister. And as head of the Belgrade city Secretariat, I was not informed of the work of members of the Ministry of ⁸⁷⁴² the Interior, but I would have certainly heard of something like that, something of that order.

Q. Let us return to the main issue. To the best of your knowledge, I mean the knowledge available to the service and your personal knowledge as head of that service, did you know that the main reason for migrations during the war was the bombing? Is that correct or not?

A. Certainly one of the reasons of migration was the bombing.

Q. Is it also true that another reason were the efforts to avoid direct clashes, conflicts, in which the army and the police fight with the KLA, and efforts to remove the citizenry from the area, the theatre of combat operations?

A. Yes, certainly that was one more reason.

JUDGE MAY: We're going to adjourn now. It's time. We'll adjourn for 20 minutes. Would you be back, then, please, Mr. Markovic.

--- Recess taken at 10.35 a.m.

--- On resuming at 10.56 a.m.

JUDGE MAY: Yes.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Radomir, you are talking about the political body that was headed by Nikola Sainovic. My first question is: Is it true that this body, as you said yourself, was a political one?

A. I can't think of another term for that, but it was some kind of coordination body and it was made up of people who dealt in politics. So I define it as a political body, and perhaps I was not the only one who defined it that way. ⁸⁷⁴³

Q. Indubitably, a political body is one which has political goals. The staff, the police staff, Sreten Lukic headed it, had police tasks, the army had military tasks, that is, everyone had their own task. I would take, for an example, one of the documents shown by the opposite side yesterday, that is, a report of the Ministry of the Interior of the Republic of Serbia that was quoted yesterday here. They actually said it referred to two days, whereas it says here "Summary of events, occurrences, and information of importance registered in the period for -- from 0600 hours on the 27th of March to 0600 hours on 28th March," which means 24 hours. This staff reported up the line to the office of the minister and copied to the head of the public security sector, the head of the state security sector, Radomir Markovic, assistant minister Obrad Stevanovic, another assistant, Minister Misic, the administration of crime investigation police, the administration for analysis and information, the operative centre, and the secretariats of the interior, that is, heads of secretariats, indicating numbers of the secretariats and these are the secretariats of the interior in Kosovo and Metohija? Right? So it's clear that as far as the police is concerned, it operated up the line, along the vertical chain. It is also clear from the military papers presented by the opposite side here that the army also followed its own vertical chain. Is that correct?

A. Yes.

Q. In view of the existence of this political body, are you aware that there was also a temporary Executive Council of Kosovo and Metohija, or a provisional Executive Council, that is, the government of Kosovo and ⁸⁷⁴⁴ Metohija, headed by Andjelkovic, who was also there the whole time?

A. Yes, I'm aware of that.

Q. Do you know that this government of Kosovo and Metohija, this provisional government, was made up of representatives of all ethnic groups: Serbs, Albanians, the Romany, Gorani, Muslims, all the ethnic groups that populated Kosovo?

A. Yes, I know that.

Q. Do you know that this government was engaged in resolving day-to-day economic, financial, social, health-related, and a variety of other issues that had to do with taking care and accommodating internally displaced persons and all the normal problems that the government normally deals with, this government in particular was a provisional one, though?

A. Yes, I know that.

Q. All right. Is it then clear that this political body that existed there, all those civil servants, Sainovic as deputy prime minister, Andjelkovic as president of the provisional Executive Council, and other public officials who had their respective positions, they were not part of the chain of command. Its purpose was to effect exchange of information and consultations, although along the vertical respective chains of command, the police effected command as they were supposed to, according to the law, and so did the army, each one according to their own vertical chains, along their vertical chains of command?

A. I said myself that this body had the task of providing coordination between the army and the Ministry of the Interior, but I didn't say that they had the last word in it. ⁸⁷⁴⁵

Q. All right. Let's translate that into a practical language. Was this political body in charge of you? Did they command you?

A. No.

Q. Was this political body able to command Vlajko Stojilkovic?

A. No.

Q. Did they command Ojdanic or Pavkovic?

A. No.

Q. Do you know that every event, as this report indicates, all events from 0600 hours on one day to 0600 hours on the following day, every event relevant to the army is reported from the level of a unit up the vertical chain to the brigade, the corps, the command? Do you know about that?

A. I suppose that subordination and the vertical chain of command exists in the army as well, but I don't know exactly how the reporting goes. I believe it is identical to that of the Ministry of the Interior.

Q. All right. But knowing Vlajko Stojilkovic, do you believe that he would have allowed anyone else to take decisions on engagement of the police without his knowledge and explicit consent, approval?

A. No. Consent was certainly required, and not only consent of the Minister of the Interior.

Q. Did Vlajko Stojilkovic, at your in-house meetings and senior-staff meetings, did he always insist that every single action had to be in strict accordance with the law at all times?

A. Absolutely. Vlajko Stojilkovic always strongly insisted on legal action.

Q. Did Sreten Lukic, Obrad Stevanovic, Vlastimir Djordjevic, and all ⁸⁷⁴⁶ his subordinates insist on the same thing? Was it also their duty, their task, and their personal conviction as well?

A. Concerning actions of members of the Ministry of the Interior, no action could be illegal. Everything had to be in accordance with the law.

Q. You spoke about the fact that Pavkovic reported from the ground. Do you remember that he reported mainly about the deployment of KLA forces, their strength, he reported on problems they were encountering on the ground, on the current situation, using maps, in the presence of a broad circle of leaders?

A. Yes.

Q. From these orders that the opposite side exhibited here and which you had occasion to review because they were shown to you, is it abundantly clear that the subject-matter and the discussion was always the terrorist groups and their actions?

A. Yes.

Q. A moment ago, during your examination-in-chief, you said the activities of that body had to be approved. You "assume" by Belgrade. So is it reasonable to assume is that it was a case of pursuing the policy, which meant eliminating terrorism, protecting the citizenry from terrorism? Do you believe it is a legitimate right of the state and also the duty of the police, the army, and everyone else who is enforcing the law on a certain territory?

A. Combatting terrorism is not only the right but also the duty, and falls within the competence of every state and its organs.

Q. Mr. Nice also asked you about who my associates were. He asked ⁸⁷⁴⁷ you to identify them. And from your answers to his questions, I heard you say president of the federal parliament, president of the republican parliament, president of the Republic of Serbia, president of the government, that is, the prime minister, and their top officials of the state. Also when you speak about the coordination in Kosovo and Metohija, you mentioned politicians, the army, the police, public officials. How can we then talk about - how shall I put it? - private policies and private command if meetings are being held of the entire political and military top echelon without any outsiders present, so only people who are in very responsible public positions? The top officials of the state, the police, the state security, leaders who are reviewing certain political and military options. Was that the practice?

A. Yes. Those meetings were devoted to precisely those subjects.

Q. Is it true that this political coordination and briefing on the estimates of the army addressed to the representatives of the federal and the republican government, the provisional council of Kosovo and Metohija, isn't it right that these bodies cannot be interpreted to have been part of the chain of command? It was just coordination and exchange of information about the situation, whereas command was effected along the proper chain of command, both in the army and the police? Is that correct?

A. Well, that's the term I used: "coordination."

Q. What was mentioned here in some testimonies was that Sainovic was in charge of operations in Kosovo. Can that seem probable at all that the deputy federal prime minister, in addition to all the professionals in the ⁸⁷⁴⁸ chain of command in the army and the police, who were trained for that kind of thing, is in charge of some kind of operations, operations in the sense of military and police operations, things like that?

A. I don't think that he was an expert who could carry out military and police operations. He could only carry through that which was mentioned at meetings that were held in your office that showed how the state was supposed to function in Kosovo.

Q. Is it logical, when there is a crisis in a particular territory, in the territory of a particular province, precisely because of the concerns over everything that is happening there, to delegate the deputy federal prime minister with some other high officials. The president of the federal parliament was there for a while as well as some higher officials to help the local authorities, and generally speaking, in all these developments, as an expression of the concern of the state for the events involved and also ways and means of resolving that?

A. I think that is logical.

Q. Didn't we try, from the very top down to these authorities, to stop this flow of refugees who were leaving, that we tried to explain to them, to convince them, through good arguments, that the army and the police would protect them, that they should stay where they were? You did that, you from the state security, and also people from the public security section. That was an overall political intention. Is that right or is that not right?

A. Yes, that was the instruction, and those were the assignments.

Q. And do you know that the KLA carried out propaganda, that as many ^{8749 BLANK PAGE 8759} civilians as possible should leave Kosovo and thus stage an exodus that was caused by some kind of violent behaviour of the authorities?

A. Yes, I'm aware of that.

Q. Did it happen to you too, that you intervened in that direction in order to stop the flow of refugees, to make efforts to help them, on the basis of information that you yourself received and insisted, therefore, upon that, that they be helped, in accordance with the policy that we pursued in this connection?

A. Yes, I intervened once in Kosovo, here, from Belgrade. When I received this kind of daily information that a large number of refugees appeared who were moving towards the borders with Macedonia and Albania, I called the staff there, General Sreten Lukic, and I asked him for more detailed information. Also I asked him what they would do in order to stop these refugees. He referred me to Sainovic, the head of the staff there, that I should talk to him about it as well. I called Sainovic and I actually abused your name in that conversation. I think you remember that. I said that it is President Milosevic's order that the refugees be stopped.

Q. Oh, this abuse I can understand only in - how shall I put it? - in a very relative sense. You knew that that was my position as well. You knew that I wanted the refugees to be stopped. And as far as I can remember that event, when I was asked about that event whether I had issued such an order through you, I said: "Of course I did."

A. That's it's way it was.

Q. So in your assessment, and according to the experience you had, ⁸⁷⁶⁰ according to the information you had, were the refugees the result of a war, like any other war, and in all other wars, not some kind of action taken by the army and the police against the civilian population?

A. Yes.

Q. In all these endeavours, in all these attempts, did we manage to slow down the refugee flows?

A. Unfortunately, we did not manage to stop them fully, but we certainly reduced them to a degree. We guaranteed them their safety, we guaranteed them medical security, and we explained to them that they were safest in their own homes.

Q. Precisely in connection with that: To the best of your knowledge, is it correct that the members of the police were actually explaining to the Kosovar Albanians that they should not leave their homes, that they should go back, that they are being guarded by the army and the police and, and that when they go there, across the border, that they would be recruited by force, and that they would be subjected to the other types of violence that the KLA had been carrying out against them?

A. Yes, that is just the way they talked to them.

Q. And do you know that this political body that you refer to had contacts with Albanian representatives, for example, Sainovic, on several occasions, with Rugova, and with other Albanian leaders, that likewise, during cooperation with the Verification Mission, he was head of the commission of the federal government for cooperation with the Verification Mission, that he had an assistant, the retired General Loncar, who was in Pristina all the time, also for the purpose of cooperating with the ⁸⁷⁶¹ Verification Mission, that this federal commission for cooperation with the Verification Mission consisted of representatives of all the relevant ministries that were necessary for this kind of cooperation, that is to say, the army, the military, the police, the commissioner for refugees, the ministry for social matters, et cetera? Are you aware of that?

A. Yes, I know that Sainovic did contact the representatives of the Verification Mission and for missions in Kosovo, and also that he had contacts with Rugova.

Q. I have a few concrete questions. Being the best-informed state official in terms of state security, as head of state security, did you ever hear of a plan called Kolubara?

A. I already answered that question to the gentleman of the investigation, that is to say that I never heard of such a plan.

Q. And did you ever hear of a plan called horseshoe, Potkovica, because that has also been referred to here. Let me not go into all that now. I don't want the question to be a leading question. Have you heard of a plan called Horseshoe?

A. I have already said that I hadn't heard of that either.

Q. All right. Let me just take a look. In a conversation -- actually, do you remember this conversation that you had with two committees of the federal parliament while you were in prison? During that conversation or interview did you say that the state security was not mine or yours but that it belonged to the state? Is that your position?

A. Yes, that is precisely the way I put it, and that is what I assert ⁸⁷⁶² now as well.

Q. So this was not any kind of control over the state security. The state security worked according to their own regulations and according to the law. It could not have been the private affair of you or me or any other individual in the state; is that correct?

A. Precisely.

Q. Let me just take a look here at my notes. First of all, I would like to continue along the following lines: I mentioned your interview with two committees of the parliament of Yugoslavia, the assembly of Yugoslavia. Is it correct that you were arrested only so that by exerting pressure against you, they could accuse me?

A. Yes. That's why they arrested me.

Q. Here, when you talked to two committees of the parliament of Yugoslavia, you say: "They asked me to accuse Slobodan Milosevic and to admit to criminal acts and to say that I was instructed by Slobodan Milosevic thereof."

Is that correct?

A. That's correct. I was told that in that case I would not be the one who would be held accountable but that I could choose a country where I would live and that I could get a new identity and that it was indispensable to accuse you so that you would be tried in the country.

Q. So that I could be tried in the country so that they would not have to sustain the shame of extraditing me to The Hague; is that right?

A. I assume that that was the reason. ⁸⁷⁶³

Q. All right. Since you're a career policeman in the details that were referred to here, as soon as you finished your university studies, you started working in the police force and you did so all the way up to your arrest. Is it correct that a detainee in an investigating prison can be only under the jurisdiction of a court and is not under the jurisdiction of the police?

A. According to our law on criminal procedure, a detainee is exclusively under the jurisdiction of the court. That is to say, that while an individual is under investigation, he is under the authority of an investigative judge and then after that, within the authority of the president of the chamber of the court.

Q. Is it true that even prison guards are not members of the Ministry of the Interior but members of the Ministry of Justice, that is to say, a completely separate authority that is within the judiciary system?

A. Prison guards are organisationally linked to the Ministry of Justice.

Q. Is it correct that without the approval of the court, you were illegally taken out of members of the state security section so that they would exert this kind of pressure that I've been referring to against you?

A. Members of the state security sector did not have a document given to them by the investigating judge to have me taken out. They only had permission to talk to me within the prison.

Q. Is it correct that a month after you were brought into custody, they took you out to interview you and that there was an interview that ⁸⁷⁶⁴ was attended inter alia by the Minister of the Interior, Mihajlovic, and others. As for the official record from the trial, I submitted that here while Witness Karleusa was being questioned, and that is stated in that record as well. Is that right?

A. The first time they talked to me after I spent a month in prison. Then, during the following months, they spoke to me several times. I literally handed over my position in the service in prison, because they did not carry out this handover when it was supposed to be carried out. I talked about the sector. I referred to things where I thought I could help them, where I could lead them to the right path, so that we could clarify where the state security was used and where it was instructed to do certain things and when it was not. Because very often the state security service was used and abused. It was mentioned in many places, and it had no authority to act in such areas.

After having spent four months in detention, I was taken out, and that's when I had this meeting with the head of state security, Goran Petrovic, and Zoran Mijatovic, his deputy, and the Ministry of the Interior of the Republic of Serbia, Mr. Mihajlovic. They did say that in court, and you have a record of that. They accepted that we did talk outside the prison premises. They claimed that that was at my request.

Q. Was it at your request?

A. Had it been at my request, then they certainly would have had a proper order from the investigating judge and then they would not have taken me out for dinner.

Q. Is it true that they offered on that occasion to you certain ⁸⁷⁶⁵ protective measures? They told you you would be in prison for six months and would be tried if you don't agree to charge me falsely, to level false allegations against me? Is that true or not?

A. They spoke to me about the difficult position I was in. They warned me against the possible consequences and offered me an option in the form of accusing Milosevic, as the person who issued orders for those criminal offences, which would relieve me of liability before a criminal court.

Q. Is it true that they offered you a new identity, money, and sustenance for you and your family only so that you would falsely accuse me? Is that correct?

A. Yes, that's correct.

Q. Do you know that in 1998 -- sorry. 1988, the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted by consensus a declaration against torture, and that such treatment that you were subjected to is explicitly forbidden by this declaration, as well as forcing --

MR. NICE: Your Honour -- [Previous translation continues]

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. -- statements from detainees, extortion and such things?

JUDGE MAY: This doesn't appear to have any relevance to the evidence the witness has given here, none at all. He's been agreeing with you, he's been agreeing to the matters you've put to him, and we're not certainly going to litigate here what happened in Yugoslavia when he was arrested. What we're concerned with, as you know, is events in Kosovo.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. May, the conduct of a puppet ⁸⁷⁶⁶ regime in Belgrade is completely identical to the false indictment --

JUDGE MAY: Precisely the sort of point which we're not going to consider. Now, have you got any more relevant questions for this witness? Or we'll move on.

Mr. Tapuskovic, have you got any questions of this witness?

MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Of course I have more questions. I have many more questions.

JUDGE MAY: How long do you think you'll need, Mr. Tapuskovic?

MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I will try to do what I have to do within 15 minutes.

JUDGE MAY: Thank you. Yes, Mr. Milosevic. Move on to some other topic.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. All right. Is it true that inciting somebody to false testimony and false accusations is a criminal act under our law?

JUDGE MAY: That is precisely the point that has been ruled against. Now, you'll have to deal with his evidence. Do you challenge, for instance, the meeting at which it was said you were at and there was talking of the cleaning up of the terrain? If so, you should put that?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. May, I am asking precisely that question: Is it true that this statement that has been presented about the mopping up of the terrain was drafted precisely by the same people and under the sponsorship of those people who exerted pressure on you and who have been torturing you for one year and a half now? ⁸⁷⁶⁷

A. Yes, it's an interview with the same people.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. From --

JUDGE MAY: Exhibit 283.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. I have noted down your words related to this matter. You said it was a liberal interpretation on their part, that you discussed the mopping up in an informal conversation with Ilic, that what was said was mostly gossip, and that nobody, Ilic or you included, ever talked about removing corpses from Kosovo. So could it be said that this statement is a fabrication by the same people who conducted these interviews?

A. Unfortunately, I did not read that statement before I signed it, and it is not really in the format of the statement. It was a conversation, an interview, in which we were looking for a way out of the problems that were facing the Ministry of the Interior. After that, an official, officer of the state security service drafted this paper, and later, when it was presented to me by the Office of the Prosecutor of The Hague Tribunal, I pointed out certain details which did not tally with the truth. And after that, I gave my statement to the investigators of the OTP, which I assert is true and correct.

Q. Okay. Let's get one thing clear: At this meeting about which they made this statement, did I ever mention in any way removing traces of crimes?

A. No. You approved the mopping up, the clean-up.

Q. Is it true that the mopping up or clean-up means a lawful ⁸⁷⁶⁸ procedure consisting of those elements which you mentioned in chief, that is, removal of mines and explosives, removal of chemicals, removal of dead bodies, taking care of the wounded, repairing infrastructure, service lines, et cetera, that is, creating -- restoring life back to normal after combat operations? Is that correct?

A. Yes, that is what the clean-up means, what it implies.

Q. Did anyone at that meeting mention that clean-up also involves removal of traces of crimes or any sort of cover-up? Did anyone say that crimes needed to be covered up?

A. No, nobody talked about crimes or covering them up.

Q. And even later, in the Ministry of the Interior, did anyone speak about the need to transfer some bodies from Kosovo to Serbia proper?

A. Not that I heard.

Q. Is it well known that the actual situation, the reality, was quite the opposite, as far as covering up is concerned? The position of all of us, starting with me, the minister, Milutinovic, and other politicians, yourself and others, namely, that crimes had to be answered for and that any perpetrator of a crime had to be brought to justice?

A. That was also written in the orders that we received.

Q. So can we derive the conclusion that if anyone wanted to cover up anything, it was concealment from the local authorities and not The Hague Tribunal, because at that time, in March 1999, nobody gave a thought to The Hague Tribunal?

A. Yes, it could be interpreted that way.

Q. Very well. During your testimony here, some sort of record of ⁸⁷⁶⁹ interrogation was presented here, your interrogation before an investigating judge, and Mr. Nice quoted, "Jovica Stanisic showed you a paper which was actually an authorisation from then president of Slobodan Milosevic, according to which the head of the SDB was directly answerable to Slobodan Milosevic I don't know exactly was written in it, but it transpired -- the essence was that the minister was bypassed, the Minister of the Interior, Vlajko Stojilkovic, was bypassed, and instead, Jovica Stanisic was directly accountable to Slobodan Milosevic." That is basically the statement that Mr. Nice quoted here yesterday. And then this decision was also presented to you, and you confirmed it was the decision that indeed had been shown to you. Since this decision contains only one sentence, I will read it out: "In the period of preparations for enacting the federal law on conducting law enforcement in the SFRY, the security sector shall work according to the guidelines of the president and the government of the Republic of Serbia from the day of entry into force of this decision until the day of entry into force of the federal law which will govern security affairs from then on."

So I've read this decision entirely. It says at the bottom "Slobodan Milosevic, president of the Republic," and my signature. Can this decision be interpreted or understood as bypassing the law or, as they said here, bypassing the Minister of the Interior, Vlajko Stojilkovic? Can that be the interpretation of this decision?

JUDGE MAY: Before you answer, the record should reflect that the accused is referring to Exhibit 277. ⁸⁷⁷⁰ Yes, Mr. Markovic.

A. It is a fact that Jovica Stanisic did not submit reports to the Minister of the Interior, Vlajko Stojilkovic, nor did he or any representative of the state security branch during his tenure attend the senior staff meetings of the ministry while Vlajko Stojilkovic was the minister.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Okay. Let's clear this up. This decision was adopted on the 21st of April, 1997. That's what it says here. But before I ask my second question: Was that the case during all the time while Jovica Stanisic was head of the DB until late autumn 1998, what you just said, that he did not attend?

A. No. That was the case only during the time when Vlajko Stojilkovic was appointed Minister of the Interior. Until then, he was a regular attendant of meetings in the office of the minister, Zoran Sokolovic.

Q. All right. But beginning with the 21st of April, or around that time, Stojilkovic was appointed before that, was it the case that during all that time he didn't attend these meetings while Vlajko Stojilkovic was the minister?

A. I believe he started to attend, and at some point later, when he was enabled in this way to report directly to the government of Serbia, he stopped attending.

Q. So that was the case until the end of his term of office?

A. Yes, until the end. ⁸⁷⁷¹

Q. All right. This was adopted on the 21st of April, 1997. And I ceased to be president of the Republic of Serbia by assuming the functions of the president of the SFRY in the same year, on the 23rd of July. I suppose that these facts are not disputed or disputable. Therefore, in light of this decision - and I assert that it cannot be understood in this way - he was able to report to me from the end of April until the 23rd of July, but not after that date, because this refers to guidelines of the president and the government of the Republic of Serbia, not me personally. The reference is made here to institutions, not an individual?

JUDGE MAY: You're making your point. Mr. Markovic, help us with this: Can you see any point in this document? What would you understand the purpose of it to be?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. May, we'll come to the purpose of this document. Let me continue my examination.

JUDGE MAY: You've been making speeches. Let the witness answer.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I understood that the head of the state security sector at that time, Jovica Stanisic, did not wish to communicate with the Minister of the Interior. The reason was probably that his past experience until then was much richer than the experience of the Minister of the Interior. It was at his personal request - and that's what he told me himself - that he received this document, enabling him to communicate directly with the head of the Republic of Serbia, the president of the Republic, and the government of Serbia.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Let us now go to the essence of this document and the essence of ⁸⁷⁷² what you testified yesterday, I believe it was during the examination-in-chief. It might have been even the day before yesterday, because there were constant interruptions. The subject was the preparations for enacting the federal law governing security affairs on the territory of Yugoslavia. Is it true that the procedure for enacting a federal law starts with a certain expert body preparing a draft law, or a bill, after which the competent ministry proposes that bill to the government; if it is a federal law, then to the federal government; the federal government first approves the draft, then reviews it, and only then it is reviewed at a session of the federal government, whereupon a proposal is made to refer it to the federal parliament for enactment. Does this describe roughly the procedure for enacting a federal law?

A. Yes, that is the procedure for adopting a law.

Q. Could you then assume -- let me break this question down again. Do you think that Jovica Stanisic was -- perhaps I should put it this way -- to a great extent, the person who was the greatest expert in national security affairs that we had at that time? Is that right or is that not right?

A. Yes, that's right.

Q. So do you assume that he headed the team that worked on the professional preparation of that law?

A. Yes. That was his idea originally, to adopt this law.

Q. Do you know that it was considered, in many developed countries, that these state security affairs should not be carried out within the Ministry of the Interior, but that there are agencies that the state ⁸⁷⁷³ establishes for carrying out such work?

A. According to that model, that proposal was made, and I see that such a law has been adopted now.

Q. Do you know that at that time, when work was being done on regulating the state affairs in the area of state security, there was a state security service of Serbia, a state security service of Montenegro, there was an administration for intelligence and the General Staff, then also an administration in the General Staff that also dealt with security, and then also in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, a special service that also dealt in such matters? Are you aware of all of that?

A. Yes.

Q. So the objective was to create a community of security services, to regulate it by federal law, and in this way to make it possible to do away with mutual rivalries, mistrust, jealousies, et cetera, that usually exist between such communities and they jealously guard the information they have, rarely give it to other agencies, et cetera? Is that correct?

A. Yes, that was the objective.

Q. And then is it quite clear that Stanisic wished - how should I put this? - to protect himself from lateral influences with regard to the professional preparation of that law, and once he drafts it with his team, it could not have a different fate by what we established a few minutes ago, that it be presented to the government then, that then it be presented as a bill to the federal parliament, and so on? So there was no other question involved.

A. I can only assume that that was his wish. ⁸⁷⁷⁴

Q. All right. But isn't it logical that someone who believes and --

MR. NICE: [Previous translation continues] ... amount of --

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for Mr. Nice, please.

MR. NICE: There must be a limit to the amount of self-serving benefit that can be got by assumptions and so on through this witness, but it is a matter for the Court.

JUDGE MAY: It's a matter for the Trial Chamber to decide what value this evidence has, given largely by the accused.

JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Milosevic. There's not much point. This is the point that's being made: Going on to the witness about matters which he really doesn't know about and asking him what his assumptions are. Now, if you want to call or give evidence about these matters from somebody who knows about them, you can, but it's of little benefit to the Trial Chamber. As you know, your time is limited, so you'll want to use it as usefully as you can.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, I am using it, Mr. May, but precisely from this paper that was submitted by Mr. Nice, this paper shows what I have been claiming. It shows that the most expert team possible that was preparing a draft law was headed by the greatest expert of all, and it was logical to make it possible for that man that until he prepares this bill for consideration for the government, that he should not be subjected to pressure from any other sides until he actually prepares this. So then it was not up to me or anyone else; it was up to the government and parliament what kind of bill would be presented and what the parliament would ultimately adopt. ⁸⁷⁷⁵

JUDGE MAY: We hear your argument. It is a matter of argument. The witness can only give evidence about what he knows himself or saw or heard. Now, unless there's anything else you want to ask about this which is relevant, I suggest we move on and don't waste further time on it.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. May, you did not caution the other side that they were wasting time when they were putting questions about licence plates on a truck for ten minutes, and you are cautioning me when you speak about a decision that is quite legitimate and that pertains to the internal regulation of a sovereign state. And you cannot even --

JUDGE MAY: Your points are totally false. There was no question of ten minutes on that matter. Anyway, it's irrelevant. If you want to ask, if you've got questions that this witness can deal with, of course this is an important document. If you've got some questions that the witness can deal with in relation to it, why, then, ask him, but asking him about a series of assumptions is not going to assist anybody.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The assumption is -- or rather, the construction that somebody planted to this witness on purpose is that through this document, the Minister of the Interior was bypassed. That's not what it says in this document. And that the law was bypassed. And that's not what this document says either.

JUDGE MAY: It will be a matter for the Trial Chamber to decide what construction to give to the document. Now, let's move on.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Please, were there any changes at all in the method of your work and in the work of the state security -- I'm comparing the time when I was ⁸⁷⁷⁶ president and the time after I stopped being president, that is to say, after the coup of the 5th of October. Did you work the same way before that and after that?

A. The public security functioned the same way. I cannot speak about state security because I do not know how it functioned at that time.

Q. All right. But I'm referring to the following. For a while you did head state security after the 5th of October too, for a few months. I cannot say exactly how many months. Did you change anything in the method of your work? Did you work differently while I was president and after I stopped being president?

A. No. Nothing was changed in the method of work. That is to say that the sector worked for the state, and the state had its duties that are precisely regulated by law and other regulations.

Q. Now let us digress in relation to this mystification of resubordination of the forces of the Ministry of the Interior to the army. Actually, in a situation of war, precisely because of the existence of the principle of one command, the police is subordinated to the army. Is that correct or is that not correct?

A. That's correct.

Q. Is it correct that by proclaiming a state of war, the General Staff of the army of Yugoslavia becomes the staff of the Supreme Command? Is that correct?

A. Yes.

Q. Is it correct, therefore, that the staff of the Supreme Command and the Supreme Command, in a state of war, includes all armed forces, not ⁸⁷⁷⁷ only the army? That is to say, the army and the police and everybody else who carries a weapon.

A. That's right.

Q. I am not going to give you now this instruction of the staff of the Supreme Command, Mr. May, because I need it for other reasons, more important ones, but I should just like to recall that it bears the signature of the head of the staff of the Supreme Command. Lest there be any misunderstanding, the fact that it was signed by the chief of staff of the Supreme Command does not mean that I am not considered to be the authority -- the order giving authority in this respect as well.

MR. NICE: I'm not sure if the accused is saying that he's cross-examining on a different document from any that we have and that he's not prepared to disclose, but if that's what he's saying, he should perhaps be corrected, because if he has a document, it ought to be revealed to the Court.

JUDGE MAY: Let's see what the point is. Yes, Mr. Milosevic.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] This is what I'm trying to say: In the order -- actually, yesterday Mr. Nice presented a document here that refers to General Pavkovic's order in respect of resubordinating the police to certain structures of the army in the field, but I'm just mentioning that General Pavkovic's order is based on the order issued by the staff of the Supreme Command, and in it the command of the 3rd Army, headed by General Pavkovic, are told that forces of the civil defence are ⁸⁷⁷⁸ being put under the command of the 3rd Army and are being used exclusively on the basis of your decision. So we clarified this a short while ago, that this is a legal --

JUDGE MAY: What is the date of this document?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The date of this document is the 9th of April, 1999.

JUDGE MAY: You're going to produce it in due course; is that right.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Of course I will. But I need it for cross-examining another witness. According to the list provided by the OTP, or rather, those who aspire to be the Office of the Prosecutor, I will needed this for another witness that I will be cross-examining, and after all, I have that right, not to disclose it now. After all, I have the right not to disclose anything I don't want to disclose, so there.

JUDGE MAY: But in order that there's some order in this, you must disclose that before we break from the Kosovo part of the case. Or you can give a copy to the Prosecution. Either way will do.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I am going to tender it before we finish the Kosovo segment of the case, Mr. May. Don't you worry. But before that, I want to discuss certain allegations made by a witness who is supposed to appear here. I hope so, at least, unless the Prosecution does not call him again.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Furthermore, please, let's just look at the question of financing for a moment. You were asked -- or rather, you personally have been asked ⁸⁷⁷⁹ here by the representatives of this indictment -- this is the way I wrote it down -- whether the state security was financed by the state, from state sources, or in some other way. And then there was an explanation given by you that the budget was approved, et cetera, et cetera, and that the funds that were lacking for that were given from the funds that were collected by way of the Federal Customs Administration. Is it contested that resources that are collected by way of the Federal Customs Administration are also state funds, not funds that are apart from the state?

A. These are state funds.

Q. Is it contested that every time, for such funds, there was an appropriate relationship between the customs and an appropriate service of the Ministry of the Interior that then used these resources according to a plan that had it explained and elaborated before that? Is that right or is that not right?

A. That's what I said.

Q. Yes, but, for example, the Prosecution said that there was some kind of mediation in terms of the purchase of helicopters and equipment for helicopters, that there was some kind of mediation on the part of my brother. Did he do this as my brother or because he was required to do so by the service?

A. He did that within the context of his own service, and this was required from him by the service.

Q. And do you know that already in the early 1970s my brother was counsellor of the embassy in Moscow? ⁸⁷⁸⁰

A. No. I met him as ambassador.

Q. And do you know that later in the 1970s he was minister counsellor in the embassy in Moscow? Just say yes or no. It's not important.

A. No.

Q. And do you know that towards the end of the 1980s he was ambassador of the former SFRY in Algeria and he also served a term?

A. No. I only know about the period when he was ambassador to Russia.

Q. And before that period he lived in Moscow, and before that in Paris, et cetera. Was it through me that the service communicated with our ambassador to Moscow, or did the service officially address him? For example, did you communicate with him through me when you had some contact with him, or did you have contacts of your own with him?

A. No. The communication was direct, because it was inherited, so to speak. That is the way it worked before me. And Borislav Milosevic was engaged in other matters in addition to being ambassador, before that, and he was a man who knew very well what the possibilities were of obtaining what we needed.

Q. Actually, did he help the service to meet their needs in terms of purchasing some equipment?

A. Yes, he did help the service.

Q. Because of what can be interpreted between the lines, did anyone ever have any information to the effect that he had taken some money for helping the service?

A. No. He only enabled contacts based on which the service of the ⁸⁷⁸¹ Ministry of the Interior, the relevant service, managed to conduct these transactions.

Q. So he used his own reputation, connections, to enable members of your ministry to get this done?

A. Yes.

Q. And do you have any information to the effect that he himself, or any of his subordinates, collected any money for this service, so to speak?

A. No. The state security sector did not conclude any contracts. It was the job of the financial department of the Ministry of the Interior, and I have no such information.

Q. You mentioned yesterday Borka Vucic. I don't want to object to this or hold it against you, but the opposite side seems to represent this person as some sort of shadowy figure through which such -- shady figure through which such transactions were conducted. Do you know that she was actually the director of one of the major financial institutions, major banking institutions called Beogradska Bank?

A. I spoke of Mrs. Borka Vucic precisely as an expert in the area of finance and banking, and that was the reason why we were directed to conduct our affairs through that bank, because they were experts in that field.

Q. Do you know that Mrs. Borka Vucic has been engaged for many decades in this area and that she is well known to the top-notch bankers in the world?

A. I have heard a lot about the expertise of Mrs. Borka Vucic. I'm ⁸⁷⁸² not competent to qualify her or to assess her qualifications, but I know that she is a well-known banker internationally.

Q. But do you know that every transaction had to be legally effected through a bank precisely because rules had to be abided by in every respect, rules governing banking, financial affairs, et cetera?

A. Since it was the Ministry of the Interior, I'm certain that all transactions had to be effected legally and lawfully.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] Let me just look through this.

JUDGE MAY: We're going to adjourn now. It's 12.15. It's time for the break. Twenty minutes. Would you be back then, please, Mr. Markovic.

MR. NICE: Your Honour, just before we leave, in setting the timetable for the balance of the day, with a witness of this kind, he's already been in cross-examination longer than in chief, there will be a significant number of questions to ask in re-examination. It's not a case where, of course, the cross-examination has been regarded as hostile by the accused. The re-examination may be quite important.

JUDGE MAY: How long are you asking for?

MR. NICE: At least 15 minutes, but it could be longer.

JUDGE MAY: Very well.

--- Recess taken at 12.15 p.m.

--- Upon commencing at 12.39 p.m.

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Milosevic, you can have half an hour more, if you require it.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I was just going to tell you, ⁸⁷⁸³ Mr. May: Since I heard that the amici want to use up 15 minutes and that Mr. Nice too wants 15 minutes, I was going to tell you that I will shorten my cross-examination so that they can have this opportunity in full, and I wanted to say that at the end of the previous session, when you told me I may continue after the break.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. I have just a few more questions, mainly related to what the opposite side put forth in this courtroom. Radomir, yesterday, or the day before yesterday - I can't remember exactly - the opposite side quoted some alleged statement of yours to the effect that my wife wanted to influence have over the service, and that is associated with the appointment of Uros Suvakovic on one of the positions in the service. Just a few questions about that.

Is it true that Uros Suvakovic was not a member of the Yugoslav left wing, but a member of the socialist party of Serbia?

A. Suvakovic was a member of the socialist party of Serbia, yes.

Q. Was he appointed by a decision of the Minister of the Interior to his position?

A. He was appointed by a decision of the Minister of the Interior, yes.

Q. Is it true that in that position to which he was appointed to, Uros Suvakovic did not deal in either intelligence or counter-intelligence affairs, but as a young scientist in the field of sociology, he dealt in general issues of sociopolitical nature, of political and security nature, rather? ⁸⁷⁸⁴

A. His job had to do with analytical work in the state security branch.

Q. Very well. Yesterday, the opposite side produced a document here titled "Order by Lieutenant General Nebojsa Pavkovic," dated 8th May, 1999. It is an order concerning resubordination of the MUP to the army of Yugoslavia, and it was adopted almost a month earlier, as I said before. Is it true that the command of the 3rd Army of the VJ -- is it true that this order relies completely on this previous order, since it is dated the 8th of May, 1999?

A. Yes. I said yesterday that I assume that this order of his is based on the order of the staff of the Supreme Command.

Q. And it is implied - and I don't contest it in any way - that an order of the chief of staff of the Supreme Command must have an approval from me.

A. That's understood too.

Q. Are you aware of any -- I quoted here only a certain number of orders, but are you aware of any order of the staff of the Supreme Command which would be contrary to the laws and customs of war, the Geneva Conventions, and all the legislation governing proper treatment of civilians and proper conduct of the army or the armed forces in general?

A. No, I don't know of any such order. I am certain that none existed.

Q. Some training centres for volunteers have been mentioned here. Is it true that neither you nor your service could have had no information about the role of the leadership of Serbia or my personal role in the ⁸⁷⁸⁵ fostering or maintenance of such training centres? Is that true or not?

A. I had no such knowledge, and during my tenure as head of the state security sector, there were no such camps.

Q. I omitted to ask you something about that notorious mopping up. Is it true that there was an official instruction on mopping up that included all those elements that you enumerated, plus some more elements which were prescribed by the same instruction?

A. I don't know about the official instruction, but it was prescribed by the army of Yugoslavia. They issued an order to that effect, and I suppose it was signed by General Lazarevic.

Q. When was the first time that you heard about some transport of corpses to Serbia proper?

A. I heard about it and I read about it in the papers while I was in prison.

Q. So you didn't, and you couldn't have known anything about it while you were heading the state security sector, and if anything of the sort existed, I suppose, you would have had to know?

A. I knew absolutely nothing about it.

Q. Since you occupied high positions in the police, have you ever heard of any plan designed by me or anyone else in the top echelons of Serbia or Yugoslavia to create a Serbian army outside the territory of Yugoslavia or a Serbian army within the boundaries of Yugoslavia? Have you ever heard of such a plan?

A. No, I haven't.

Q. References are made here often on the importance of the Ministry ⁸⁷⁸⁶ of the Defence of Serbia, especially in relation to Croatia. Since you worked in the Ministry of the Interior and you had access to the most confidential documents, did the Ministry of Defence of Serbia ever have a role with regard to Croatia or the war in Croatia?

A. I know nothing about that.

Q. One more question: Did the KLA -- or rather, is the KLA just a name for a terrorist organisation which assumed that name in order to make the international community treat them as some sort of liberation movement rather than a terrorist organisation?

A. Yes.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] No further questions, Mr. May.

MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. Questioned by Mr. Tapuskovic:

Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Markovic, I would just like to ask you to give a few explanations with regard to Exhibit 283. It has to do with your statement, as it says here, dated the 2nd of June, 2002.

A. Could you please repeat what this is? I can't know this way.

Q. That is a statement where it is said that you spoke of the possible civilian casualties that could become the object of the interest of The Hague Tribunal, as Mr. Nice read out to you. It is your statement dated the 2nd of June, 2002. There it is. You don't have to read it?

JUDGE KWON: 2001.

MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes. It says -- I mean, that's what I want to ask.

Q. In this printed text of your statement, it says that it was given ⁸⁷⁸⁷ on the 2nd of June, 2001. That's what it says. And in -- on the bottom of the page, you put your signature and you said the 2nd of June, 2002. Usually a date is not put underneath a signature if it is already contained in the statement. Can you explain this? Was this statement brought to you as it was written here?

A. It was brought as it was written here.

Q. When was it written? On the 2nd of June, 2001?

A. You know what? I have lost an idea about this. Now, I was arrested in 2001.

Q. When?

A. In February. So this is the year 2001.

Q. So when was this statement written? It was brought written as it is to you, wasn't it?

A. Yes, it was brought to me written as it is in 2001, because --

Q. Then why did you put this date here, the 2nd of June, 2002?

A. That's only on the middle page. But look at the first one. That is 2001 --

Q. No. On the second page it is 2001, and then the third page is 2002. As far as I can see it is 2002 in all three places. But all right. What interests me is the following: It was brought to you written the way it stands; right?

A. Yes.

Q. So they did not put questions to you and then compose this statement?

A. We had several conversations. That is to say that at some ⁸⁷⁸⁸ conversations, we compiled a report after the interview, and others, due to the limited time that could be spent in conversation with me, on the basis of notes of employees of the state security sector, statements were compiled later and brought to me to sign.

Q. Was this for the purposes that Mr. Milosevic referred to? Were some promises made to you?

A. When I signed this, nothing was promised to me. These were interviews with an employee of the state security service. This was purely an exchange of information. It was not a statement that was being taken as under the Law on Criminal Procedure. This was an interview in which they insisted that I should help them in respect of the knowledge they already had, that I could help them enhance the knowledge they already had. I told them what I knew and referred them to people who knew far more about this. That is to say that I said what I had heard. And I referred them to people who actually did that.

Q. Thank you, but I don't have much time. I'm interested in the following: Could this statement have been taken to you under the circumstances under which it was taken in the spirit of Yugoslav legislation and could it have been taken in this way according to Yugoslav law?

A. It could have been taken this way in the spirit of Yugoslav law.

Q. Thank you.

A. It could have --

Q. I'm interested in the following now: You said that all paramilitary formations in the territory of Kosovo were under the command ⁸⁷⁸⁹ of the army of Yugoslavia; is that right?

A. Yes.

Q. Do you know of the existence of armed village patrols, Serb village patrols, in villages where people were defending their own homes? And how much of this kind of thing was there?

A. I don't know. I did not stay in Kosovo at all, and I am not aware of such armed patrols. I assume that there were some, but I don't see any reason why they wouldn't be attached to the police or the Ministry of the Interior, because these citizens of Serb or Albanian ethnicity there were not left to their own resources.

Q. Thank you. You arrived in Kosovo -- or rather, you took over your job in state security in October 1998?

A. November 1998.

Q. At the moment when you took over that duty, did you have any precise information at all about the membership of the KLA, the number of member of the KLA? And while you were involved in this line of work, until the bombing started on the 24th of March, 1999, can you tell us the numbers of the KLA?

A. At any rate, the number went up. For a while it was reduced, that is to say, before I came to that position. Quite a bit had been done in order to reduce the number of terrorists in Kosovo. Later, terrorism was in full swing again and the number of terrorists in Kosovo increased, and they called themselves the Liberation Army of Kosovo.

Q. Do you know how many of them there were when the bombing started?

A. I don't know, because it was exceptionally hard to tell, but I'm ⁸⁷⁹⁰ sure that there was 10.000 or 20.000 of them.

Q. Thank you. Yesterday the Prosecutor, Mr. Nice, asked you about the resources that were secured apart from the budget in order to procure vehicles, equipment, weapons, and other things that were needed so that the army and police could function properly. Also, reference was made to the fact that you organised special units of the police. Is that all that was done? Or rather, all of this that was done, was it done only because of the problem with terrorists in Kosovo, as you had put it?

A. Absolutely because of that. Special units are called anti-terrorist units, and they are used for combatting terrorism, all forms of terrorism. Therefore, the state security sector had its own anti-terrorist unit which exists in the state security station until the present day.

Q. Yesterday, the Prosecutor Mr. Nice presented two documents to you. One was introduced as Exhibit 280 and the other one as Exhibit 282. In both of these decisions reference is made to the fact that these are orders that have to do with terrorist activities. My question is the following: All the decisions that you ever saw, were they related to activities that had to do with paralysing the terrorist forces?

A. Yes.

Q. Is that the way it was, all the way up to the 24th of March, 1999?

A. That's the way it was.

Q. Now, at that moment the NATO bombing started. Civilian facilities were destroyed, houses, roads, there were civilian casualties, and now, at that moment, on the one hand there was an armed rebellion and on the other ⁸⁷⁹¹ hand there was NATO bombing. In this situation did you have some priorities? What was the most important thing for you now?

A. I repeat to you once again that during the bombing, and also before that I was not in Kosovo, but the priorities were, at any rate, to preserve the lives of all persons in Kosovo, that is to say both the members of the army and the police and also the Albanian and Serb population, and those were the priorities, to oppose that type of warfare that was engaged in by the army of Yugoslavia was, I think, impossible.

Q. Did you hear that on that day, the 24th of March, a plan was elaborated to carry out some actions in relation to the civilian population in addition to all the problems that you had with terrorist and due to the NATO bombing?

A. I never heard of such a plan.

Q. Thank you. Could you please tell me whether you knew about something like this at all: That some leaflets were thrown to the Albanian population after the bombing started, that they should leave Kosovo and also we saw these leaflets here, that they bore the signature of Ibrahim Rugova?

A. I heard about these leaflets that were thrown, that there were leaflets that were thrown, but I cannot quote their exact contents.

Q. You already mentioned that the Albanian population was already on the move because of the conflicts between the KLA and the army and the police, and in this same period of time, after you came, weren't Serbs increasingly leaving Kosovo, abandoning their homes, and going to Serbia and elsewhere? ⁸⁷⁹²

A. Yes, Serbs were leaving Kosovo. The reason was certainly this threat of terrorism, uncertainty. People simply no longer felt safe in their homes. They were being expelled by the Albanians, not only the terrorists, but also their next-door neighbours. It happened that they would simply be expelled. Of course, that was not the case everywhere. There are different kinds of examples too, but unfortunately they are rarer.

Q. Did that take place over all of those ten years and with equal intensity, and since you worked on the police force, you know that this was taking place since 1980? And if so, can you please explain this?

A. No, I was not engaged in this particular subject-matter within the police. I was informed to the extent to which every citizen of our country is.

Q. While you did your job, the one that we've been referring to, that is to say as head of the state security section, were you aware of Albanians coming into Kosovo en masse and staying in Kosovo, Albanians from Albania?

A. We did have such information about migrations towards Kosovo, that is to say across border crossings. It was both people and weapons that were coming in from Albania.

Q. Mr. Markovic, I just have a few more questions for you relating to the bombing. Yesterday you were shown, several times, Exhibit 281. That is this survey of events that are of significance from a security point of view during the course of one day. You saw that yesterday, didn't you?

A. Yes. ⁸⁷⁹³

Q. Please take a look at it. I can read this to you. For example, on the 26th, it says:

"NATO bombs hit a flyover. Four persons were hit, including four females. A crater was the result, five metres deep. Then also there were many shops that were hit . Shefqet, Ferizi, Avni were killed." I cannot quote all of this any more. But don't you know, as a person who was in charge -- or the person who was in charge of the state security service, to what extent did this happen in Kosovo? Wasn't it Kosovo that was bombed the most, and it wasn't the Albanian population that was afflicted the most?

A. Since the Albanian population is the overwhelming population of Kosovo, they were the ones that were afflicted the most, and bombs do not select in that sense. So it is certain that it was Albanians who were afflicted the most in this way. Kosovo was bombed the most, and that is where most of the destruction took place as well.

Q. Can you tell me how the people behaved, not only in Kosovo, but throughout the territory of Serbia? Were people leaving the country en masse and going in different directions, that is to say, people from Kosovo and people from other parts of Serbia?

A. It is certain that the bombing in Kosovo did start the migration of the population, both Serbs and Albanians. Again I say that the Albanians are the majority population, and therefore their migrations were more pronounced. In Serbia, one did not feel it to that extent. Individual persons had left, perhaps to save their children and themselves, but one cannot speak of migrations in Serbia. ⁸⁷⁹⁴

Q. What about towards Hungary?

A. No. No. Not to an extent to which a person could call it migrations. Individually, yes. People were fleeing from the bombing, but not in an organised manner.

Q. Can you tell me one more thing. Were you interested in the following: What kind of weapons were used? Were there problems with cluster bombs that had in the exploded? And did your service come to the conclusion that depleted uranium was also used, or rather --

A. Yes. We had both pieces of information: One, that cluster bombs were used that remained unactivated, unexploded, partially, and our own people, technicians, experts in this field, even lost their lives as they were collecting these cluster bombs and deactivating them. The service also knows that projectiles were used for certain weapons, and depleted uranium was used in the ammunition for that.

Q. I'm going to put a question to you now that you don't even have to answer. Will life be possible in Serbian Kosovo after all of that?

JUDGE MAY: No. That's not a question for the witness.

MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you. Re-examined by Mr. Nice:

Q. Mr. Markovic, you've been described as the most informed man in Serbia or something of that sort. And in the course of the questions he's asked you - and I think he's addressed you in the familiar form of language throughout, using your first name, you responding in the respectful form - you've been able to answer nearly every one of his questions. That's right, isn't it? ⁸⁷⁹⁵

A. Yes. After all, that was the usual communication between myself and Mr. Milosevic. I always addressed him in those terms, and he addressed me in the terms he used now as well.

Q. So, I want to know if you can help me, please: As one of the most informed people in Serbia, we've had evidence, you see, of bodies found at the Batajnica base of the special forces there, and forensic scientific evidence showing that those bodies came from Suva Reka in Kosovo. Can you explain how, with your level of knowledge, you either knew or, alternatively, didn't know, about those matters?

A. I assume that all of this was done before I came to head the state security sector, because I probably would have known something about this, but I did not know anything about it. I first heard of this when I was already in prison.

Q. If you would be so good, please -- can we just go to the statement that you've been asked about, Exhibit 283. Would you take that again, please? Mr. Tapuskovic has asked you some questions about it as well. Now, just to tidy up a little point that was troubling Mr. Tapuskovic. If we look at the signature, in fact, your figure 1 is quite similar to figure 2, but it is, in fact, different, and it's differently constructed, and you have no doubt that the date of these signatures is the 2nd of June, 2001, do you?

A. That's right.

Q. If you'd be good enough now to go to the last page.

MR. NICE: And it may be that the overhead projector should be erected and the usher could just lay the third sheet of the Bosnian -- of ⁸⁷⁹⁶ the Serbian version on the overhead projector, so that we can see the signature page. The overhead projector, please.

Q. Now, it's right, isn't it, that this statement --

MR. NICE: If we just put it on -- thank you very much.

Q. -- concludes with these words: "Pursuant to the law on criminal procedure, I've read this statement in its entirety, I accept it as mine, and accordingly sign it under penalty" .

And then there are two people who might be able to help us with that, one of them being the authorised officer, and the other, the recording secretary. And then it's signed by you. We'll come back to that signature in a minute. Just help us, though, because you've been asked by the accused about this statement. It says you read it. Did you?

A. No, I did not read it. The statement does say that I read it. I glanced at it superficially and I saw that it did refer to things that we had discussed and I signed it. When I read it, though, when it was shown to me by the gentleman of the investigation, I said quite precisely what I thought about it, what I knew, what I did, and not what I talked about to the employee of the state security sector.

Q. I'm going to come back to what you may have said to the investigator in a second, but before I do, I'd be grateful for your help on this: On the first page of the English version, if the usher would be so good, and I think it's probably about the first page of your version, there's a sentence which says this, pretty well middle of the page: "Personally, I would not let the state security department get ⁸⁷⁹⁷ involved in this morbid affair."

And then on the second page in the English, six lines up from the end:

"I would like to reiterate resolutely that the state security department had nothing to do with these events." Were you concerned, in your interviews with these people, to make clear that the state security department had nothing to do with this "morbid affair"? If so, it would appear that they have accurately recorded your position. Can you just help us with that, please?

A. Yes. I said that that is what I had heard; that is to say, I had heard about the order for mopping up. As for the rest, I only heard about that from Dragan Ilic, and this was just in private conversations. This is what he mentioned as a problem that he encountered in Kosovo. It is natural that this kind of mopping up that is being spoken about, and that also has to do with corpses in Kosovo, is a very unpleasant task. And people who are not prepared for doing that kind of thing is something that people find very troublesome to do. And I said that I was glad that people from the state security sector did not have to do with that because I wanted to preserve them from such things.

Q. And that was the only reason, was it?

A. That was the only reason. The rest is what I heard, unofficially and superficially.

Q. We've had some evidence -- as with all evidence, it will for the Judges to decide, but we've had some evidence that it was the Roma, not Kosovar Albanians, who were associated with the removal of bodies. You, ⁸⁷⁹⁸ as the knowledgeable man you were, can you help us with that, why that should be, if it's something that the Judges, in due course, find?

A. We are now talking about the corpses that were found in the refrigerator truck, right, or the corpses that were exhumed there at the compound of the special unit?

Q. You obviously follow the purpose of the questions. Can you help us whether it was one group or another that was predominantly used, or one group or another that was never used in relation to that work?

A. What group are you referring to?

Q. The Roma. Were they used predominantly for the work of moving bodies?

A. Now I've understood what you've been saying. I don't know about that. I simply do not know who was engaged in Kosovo. That is why I told the employee of the state security sector to speak to the person who was involved, and that it would easily be clarified with the person who knew about this matter for sure.

Q. And you've been asked again about mopping up or -- I can't do it.

THE INTERPRETER: Asanacija.

MR. NICE: Asanacija. Thank you.

Q. Does your understanding of "asanacija" mean taking the bodies from one territory and one country and moving them to a country of another or different country and burying them there? Is that what "asanacija" means?

A. No, by no means. "Asanacija," when referring to the corpses, means their exhumation in the place where they were provisionally buried, along with identification and final treatment, but in the territory which is ⁸⁷⁹⁹ designated for such "asanation", and it can't be by any means a territory outside of Kosovo.

Q. And therefore you couldn't understand, or you couldn't explain, removal of bodies to the area of Belgrade; would that be right?

A. That's correct. I couldn't understand it at all.

Q. But then you tell us you weren't aware of it in any event?

A. No, I didn't know about it.

Q. You've spoken of this meeting, set out in some way in this statement, as happening in March of 1999, when the war was well under way. You say you only heard of things from rumours. Can you help us, please, with what, from the rumours or from your direct knowledge, what led to this asanacija policy being carried out so early in the war, please, Mr. Markovic?

A. I cannot claim with any degree of certainty why it started to be discussed at that time. It was simply a proposal of the army of Yugoslavia which was accepted. It was also a proposal of people who had behind them a tour in Kosovo and had a better insight in the problems that had to be dealt with there. I never decided on whether it would be done or how it would be done. I was simply informed of it.

Q. Do you recall that the accused said to you, in relation to these matters, that at this time The Hague Tribunal wasn't in anyone's contemplation? See if you can help us, please. Do you remember when Justice Louise Arbour was blocked from entering the territory? As the most knowledgeable man, you probably can remember.

A. Yes. I remember that Mrs. Arbour had some problems. ⁸⁸⁰⁰

Q. When were those problems, as you've described them?

A. I can't remember the exact date, but now you reminded me of it, and if you hadn't, I probably wouldn't have remembered it at all.

Q. Let's move to another topic that you've been asked questions about.

JUDGE KWON: Just a second, Mr. Nice, since we are with the Exhibit 283.

Mr. Markovic, you said that the statement itself is a kind of liberal interpretation of the people who had an interview with you. That means that some part of the statement is true, but some part of the statements are not true, and they interpret liberally. So I'm interested in the part where you said that Mr. Ilic complained about the lorry case. He explained to you that it was the - I'm sorry - it was the result of Djordjevic's bad organisation. Is it true he said some kind of thing to you, that kind of thing: It was the bad result of Djordjevic's bad organisation?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In terms of his position, Dragan Djordjevic was subordinated to Vlastimir Djordjevic. He was in charge of combatting crime, whereas Djordjevic was in charge of the public security sector. Ilic received orders from Djordjevic, and especially when Kosovo was concerned, Djordjevic was an expert for Kosovo because he had spent a lot of time there and he was one of the most knowledgeable people in his sector as far as Kosovo is concerned. Ilic just mentioned that he encountered problems in his communication with Djordjevic and also in terms of his tasks in Kosovo. He did not receive the assistance and ⁸⁸⁰¹ support he needed, and he probably complained about that. I told him to talk to the Minister of the Interior, because I wasn't competent to help him.

JUDGE KWON: Did he say about refrigerated lorry to you, or did he not?

THE WITNESS: No. When the refrigerator lorry was found, he only mentioned that it could possibly cause problems, but he was not very well familiar with the whole issue, because he himself didn't know where these bodies could have come from.

JUDGE KWON: Thank you.

MR. NICE:

Q. And His Honour reminds me, Mr. Markovic, that I'd said I'd come back to your observations about the members of the Office of the Prosecution and things you've said to them about this statement, which you signed. Just answer me, if you can help us, please, this yes or no: Apart from what you say about where the sources of information were, were you actually asked whether the statement was accurate or not by the investigators of the Office of the Prosecutor?

A. I explained to the investigators which parts were true and which were not.

Q. Some of it, you say, came from other sources, so it might still be true, to the best of your belief, and you signed it. I just wonder: Did you ever assert that any part of it was actually wrong? Is that what you're saying?

A. I again gave a statement to all of these circumstances to the ⁸⁸⁰² investigators of The Hague Tribunal, and I was very precise in that statement when identifying things that I don't know myself firsthand and other things that I only heard about that. I was at that meeting. I know what "asanation" or "mopping up" means. But all the rest, such as associating "asanation" or "mopping up" with these bodies which were found then or found recently, I said I didn't know anything about that.

Q. A couple of other topics. Still staying with your position as a very knowledgeable person and the questions the accused has asked you about money, and he asked you whether the cash that came from the customs service and was collected by your staff in suitcases was still money belonging to the state. You said it was. Can you just help the Judges, please, with what good reason there could be for moving money around in cash like that?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have an objection, Mr. May.

JUDGE MAY: What's the objection?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Nice is quoting me, and he says I asked him about cash. I never used the word "cash." I talked about funds belonging to the state --

JUDGE MAY: Yes. That was --

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] -- that were --

JUDGE MAY: They're entitled to re-examine on that.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I don't want him to put words like "cash" into my quotation.

JUDGE MAY: Very well. The witness has the point clear there. I have no doubt. ⁸⁸⁰³

MR. NICE:

Q. Mr. Markovic --

JUDGE MAY: Would you repeat the question.

MR. NICE: Repeat it and, to assist the accused, I'll rephrase it.

Q. Mr. Markovic, the accused asked you carefully about funds. Were those funds in cash or in banker's orders?

A. These funds were in cash.

Q. You were asked whether those funds which you tell us were in cash were funds of the state, passing from one department, as it were, to another. Can you help the Judges at all, Their Honours, with any reason for why this money was moved -- these funds were moved in cash as opposed to by an ordinary commercial document?

A. I can't explain that. I suppose that Mr. Kertes had explained that, because he too has talked to the investigators, and his explanation is surely a valid one. I don't know about this. All I know is what I was told, that funds from the FCA would be paid through the Ministry of the Interior and the appropriate bank to an account that was to be used for effecting payment for materiel and supplies.

Q. You were asked some further questions by the accused in relation to money, about the woman Borka and her experience and so on in the international banking world. The financial report in this case has been made public and has been given some publicity, I think. If it be the case that many millions, 34 millions of dollars, went in cash from Belgrade to Cyprus, and the knowledgeable man you are, between 1998 and 1999, can you help us with why? ⁸⁸⁰⁴

A. I don't know that this transfer to Cyprus was made at all. I know absolutely nothing about it. I was not involved in any decisions to transfer any funds whatsoever, nor did I participate in this business.

Q. Finally, on the money side of things, then, please: Who directed you to conduct your affairs through the woman Borka's -- Borka Vucic's bank, please?

A. Well, when we discussed -- the minister and I, when we discussed which bank should be used as an intermediary, he suggested that it be Beogradska Banka, headed by Borka Vucic, and it was also the suggestion of Mr. Milosevic, in the minister's words, and the reasons, as has been stated here already, were that it was a competent bank and a very qualified person.

Q. Crimes said to have been committed by the MUP, or as the accused would put to you, and you've agreed with everything he said, really no such crimes -- again, the learned Judges will decide, and you may have been following the evidence elsewhere, but if in due course this Court decides that the MUP were involved in criminal acts at either Racak or Bela Crkva or Izbica or Meja -- first of all, did you ever receive reports of the crimes of the types that have been dealt with here from any of those places?

A. No. I never received such a report. And generally speaking, these reports that came from Kosovo, you showed one of them here, and I suppose you can get hold of other reports from Kosovo and you can easily establish whether there had been such reports or not.

Q. Before we part from this one last question, again simply on the ⁸⁸⁰⁵ basis at the moment only a possibility that these offences occurred and that you didn't learn about them. You're not suggesting, are you, that anybody else was in a position to command these people or control them other than yourself, ultimately?

A. The people who were working in Kosovo, who were carrying out the job in Kosovo, meaning members of all the units of the Ministry of the Interior, were commanded by the staff in Kosovo. The command, therefore, went through public security sector, not the state security sector. State security had other responsibilities. Command to the units and command and control of the operation was effected exclusively through the public security sector.

Q. Are you saying that this would explain why you might not have received reports of such crimes if they happened?

A. I simply never received such reports. If such report had reached the public security sector, I suppose it would have reached me too.

Q. Last topic: Refugees. Were you aware from everything in the media and international press which you may have had access to that there was this very large number of refugees leaving Kosovo?

A. Yes, I was aware of that.

Q. And when did you first learn of that?

A. This whole topic of people leaving Kosovo was a topic that was constantly discussed at meetings in the office of the Minister of the Interior. We made constant efforts to reduce the flow of people out of Kosovo and to stop this trend. Regrettably, it was constantly on the rise, and until the moment when I finally reacted -- and I can't remember ⁸⁸⁰⁶ the exact date, but you understood from my conversation with Mr. Milosevic that it happened the way I described. I intervened through the staff and through Mr. Sainovic to stop the flow of refugees, and something was done at that moment. I'm not saying that it was I who succeeded in doing that. My intervention simply came at a moment, at the right moment, when it was possible to do something to get some people to return.

Q. We've heard from people who went to the border crossings and spoke to the refugees. Did you do that ever?

A. No, I never did that.

Q. Can you help us with why not?

A. Because it was not my job to do anything like that. Simply speaking, in Kosovo, the staff was in charge of such things, and the head of the state security, had he been involved in that staff, would have done it, but I personally was not instructed and never went there to do such a thing.

Q. -- questions you've been asked and answered by the accused -- perhaps you'd just look at one document to help us, please.

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Nice, you'll leave enough time for Judge Kwon to ask some questions.

MR. NICE: I'm so sorry. Yes, of course I will. I'll shorten matters. I just wasn't aware there were matters outstanding.

Q. A quick viewing of the original on the overhead projector, which we can see is in Cyrillic, dated the 27th of March, 1999, from the Republic of Serbia MUP, border police administration for aliens and administrative affairs, police station Vrbnica, date I've given, and then ⁸⁸⁰⁷ in English, please, the English version reads:

Compiled on the 27th of March, 1999, in the offices of Vrbnica SPP, station commander, in connection with the crossing of persons from Yugoslavia into Albania, 1230 hours on 27th of March, a group of Albanians turned up at the crossing - I'm going to summarise it - wanting to cross without travel documents, ID cards, or any other documents. They stated that their ID cards had been taken away from them and kept at the prison in the SUP. 1240, the prison of SUP and the Republic of Serbia were informed about the above and approval was given to allow them to cross into Albania. Total of 94 people, women and children, crossed. We took the personal details, note compiled.

Then over the page in the English we see that this was reported up to the MUP of the Republic of Serbia. And then to the border police department, state security department in Prizren as well. So it came to your department, in general, and it shows that people were having their documents taken away from them. Can you help us with that?

A. No. This document never reached me. Among other things, it says here -- I can't see clearly, but it says "Copied to the MUP of the Republic of Serbia, staff of the centre of the state security sector in Prizren." Not all reports were forwarded. It must have been incorporated in the daily reports, the general daily reports, not sent on individually. I heard of cases involving taking of personal documents from refugees, but I don't remember exactly when and what numbers of people were involved. Such conduct was never according to orders.

Q. Just help us with this, and this is my last question so that His ⁸⁸⁰⁸ Honour Judge Kwon will not be inconvenienced: Did the law ever allow the -- the law -- we can turn to it, if necessary, but you can help us. Did the law ever allow the seizing of identification documents from individuals?

A. No.

MR. NICE: Your Honour, that's all I ask.

JUDGE KWON: Exhibit number.

THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit Prosecution Exhibit 484.

MR. NICE: I'll make an application perhaps at the end of this hearing in relation to the statement takers of the statement Questioned by the Court:

JUDGE KWON: Mr. Markovic, what was your position at the time of January 1999? You were the head of RDB.

A. I was appointed head of the RDB sometime in November 1999, which means that in January 1999 I was Assistant Minister of the Interior in charge of crime investigation and prevention.

JUDGE KWON: Were you in the position -- you could receive some information about Racak incident at that time?

A. Not directly, because such information was only forwarded to the Ministry of the Interior and heads of sectors at the time. I could only have heard such information at a senior staff meeting at the minister's office.

JUDGE KWON: At any rate, you had some indirect information. We have evidence which tells us that some 40 civilians were killed at that time, and also we have allegation that it is all fabrication. What is ⁸⁸⁰⁹ your observation?

A. What was said at the Ministry of the Interior was that it had been an operation where the forces of the army of Yugoslavia and the MUP had clashed with the terrorists. That was the information that featured at the Ministry of the Interior. Nobody ever mentioned any civilians or anything of that kind.

JUDGE KWON: Thank you. And what was suggested by your evidence in cross-examination and re-examination? It seems to me that it is that in Kosovo, before the war and during the war, while there might have been some individual crimes committed by some members of the VJ or the MUP against Kosovar Albanians but there was no widespread deportation or wanton killing of civilians. Is it correct?

A. Yes. Not individual crimes. I said clearly that over 200 members of the Ministry of the Interior are being prosecuted for their conduct in Kosovo, and the number of members of the VJ prosecuted for the same thing is even higher. They are prosecuted for illegal conduct and the crimes committed and those perpetrators who have been identified are being brought to justice in accordance with due process. As for organised crimes or anything like that, I am not aware of any.

JUDGE KWON: In the meantime, however, there has been an allegation by some observers, including internationals, that the reaction of the Serb forces against the KLA was disproportionate. For example, there were wanton shellings against civilian houses, not deliberately targeted by military tanks or driving out civilians out of their homes, against their will in wintertime. Were you aware of such an allegation, ⁸⁸¹⁰ and what is your -- what was your observation?

A. I heard -- or rather, read in reports from Kosovo about cases when houses were set on fire and when members of the international forces were complaining of the use of disproportionate force. But I must tell you that it was construed in the following way: Many houses belonging to Albanian citizens were forcibly evacuated precisely by them, by the KLA, so that can service fortifications along roads and in those places where they needed strategic strongholds. I suppose that such houses were targeted, but I have no information that houses were targeted or torched randomly.

JUDGE KWON: So your assertion is that the -- there's some international diplomat or generals or international community as a whole who gave warnings to your country to stop the -- some atrocities were based on some false information. Is it what you are claiming now?

A. I'm only speaking about what I know. Disproportionate use of force was discussed, but I don't know anything firsthand. I don't know any other details. I was never involved in any discussion with any member or representative of any foreign service in Kosovo.

JUDGE KWON: Thank you. I've passed the time already.

MR. NICE: Your Honour, just one correction. I think that the date of 1999 is the start date for the witness's position is incorrect, because at the end of paragraph 1 it's 1998. Nothing else to say, Your Honour, except in light of what we've heard, it may be helpful to the Chamber to have witnesses who can deal with the taking of the statement and I'll make an application in writing, if so advised, between now and ⁸⁸¹¹ September.

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Markovic, that concludes your evidence. Thank you for coming to the International Tribunal to give it. The Chamber will now adjourn until the date later in August.

--- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.49 p.m., to be reconvened on Monday, the 26th day of

August 2002, at 9.00 a.m.