³³⁹⁸¹

Wednesday, 1 December 2004

[Open session]

[The accused entered court]

--- Upon commencing at 9.06 a.m.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Nice.

MR. NICE: Very short administrative matter, Your Honour. There is forthcoming two witnesses of an expert character, Terzic and Popov by surname, and I think that there may be outstanding applications and orders to be made in respect of them. I'm not sure about the position.

JUDGE ROBINSON: We have made an order which I think you should get. I signed it yesterday.

MR. NICE: Thank you very much.

JUDGE ROBINSON: For Terzic. And what's the other one?

MR. NICE: Popov.

JUDGE ROBINSON: An order will be made in respect of the other witness by Friday.

MR. NICE: That will enable us to deal with them in a timely way. More generally, there was a -- I think an order, I haven't dug it up yet - again, my mistake - that we should be having 50 witnesses pretty well notified at a time. We've got the accused's list of witnesses until the Christmas break, and there may be some spill-over, I dare say, of the last couple of witnesses into the New Year, but our invitations to be provided with a list of witnesses who are going to come after the Christmas break has so far not been answered.

Now, if we are to prepare these witnesses we really do need ³³⁹⁸² advance notice. We simply can't prepare witnesses without advance notice. And of course as the Chamber will have, I dare say, forecast when looking at the 65 ter summaries initially and will have discovered on seeing the evidence given by witnesses foreshadowed only by a four- or five-line 65 ter summary, preparation is very difficult without the sort of detail that would be provided by a Prosecution to a Defence.

JUDGE ROBINSON: How many witnesses are on the accused's list to December?

MR. NICE: Only about another six, I think. Terzic, Popov --

JUDGE ROBINSON: In any event, the accused will have to present another list before the end of this session.

MR. NICE: Yes.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Another list of witnesses that will take us through January and February and March.

MR. NICE: Thank you very much.

JUDGE ROBINSON: And we'll make an order to that effect shortly. Mr. Milosevic, call your next witness.

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Before I call the next witness, I just have a motion, a submission; namely, yesterday Mr. Primakov mentioned his book titled Eight Months Plus, and part of the examination, especially cross-examination, had to do with his conversation with Chirac pertaining his visit to Belgrade and there also his conversations with Gore, with Kofi Annan in that book. I'm not going to go into the details of those conversations, however, this is a very useful material. Therefore, I was ³³⁹⁸³ going to ask you to admit that book into evidence as well, this book of Mr. Primakov that he mentioned yesterday.

If you wish, if you accept this, I will prepare it and submit it to the Chamber.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Submit it to us, and we'll consider it.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. I call witness Vukasin Jokanovic.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, I'm reminded that of course it's only the parts of the book that are relevant that were adverted to that we would consider admitting, so that you should identify those parts.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well.

MR. NICE: And of course the obvious point is that I wasn't alerted to it and may have had several questions to ask arising out of it, but perhaps I could see the book when it is admitted.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Very well, yes.

[The witness entered court]

JUDGE ROBINSON: Let the witness make the declaration.

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

JUDGE ROBINSON: Please be seated.

WITNESS: VUKASIN JOKANOVIC

[Witness answered through interpreter]

JUDGE ROBINSON: You may begin, Mr. Milosevic. Examined by Mr. Milosevic:

Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Jokanovic. ³³⁹⁸⁴

A. Good morning.

Q. Please tell us your full name and last name.

A. Vukasin Jokanovic.

Q. You were born and you lived for a long time in Kosovo and Metohija. You were schooled there up until the university level. Please tell us briefly something about your biography.

A. Yes. I spent most of my life in Kosovo. I lived and worked there for a long time. I completed my elementary and secondary school in Kosovo, and law school in Macedonia in Skopje. After completing the law school I worked in Gnjilane for about 14 hours. Out of that time I spent eight years as president of the municipality of Gnjilane. I had two terms of four years, then I was a member of the Council of Kosovo and a commission on the -- legislative commission of the province in Kosovo.

Q. Mr. Jokanovic, please slow down a little bit. And let us just clarify: The municipality of Gnjilane is in Kosovo and Metohija?

A. Yes, that's right.

Q. Please continue.

A. After my term, four-year term, as a member of the Presidency of Kosovo, I was also a member of -- of another organ within the province of Kosovo, and then I became a deputy in the Assembly of Kosovo. I served two terms there, two one-year terms because, in accordance with our then system, the terms lasted one year and anybody could be elected for two terms.

In late 1989, I went to work in Belgrade. I was vice-president of the Assembly of Serbia and also a delegate in the Assembly of Serbia. ³³⁹⁸⁵ Then I was a federal delegate and president of the Commission for Justice and Administration. I was a minister in the government, and my last post was the federal prosecutor of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. I retired two years ago.

Q. Thank you, Mr. Jokanovic. At the time when the Assembly of Kosovo debated and decided on the amendments of the constitution of Serbia in 1989, you were president of the Assembly of Kosovo and Metohija?

A. Yes, that's right. I was president of the Assembly during that time.

Q. This is a very important issue, and I want us to go into that. I wanted to start off with that question, but since we need to watch a tape, I was told by the registry that it would be better to put it off for a bit later. So we will now turn to other issues and then come back to this issue later.

Mr. Jokanovic, Kosovo and Metohija is an ethnically mixed territory, or at least it used to be. What was the ethnic composition in the organs in which you worked and generally in various other organs and organisations?

A. Ethnic composition in organs and organisations depended on the ethnic composition of the population. That was one of the key positions in the policy that was conducted in Kosovo at the time, so that in all posts starting at the municipal level up until the level of the province, and also at the republic level and federal level, depended on the ethnic composition of the population. This is how it was in the organs, social organs and socio-political organs and in the economy. ^{33986 BLANK PAGE 33987}

Q. When you were president of the Assembly in 1989, do you remember who were main political figures in Kosovo and Metohija as well as do you remember who were main political figures from Kosovo and Metohija in Serbia and at the federation level?

A. Certainly I remember. I was president of the Assembly. My vice-president was an Albanian. The general secretary was an Albanian. The Assembly had three Chambers. Each Chamber had its president, out of which two were Albanians and one Montenegrin. President of the Kosovo Presidency, which was the highest collective organ, was also led by an Albanian. President of the Province Committee was also an Albanian. President of the Socialist Alliance, which was the largest social organisation, was also an Albanian. President of the union was a Serb, and president of the youth organisation was also an Albanian. And at the level of the federation, the most responsible posts were generally held by Albanians.

Q. Thank you, Mr. Jokanovic. Please tell me, when was the first time that you were faced with the phenomenon of Albanian separatism in Kosovo? Or let me rephrase it: With the phenomenon of the organised Albanian separatism in Kosovo.

A. The first time I was faced with the organised expression of Albanian separatism and nationalism was in 1968. That year, in several cities in Kosovo, demonstrations were organised. They were also organised in Gnjilane, which is where I worked and lived. These demonstrations were held on the 27th of November, on the eve of the state holiday of Albania, which is on the 28th of November. That was my first encounter with the ³³⁹⁸⁸ organised activities, with demonstrations held in the streets, with people carrying well-known slogans.

Q. Please tell us in more detail what those demonstrations were like. What was their objective, and what was their scope?

A. The main objective of the demonstrations could be seen from the slogans which were shouted. The slogans were "Kosovo Republic," and "Unification." These slogans dominated, and there were other slogans as well.

The demonstrations I witnessed myself in Gnjilane mostly included younger people in the streets. And later on, through our political work, we learned who the organisers were, whom we criticised. These people were in the vicinity of the demonstrators. And there were also a lot of people standing there just out of curiosity and watching it. The demonstrations in Gnjilane started in front of the secondary school centre, then they passed through the entire city and went to the bus station.

Q. Mr. Jokanovic, I have to interrupt you to save time. You don't have to give us very detailed description. Please tell us, what were the main slogans?

A. The main slogans were "Kosovo Republic" and "Unification."

Q. Is it true, this information that I have, that the demonstrations were very severe in Gnjilane, Urosevac, and so on? So in Kosovo, but the demonstrations were also held in Western Macedonia, especially in Tetovo.

A. Yes. The most -- the most important demonstrations were held there in Gnjilane and so on, and also in Western Macedonia, in Tetovo, ³³⁹⁸⁹ where the police organs of the Republic of Macedonia acted very severely.

Q. Please tell us, in 1968, when these demonstrations were held, how did official organs qualify the demonstrations?

A. In the municipality where I worked and at the province level, the official organs qualified these demonstrations as being against the constitutional system, against the equality of nations and nationalities, against brotherhood and unity, as we used to say then, and it was also qualified that those demonstrations were aimed at destroying our constitutional systems, the system of self-management, and all other values of our then system, including the policies of Comrade Tito as we used to call him.

Q. These events in 1968, were they covered in the media?

A. Very briefly. There was an attempt to cover that up. Those were the times and the circumstances. It was believed that something like that could not happen in the socialist Yugoslavia when Tito was at the zenith of his power and authority. So there was an attempt to cover this up and it was basically not covered in the press. However, throughout the municipality where I worked and I was politically active, there were various meetings organised. So together with Albanians, I went out in the field to explain the essence of those demonstrations and to criticise them verbally.

Q. Very well. So the media tried to cover up those events. Do you know, was the army used on that occasion?

A. The army was not used in Gnjilane. However, it was used in Pristina and Urosevac, as far as I know. And I know that because in the ³³⁹⁹⁰ following days I travelled to Pristina and I came back through Urosevac.

Q. We don't need to go into detail. So your answer is yes, the army was used.

A. Yes, to a lesser extent than in other demonstrations that followed.

JUDGE KWON: Mr. Jokanovic, if you could tell us what you were, by profession, in 1968.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In 1968, I was assistant to the director of the medical centre in Gnjilane, in charge of legal and economic issues at the medical centre which comprised hospital, health centre, pharmacy, and other medical services institutions. I was also politically active. I was also a member of the League of Communists.

JUDGE KWON: Thank you.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Please tell me, you mentioned the position of President Tito. How did the Albanians view President Tito?

A. Comrade Tito, as we called him, visited Kosovo on a number of occasions. He was always greeted by large numbers of people. Schools would shut down, the companies as well, so the students and everybody would go out into the streets, and there was this wish to express love the people had for Tito by showing that a large number of people were in the streets to greet him.

However, in addition to that, there were some individuals who insulted Tito by writing various slogans, and who expressed a negative attitude towards him, which was a result of the Albanian influence, where ³³⁹⁹¹ at the time Hoxha was praised and Tito was considered a revisionist with respect to the communist system in power in Albania. And the demonstrations that were organised then and later were mostly of the Marxist-Leninist character.

JUDGE ROBINSON: I want to ask Mr. Jokanovic a question. How did the army deal with the demonstrations in 1968, and in particular, were there any injuries? Was there any loss of life?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The army of Yugoslavia was not used to break up the demonstrations, nor was it used for -- nor was the power and force used. The army was there just to demonstrate its force and to have a psychological effect insofar as the vehicles passed through and the army was used to secure various facilities.

At the time, the demonstrators were not ready to clash with the army. They did not want to provoke the army, and there was quite a different situation with the police. I don't know if I answered your question sufficiently.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, you did. So the demonstrations did not last very long?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Not in 1968, they didn't last long. But when the military forces appeared, especially in places where the demonstrations were larger and more aggressive, these demonstrations were suppressed. Tito was still alive, and his speeches are well known, when he addressed the public and said, "Let not the enemies of our system think that we have thrown a spear into the thorns," and he said that Enver Hoxha should stop wielding a rusty sword from the outside throughout Kosovo. ^{33992 BLANK PAGE 33993}

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May I continue, Mr. Robinson?

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. What was the -- what were the developments in the province concerning the promotion or the spread of autonomy after World War II?

A. According to the 1946 constitution, the province, which was called at the time the Autonomous Region of Kosovo and Metohija, while Vojvodina was a province. The 1963 constitution, however, then renamed the region into a province. So it became an autonomous province. Then in the amendments of 1968 and 1971, the position of the province was expanded in terms of expanding its authorities and functions so that later this was then rounded off in the constitution of 1974.

The 1974 constitution gave the province practically all of the functions which the republics had. Not all of them but practically all of them in the Yugoslavia at the time.

Q. Thank you, Mr. Jokanovic. Did the demonstrations in 1968 produce some kind of effect on the position of the province?

A. Yes, they did have an effect in that sense, because in order to stabilise the situation in Kosovo on a more permanent basis, which could be heard in a lot of meetings, the demonstrators' demands were met, or some of those demands were met, so that those amendments of 1968, 1969, and 1971 practically met, not all but quite a lot of, those demands, giving a broader autonomy and making the province more and more equal to a republic.

And in 1969, a decision of the Socialist Alliance of Yugoslavia ³³⁹⁹⁴ permitted the use of the national flag to the Albanians, and that national flag was identical to the state flag of the Peoples Republic of Albania. Before that, it was not allowed to put the flag up. And those who did that usually did that on the 28th for their national holiday, and those people were fined. The use of the flag after that became quite widespread, and it served to satisfy feelings of national belongingness. There was a lot of abuse in the use of this national flag which was often used in order to provoke other people in the province, primarily Serbs, Montenegrins, and others.

Q. Do I remember rightly, Mr. Jokanovic, this was not the traditional national flag of the Albanians but the flag of the neighbouring state of Albania? But you know this better than I do.

As far as I remember, the difference between the two was the traditional flag has the two-headed eagle, black on a red background, and the neighbouring country's flag on top of that was identical but also had a five-pointed star on top. So they didn't adopt their traditional national flag but the neighbouring country's flag.

A. Yes. This was the state flag of the Republic of Albania, with the two-headed eagle and the five-pointed star. If there are any problems about that, I could provide more details about the way the flag looked. There were attempts to change something in that flag to place the Yugoslav tricolour banner in the corner, indicating that these Albanians were in Yugoslavia, but this was something that was not accepted.

Q. Unfortunately, we don't have time to spend so much on the flag, but you know so much about the former Yugoslavia and the situation in ³³⁹⁹⁵ Kosovo, and it would take us a long time to go through all of that. What were the powers of Serbia in the province?

A. The constitution of 1974 practically denied Serbia all rights in Kosovo. The province became practically equal to the republic, both the province of Kosovo and the province of Vojvodina. There were only two differences: One was that the constitution in Serbia had Article 300, making for some singular or united solutions for the whole of the republic; and the second was that the Council of States and Republics had 12 delegates while the number of deputies from the provinces were eight. This was a symbolic difference in the numbers, but the rights that these delegations had were absolutely the same, both in the federal Chamber, there were 30 and 20 deputies.

Q. Thank you, Mr. Jokanovic. At that time, and now we're talking about the period after 1968, 1974, when all of these rights were changed, were there any pressures towards Serbs, Montenegrins, Turks, Romas, Goranians, and what was the attitude towards the Albanian population?

A. After these demonstrations, Serbs, Montenegrins, and other non-Albanians had a feeling of uncertainty, quite rightly. This appeared because there were pressures towards the moving out of Serbs and Montenegrins. These were direct and indirect pressures. So these demonstrations from 1968 disrupted the interethnic relations and caused people to move out. This was a negative consequence. And also there were different forms of pressures going in this direction.

Q. In view of the pressures and the violence which occurred against Serbs, Montenegrins, Muslims, Turks, Romas, did Serbia have an obligation ³³⁹⁹⁶ to protect the rights and freedoms of all of its citizens throughout its territory? Was that one of its constitutional duties, including the province? And also, that constitutional order, did it also have the means to fulfil this duty?

A. According to its own constitution, Serbia was obliged to protect the rights of the working people and the citizens throughout the territory of the republic. There was such a provision in the Serbian constitution. However, the Republic of Serbia did not have the instruments nor the authority to protect these rights.

Q. Since --

JUDGE BONOMY: I wonder if I could interrupt briefly. That question started, "In view of the pressures and the violence which occurred against Serbs ..." Now, I don't recollect you speaking about violence against Serbs. Have you mentioned that so far?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Do you mean here while I'm testifying? Are you thinking about violence against Serbs and Croats and the pressure to have them move out?

This started from the early 1960s and became more intense after 1968, and then increased even more after 1971. First of all, this pressure was directed against Serbs and Montenegrins but also towards others, towards Turks. Turks from Kosovo also moved out. I can give you specific example. A village near Gnjilane, near Kosovo, called Dobrcane, which was exclusively populated by Turks had its own elementary school, eight-year elementary school, where classes were in Turkish. Later, there were no Turks there at all because they had all moved to Turkey. ³³⁹⁹⁷

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. When did they move out?

A. This was a gradual process. There was no collective movement of the population, but it was family by family; one family left, followed by another family. And this happened in a period from 1968 up until sometime in the 1980s, and I think until up to about some ten years ago, perhaps there were two or three Turkish families left in that village, which in the meantime had integrated through marriage and in other ways, attended school in Albanian, and were integrated into a different kind of life in comparison to the earlier period when the village was exclusively inhabited by Turkish nationals.

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for Mr. Milosevic, please.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] There is no need to keep turning the microphone off.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Jokanovic, could you please tell me what the situation was in the judiciary.

A. The judiciary in Yugoslavia was organised in Yugoslavia in the republics and in the provinces in exactly the same way. The judiciary functions were at the level of the province. The province had municipal courts, district courts, and supreme courts. There was the Supreme Court of Kosovo. That was the highest instance in order to achieve citizens' rights and to resolve different disputes and questions from civil law and other kinds of law, so that those citizens who felt their rights were violated, according to the law and the constitution, could not resort to ^{33998 BLANK PAGE 33999} the courts of Serbia, they had to remain in the provincial court.

Q. Thank you, Mr. Jokanovic. I have to cut you off; we do not have too much time. Could you please tell us what the situation was with the executive and administrative powers or authorities.

A. The constitution --

Q. Well, we all understand the position regarding the constitution, but what was the actual situation?

A. The executive authority was completely under the provincial organs. The provincial bodies were the only ones in charge of implementing the laws, the provincial laws and republican laws, if a law applied throughout the whole territory, as well as federal laws.

Q. Thank you. In light of what you have said, that the provincial authorities were exclusively authorised, how do you look at the assertion in the following paragraph of the so-called indictment? Paragraph 80 states: "Due to political turmoil, on 3rd of March, 1989 the SFRY Presidency declared that the situation in the province had deteriorated and had become a threat to the constitution, integrity and sovereignty of the country. The government then imposed special measures which assigned responsibility for public security to the federal government instead of the government of Serbia".

Please pay attention to what I have just quoted. This is an excerpt from this document. So "... assigned responsibility for public security to the federal government instead of the government of Serbia." End of quote.

Could you please give us your comments on what I have just read to ³⁴⁰⁰⁰ you.

A. The first part seems to be all right. These special measures were introduced and the political and security situation did deteriorate, but this last part is completely incorrect because the federal government could not assign as they said that there.

Q. No. The full sentence states as follows: "The government then imposed special measures which assigned responsibility for public security to the federal government instead of the government of Serbia." So the federal government transferred the responsibility for public security from the government of Serbia to the federal government.

A. Well, it could not have done that, because Serbia did not have authority in that area. It could only have transferred this responsibility from the provincial organs.

Q. So Serbia did not have the authority nor implemented the authority which the federal government could have transferred from Serbia to the federal government.

A. Yes, that is correct. It did not have those powers. If the Honourable Court allows me, I could say a little bit more about that.

Q. If you believe that it is important, please go ahead, but please try to be brief.

A. I would just like to mention one fact. When there were demonstrations in 1981, the Serbian police offered to help the police of Kosovo, but the provincial organs did not permit Serbian police to help its colleagues. So that the police of Serbia, for days, was near the administrative border of Kosovo, in a place called Rudare, and was waiting ³⁴⁰⁰¹ for the outcome of the situation. Only later was it allowed to a part of these forces to come in, but not as part -- as Serbian forces but as part of the joint Yugoslav forces comprising Slovenians, Croats, people from -- members of the police force from Vojvodina, Macedonia, and so on.

Q. So what you said about the government imposing special measures, assigning the responsibility from the government of Serbia to the federal government regarding security measures is incorrect.

A. Yes, it is incorrect because it is something that did not exist and could not have been transferred or assigned to somebody else.

Q. Yes. That is quite clear.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, I'd like to be clear about this. Who had the authority, the constitutional authority, for public security?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The constitutional authority for security in Kosovo and Metohija lay with the organs of Kosovo and Metohija in accordance with the Kosovo constitution, with its laws, and in accordance with the constitution of Yugoslavia. Because the implementation of all the laws and the preservation of peace and order was under the jurisdiction of the province bodies, the provincial secretariat for internal affairs and the provincial security service, which was separate from the Serbian service of the same kind. It was independent, and it had an equal standing as the Serbian Security Service and the internal affairs services.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Just a minute. So what you say is that it would not have been legally possible for the federal government to transfer the ³⁴⁰⁰² powers to Serbia.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] No, no, Mr. Robinson. I quoted -- very well. Yes. It will be clear. I would like to make it clear. I quoted here their paper here which they called the indictment, which also has some more serious untruths than this one, but it says: "The government then imposed its special measures which assigned responsibility for public security to the federal government instead of the government of Serbia." But this is not true, because the government of Serbia did not carry out any functions in the first place for the federal government to be able to take over these services upon itself.

JUDGE ROBINSON: I understand that.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Is this clear? So it was not in a position to assign functions to somebody else which Serbia did not have in the first place. It did not have them and it did not implement them.

JUDGE ROBINSON: That was the constitutional de jure position, but did it in fact happen?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, de facto it had no powers either.

JUDGE ROBINSON: [Previous translation continues] ...

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This de jure situation was also the de facto situation with one single difference; namely, after the 1981 demonstrations, the federal authorities established joint police forces, taking forces from all the republics and the province of Vojvodina in order to assist the Kosovo organs. Within those joint forces, there were also forces from Serbia under the command of the chief of that staff who ³⁴⁰⁰³ was appointed by the competent ministry. So it was not within the competency of Serbia.

I don't know if this is clear enough. I can try again.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Jokanovic, did you, as provincial secretary for legislation and general administration, because that's the post you occupied at the time, take part in the work on the harmonisation of those laws under Article 300 of the Serbian constitution? In other words, to cut a long story short, it was the only article of the constitution which enabled the Republic of Serbia to exercise certain functions on the entirety of its territory on the condition of agreement with the province. So even that provision was not quite enabling for Serbia, but under Article 300, we were at least in a position to reach agreement with the province.

A. From 1978 to 1982, I was the provincial secretary for legislation and administration. Pursuant to Article 300, some issues were included that were regulated in a uniform way for the entire territory of Serbia. However, this Article 300 was rather vague and generally phrased so that these issues that were uniformly regulated applied only to the basic principles and uniform fundaments, and it was very difficult to determine exactly how far these basic principles went. And as a result, the negotiations with the representatives of Vojvodina and Kosovo were difficult, lengthy, and often unsuccessful. Agreement was very difficult to reach.

JUDGE KWON: Mr. Jokanovic, before going further, if you could remind me of the content of the Article 300 of the Serbian constitution. ^{34004 BLANK PAGE 34005}

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't have the Article 300 of the constitution of Serbia with me, but it enumerates issues that may be uniformly regulated within the Republic of Serbia. However, this Article 300 was unclear, vague, and phrased in very general terms. So any attempt to interpret it resulted in diametrically opposed positions. In controversy, in other words.

And may I add to this?

JUDGE KWON: Yes. If you could clarify the meaning of "uniformly regulated within Republic of Serbia." If you would elaborate on that more.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I can ask a question of this witness, or a set of questions. I think this will be a more efficient way of dealing with it.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. This Article 300, was it the only article in the constitution of Serbia which allowed something to be uniformly regulated within the whole republic?

A. Yes. There was also Article 305, but it only provided for the possibility of similar or equal regulation in the republic and the province.

Q. All right. Under that Article 300, the parliament of Serbia could regulate certain things in general terms on the whole territory. However, that had to be agreed with the representatives of the province before it is passed?

A. Correct. ³⁴⁰⁰⁶

Q. Let me pick up on the question by Judge Kwon. For instance, the citizenship of the Republic of Serbia, because there was no citizenship of the province; right?

A. Right.

Q. So the citizenship of the Republic of Serbia, they insisted that they should decide in Kosovo and Metohija about the citizenship of the Republic of Serbia.

A. I was involved for a long time in discussions and debates about this law.

Q. Please say whether it is correct or not and then tell us the rest.

A. It is correct that the provincial authorities demanded that they should decide on the citizenship of the Republic of Serbia proceeding from what I said before, namely, that it is the provincial authorities who were in charge of the enforcement of all laws, including this one.

Q. So tell me, what was the point? This is a very general point: What was the point in the insistence of provincial authorities that the province should decide about the citizenship of the Republic of Serbia relating to the citizens on its territory?

A. There were two main reasons. They wanted to demonstrate that the province was practically a republic. They wanted to put a mark of equality between the province and the republic. That was one reason. The second reason was that if the province had been enabled to do that, then they would have been able to resolve certain issues, including this one. They would have been enabled -- they would have been able to give citizenship to some immigrants who had come to Kosovo during the ³⁴⁰⁰⁷ anti-fascist war, to Kosovo from Albania and remained there, and a variety of other immigrants.

Q. So this second objective was very pragmatic: They wanted to have competency over their citizenship of Serbia in order to give citizenship to various immigrants from Albania.

A. Yes, that's precisely where our differences lay.

Q. Was that correct?

A. Yes, that's correct. That was one of the reasons. The first reason, as I said, was they wanted to demonstrate their powers as a state, and the second was that they wanted to decide as a province in the province who would have citizenship and who wouldn't.

Q. Tell me, when did Albanians start to immigrate into Kosovo? Just let me say that I have no historical background to this question. When did this immigration of Albanians into Kosovo begin? Let us skip this great number of Albanians who were moved to Kosovo by Mussolini and who remained there after the Second World War.

A. After the comintern resolution of 1948 and the famous "No" that Tito said to Stalin when he was proclaimed a revisionist, a considerable number of Albanians moved to Kosovo, fleeing this Stalinist system. They came one by one but also with their entire families, with whole herds of sheep and a lot of equipment, and they were very cordially welcomed because it was in the political interest --

Q. Let me interrupt you. They came en masse in this period. Please answer me with a yes or no, and then if there is an explanation to follow, give it later. ³⁴⁰⁰⁸ Did they come en masse?

A. Not at the beginning, but later, yes.

Q. Thank you. In view of the hard-line regime of Enver Hoxha and the police control over the citizenry in Albania, was it possible to easily cross without any problem the Albanian border with whole families, furniture, herds of cattle, et cetera? Was that possible or not?

A. As far as I know, it was not possible.

Q. Does it mean that they were moved to Kosovo and Metohija in a planned way also by the Enver Hoxha regime?

A. That was tolerated. I don't know if there was a plan behind it, but it was tolerated, because they did come and they were welcomed. I don't know if the border was controlled, then there could have also been a plan behind it, but they did come en masse.

Q. You said they were welcomed, well-received in Kosovo.

A. Yes, they were. They also received some allowances and financial support, and the objective was to integrate them as fast as possible into the Kosovo society, to give them employment, and there were even instructions.

Q. Let us clarify one thing. Is it true that the then-government of Kosovo, such as the Ministry of Internal Affairs, for instance, or correct me, whichever other ministry, repurchased estates of Serbs and Montenegrins who moved out of Kosovo and gave them free of charge to Albanians who had moved into Kosovo?

A. Yes, that's correct, and if you allow me one more --

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Nice. ³⁴⁰⁰⁹

MR. NICE: Either leading or tendentious. It may not matter because it may be that had we seen a statement of the witness in advance some of these matters would be non-contentious, but there is a balance to be drawn between leading questions that are acceptable and those that really may go to the heart of the issue. So the last one, for example, where there was a suggestion that these things were repurchased and given free of charge to Albanians, it's not something I know about and therefore it shouldn't really be asked in that form.

JUDGE ROBINSON: We have discussed this before, Mr. Milosevic. You're not to ask leading questions.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson, there are many things in this wide world that your wisdom does not even imagine, Dear Horatio. I was trying to quote Shakespeare. I don't even expect you to know anything about this. That's one thing.

And second, it is not my obligation to take prior statements of a witness and disclose them to Mr. Nice. He should not be wasting my time --

JUDGE ROBINSON: I stopped you because you're making a speech. The rules here prohibit leading questions. And, Mr. Milosevic, there is a matter that I should bring to your attention: You're examining this witness, and the purpose of the examination is to assist the Chamber. It's not a private dialogue between yourself and the witness. The constitutional issues are important issues, the question of the distribution of powers between the federal government and the provinces. You ought to have had the constitution here to show us and ^{34010 BLANK PAGE 34011} have it translated. So, for example, I'm interested in seeing what powers are set out in Article 300.

The purpose of your examination is to persuade us, and you ought to have had that here. I think -- is it probably -- is it an exhibit?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson --

MR. NICE: Unfortunately -- an exhibit and I think the exhibit number is --

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Nice is speaking.

MR. NICE: Is 526, tab 1. I think that's the exhibit. But the articles that are under consideration are not included in the part of the document that's been prepared as an exhibit thus far, or certainly are not in English. They may be, conceivably, in B/C/S.

JUDGE ROBINSON: So --

JUDGE KWON: And if you could check Exhibit 132. It says Constitution of Serbia, but it's a later version maybe.

JUDGE ROBINSON: The point is, Mr. Milosevic, in presenting your evidence and in examining the witness, you must have documents available for us so that when he speaks of Article 300, we can be looking at it and looking at it in the English. That is the way you will strengthen your case. The presentation of your case would be advanced tremendously if you do it in the right way.

My colleague and myself were just saying to ourselves privately that we are somewhat at a loss in understanding the constitutional points that have been raised because we don't have the documents in front of us. ³⁴⁰¹²

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson, you will allow that I believe that the issue of the language of the constitution cannot be in dispute. It is the wording of the constitution that was passed and in force at the time, and if you need it, I will tender it as an exhibit through one of the following witnesses. We have Professor Ratko Markovic coming, and I'll introduce that text through him. No problem.

JUDGE ROBINSON: You ought to have -- you ought to have introduced it through this witness, because he's giving evidence that relates to the constitution. Don't wait for Professor Ratko Markovic.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May I continue?

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Very well. In order to avoid leading questions, Mr. Jokanovic, how were Albanian immigrants received at the time?

A. They were well received. When farmers from Albania moved in, who couldn't find jobs in enterprises, it was necessary to repurchase land so that they could engage in farming. Therefore, land was repurchased from Serbs and Montenegrins who were moving out of Kosovo, and this entire land, complete with equipment, was given to immigrants who came to Albania.

I'll give you an example. In my neighbouring village, Grmovo, the village called Drobes, the land was repurchased from the Nikoletic family and another family. They live nowadays in Kraljevo, whereas these two villages are inhabited by those immigrants who came from Albania, and the funding was provided through the provincial Secretariat for Internal Affairs. ³⁴⁰¹³

Q. Can I note then that you said that the police of Kosovo repurchased arable land from Serbs and Montenegrins and gave it free of charge to Albanian immigrants who came to Kosovo?

A. The contracts were made out between the republican -- sorry, the provincial Secretariat for Internal Affairs and these immigrant farmers. It was probably budgetary funding that was paid out through the provincial secretariat.

Q. Thank you, Mr. Jokanovic. I will quote another paragraph from this so-called indictment. Paragraph 75. It goes as follows: "During the 1980s, Serbs voiced concern about discrimination against them by the Kosovo Albanian led provincial government while Kosovo Albanians voiced concern about economic underdevelopment and dependence and called for a greater political liberalisation and republican status for Kosovo. From 1981 onwards, Kosovo Albanians staged demonstrations which were suppressed by the SFRY military and police forces of Serbia." All right. So I quoted this verbatim. Could you please answer and tell me what you know about this.

A. As for the discrimination mentioned in the first sentence, that's a mild term. There were various pressures, attacks, crimes against property, against person, beatings, rapes, and so on. As for the second claim, that Albanians sought greater political liberalisation, I don't think this is a proper term. What they wanted was secession from Serbia. They wanted Kosovo to become a republic. And as for the demonstrations from 1981 onwards being suppressed by the military and police from Serbia, that's not true. The army did ³⁴⁰¹⁴ demonstrate its force but never had any clashes with the demonstrators at the time because, as I said, the demonstrators tried not to provoke the army and not to even mention the police of Serbia, because as I've said before, the Serbian police had no competencies in Kosovo. Later on, when the joint forces from all other republics were established, yes, they were present in Kosovo up until 1990.

JUDGE BONOMY: I wonder if I could be clear about something then in regard to that answer. If all they wanted was to become a republic, and if as a province they had all the powers of a republic, what was the point of the demonstrations?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] To secede entirely from Serbia and become an independent state, which is their current goal nowadays as well, the main objective of political forces and political parties in Kosovo nowadays. They didn't want to be either within Serbia or within Yugoslavia. That was their goal.

JUDGE BONOMY: I misunderstood your answer, because I assumed by "republic" you were referring to a Yugoslav republic. Thank you.

JUDGE KWON: And if you could explain more about the joint forces you mentioned from all other republics. Could you elaborate on that.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I can. When in 1981 Serbian police was not allowed to assist their colleagues in Kosovo and Metohija police, they looked for a solution how to suppress demonstrations, because Kosovo police could not deal with it alone. Therefore, a compromise was found to engage members of police in all other republics and provinces, meaning Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Macedonia, and ³⁴⁰¹⁵ Vojvodina.

I can name specific cases where what police members were deployed. In Lipljan municipality there were policemen from Vojvodina. In my municipality we had policemen from Croatia. In other municipalities there were policemen from Bosnia and Herzegovina. So these joined forces helped the Kosovo police in order to stabilise the situation and not allow any further destruction of property and everything else that comes along with demonstrations.

Q. Which is to say, Mr. Jokanovic, based on this quotation where I read out their text to you about police forces of Serbia suppressing those demonstrations, that is not true; is that right?

A. Well, I don't want this to be taken as a leading question, therefore I said that the forces of Serbia were not allowed to go to Kosovo. They could only go to Kosovo if they were joined by forces, police forces, from all other republics. Therefore, it was not the Serbian police who suppressed the demonstrations, no. It was the Kosovo police and joint police forces from all other republics.

Q. Thank you, Mr. Jokanovic.

JUDGE KWON: When were the police forces established?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] These joint forces were established after 1981, because the demonstrations in 1981 could not be suppressed by Kosovo police alone. And therefore, if I remember correctly, on the 1st of March the competent organ within the province issued a decision to involve the army and to have tanks roll through the streets. And in 1981, the army did do that. The tanks came out into the streets, and the key ^{34016 BLANK PAGE 34017} organs in Kosovo were involved because Kosovo police was unable to deal with it.

In the evening on that day, planes flew over Pristina, and the freedom of movement was limited. I was a member of the Kosovo Council at the time, and I can show you the ID that I had issued to me during that period of time allowing me freedom of movement. Would you like me to show you that?

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Yes, please go ahead. That was the ID that you were issued with at that time.

A. I don't know where I should put it.

Q. You can put it on the ELMO. The usher will help you.

A. We can see what it says here, that this is an official ID.

JUDGE KWON: [Previous translation continues]... ELMO.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] "Leje zyrtare" means official pass. You have the text in Albanian then in Serbian after that. Then you can see my name, and then underneath it says that I'm involved in executing certain tasks assigned to me by the Executive Council of the Assembly of the province of Kosovo, as a result of which "he should be given access and freedom of movement."

There were some announcements that demonstrators wanted to take up key facilities in Kosovo so that even as a member of the Executive Council of Kosovo, I could not have entered any important building without this special pass.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Do you need to take -- to further ³⁴⁰¹⁸ examine in ID, to have it tendered into evidence, or is this sufficient?

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Please tell me, Mr. Jokanovic, what was the scope and what was the nature of the demonstrations of Albanians in 1981?

A. The demonstrations in 1981, in view of the numbers of people participating and the aggression expressed were much broader than the 1968 demonstrations but can still be qualified as a continuity of action, because the demands and slogans were the same: "Kosovo Republic" and "Unification," except that in 1981 there were many more people participating in the demonstrations and more aggression was expressed. So that in 1981, there were victims both among demonstrators and law enforcement personnel. I can even give you the numbers, if you're interested.

Nine demonstrators were killed in the demonstrations, two members of the organ of the internal affairs, and dozens of policemen were also injured, as were the demonstrators. Several vehicles were set on fire, shop windows were broken, so there was quite a lot of property damage. The demonstrations became most aggressive on the 2nd April of 1981 when the army was called to come in to protect the key facilities and institutions within the province.

Q. Where were the fiercest demonstrations held?

A. In Pristina on the 2nd of April, because in addition to demonstrations organised in other cities, on that day, from other cities, from Podujevo and other towns, demonstrators converged in Pristina, and it was very difficult to stop them. The forces of Kosovo police were unable ³⁴⁰¹⁹ to stop them. And it wasn't until the army was involved to come in and secure the key facilities and the planes that flew over the town that the demonstrations were calmed down. That was towards the evening, around 8.00 p.m.

Q. All right, Mr. Jokanovic. What was the attitude of political organs with respect to demonstrations? When I say "political organs," I'm referring both to provincial, to republic, and federal organs. What was their attitude?

A. In the beginning, the attitude was similar to the one in 1968. They tried to cover up, to present this as a rebellion of students who were unhappy with their accommodation and so on. However, when the demonstrations escalated and when the leadership saw that their functions, posts, and privileges were jeopardised, then the organs of the province started condemning those demonstrations in very severe terms. One of the worst qualifications in the then-system was the qualifications of counterrevolution. One of the closest associates of Tito was so fierce in his condemnations that he said that these demonstrators were the worst enemy of the Albanian people and that they were thugs.

Q. And there are documents which can prove that?

A. Yes, that's right. And then other organs also joined in condemning the demonstrations. The Province Committee, Central Committee of the League of Communists, and they also wanted the provincial leadership to be made accountable for that.

Q. Was Enver Hoxha mentioned during those demonstrations, or any other Albanian figures? ³⁴⁰²⁰

A. Well, some historical figures were mentioned. The unification of Kosovo was mentioned. Then there was the slogan "Kosovo Republic." So these 1981 demonstrations were identical to the 1968 demonstrations in the demands expressed.

Q. At the time, Serbia had no competencies, nor could Serbia have suppressed those demonstrations.

A. Yes, that's right. Serbia had no competencies, and it could not have suppressed the demonstrations, which cause great dissatisfaction among the citizenry who asked publicly, what was the role of Serbia? Could Serbia defend its territory integrity, its citizens, state and private property? And it was precisely then that demands and criticism were voiced, saying that the constitution ought to be amended, this constitution that does not allow the republic to protect its citizens and the property in its own territory and to protect its own territorial integrity.

Q. All right, Mr. Jokanovic. So the paragraph 75 is this bit that says that the police forces of Serbia suppressed the demonstrations is incorrect?

A. Yes, that's right. It's incorrect because the police forces of Serbia did not suppress it.

Q. Yes. You explained to us how the issue of suppressing the demonstrations was resolved. Were you specific enough when you said who was in command of these joint police forces that came to Kosovo?

A. I can't remember the name of the person who was in command, but he was someone from Croatia, whereas Franc, a Slovene, was in charge of ³⁴⁰²¹ Special Police Unit, he was in charge of an action which -- an operation in the village of Prekaze where some people shut themselves in a house and the police had to deal with that. The fire was opened. So this special unit, Special Police Unit from Slovenia, was led by the person, a Slovene named Franz. It was a violent operation, helicopters were called in, and those who put up resistance were fired upon by the police. The fire was opened from the helicopter as well.

Q. That was in Prekaze in 1981?

A. Yes, that's right.

Q. And in Prekaze again in 1998, fire was opened against the police and there was a conflict except that some aspects were different. Do you remember that?

A. I remember the first case in Prekaze because I was living in Kosovo at the time, and as a member of the Executive Council, together with some other leaders, I went to that village and I saw the house involved. And as for the other instance that you mentioned, I didn't go there personally.

Q. All right. I'm not going to put any further questions, but let me just tell you that the second case in Prekaze is identical to the first one, practically a twin of the first one. But please tell me --

JUDGE KWON: For the record, could you give me the year again? The transcript says 1998. The year in Prekaze.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] What Mr. Jokanovic described in Prekaze happened in 1981, whereas I mentioned Prekaze and the event that took place there in 1998. The same event happened there in 1998 when the ^{34022 BLANK PAGE 34023} group led by Adem Jashari was liquidated. The same group that fired on police members, and a lot of citizens were killed there. That was in 1998.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. In 1981, the special police of the federal -- the Special Police Unit of the federal police was engaged there, and it was under the command of a Slovene officer; is that right?

A. Yes, that's right. It was called Special Police Unit there, and today it would have been called Anti-Terrorist Unit or something like that.

Q. Mr. Jokanovic, please tell me --

JUDGE BONOMY: Again, on the subject you've been dealing with, when you talked, Mr. Jokanovic about fire being opened, or someone opening fire in 1981, were you referring to the police being attacked or were you referring to the police themselves opening fire?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In 1981, firearms were used both by the demonstrators. The demonstrators were the first to use weapons. According to the statement of Stane Dolenc, a Slovene, who was the person most responsible for security in Yugoslavia.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Jokanovic, you're a politician, and you speak in general terms. You said, for example, that Stane Dolenc was the most responsible for. Why don't you say that Stane Dolenc was the federal police minister? This is much clearer to them than if you say that he was the most responsible. Both statements are correct, but it's much more ³⁴⁰²⁴ specific if you say that he was the federal police minister.

A. Yes, that's right. He was the federal police minister, he was a Slovene, and he held other important functions later on.

Q. All right.

JUDGE BONOMY: I was going to say that the witness should have the opportunity, if he wishes, to complete his answer to my question. I resent being interrupted by the accused and a witness who is answering a question of mine being interrupted in the course of it. Now, is there anything else you wish to say in answer to my question?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] During the 1981 demonstrations, firearms were used by the demonstrators and police as well, but in response. Nine demonstrators were killed, and two policemen. In the village of Prekaze, weapons were used by an Albanian who barricaded himself inside the house and then opened fire from the house. The police surrounded the house and made a shelter for police members. They did not want to engage in combat inside the house. And then Special Police Unit was called in under the command of the Slovene police officer who liquidated this house from which resistance was put up and from which the fire was opened on police.

JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, you have led evidence about the demonstrations in 1968, demonstrations in 1981, and I think you're now going to deal with 1998, but we're going to take the break now for 20 minutes. ³⁴⁰²⁵

--- Recess taken at 10.33 a.m.

--- On resuming at 10.57 a.m.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Continue, Mr. Milosevic.

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for Mr. Milosevic. Thank you.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Jokanovic, these events of 1981, and I'm thinking of the demonstrations which you've already talked about a lot, how did they reflect upon the lives of Serbs and Montenegrins and other non-Albanians in the province?

A. Very negatively, because inter-ethnic relations were disrupted even further. Insecurity was created, lack of hope, and this reflected very negatively upon the overall situation in Kosovo, because Serbs, even after that, were exposed to various forms of pressure exerted against themselves, their property. Their fields were destroyed. Graveyards were destroyed. The Pec monastery was set on fire. And there were also provocations, insults, attacks.

There was an attack at the -- the Orthodox bishop at the time, and there was also an attack on a priest in Prizren.

Q. And do you remember any incidents involving killings? Was any of that happening?

A. Yes, there were some killings. I remember certain cases which were particularly unusual. There was a killing in the village of Mec near Djakovica. There was the only Serbian house in that village. And upon instructions of the presidents of the -- of the president of the Presidency of Kosovo at the time went to visit that family because that ³⁴⁰²⁶ person had written letters to the highest organs of the federation, the Republic of Serbia and Kosovo, that he's afraid that he would be killed imminently.

And with another Albanian who happened to be the president of the Commission for Complaints, went to visit that person and then went to the municipality of Djakovica and asked the municipal Secretariat for Internal Affairs to extend protection for this person. Unfortunately, very soon after that, Miodrag Saric was killed in his yard right next to his house, because he had already prepared material in order to rebuild and renovate his old house. I had visited his old house.

There was another case of Danilo Milancic in Samodreza near Vucitrn. A young man was killed. Before that, his father was killed also.

These are cases which were covered a lot in the press. There was also the case of Martinovic in Gnjilane.

Q. Very well. Thank you, Mr. Jokanovic. When did you hear the term "ethnically pure Kosovo" for the first time?

A. I heard that term in official documents of the provincial political bodies, in official documents of the political organs of Yugoslavia. This term was used following 1981, stating that the objective of the separatists and Albanian nationalists was to create an ethnically pure Kosovo.

Q. And could you please tell us how the organs of the province, the republic, and the SFRY placed themselves in relation to these problems of harassment, moving out, and so on. ³⁴⁰²⁷

A. Up until 1981, this was a taboo topic. Nobody discussed it, and it was a problem that everybody ignored.

From 1981, this problem was something that the provincial organs, the republican organs, and the federal organs all had to deal with, and they assessed this problem and decided upon specific measures, and they adopted conclusions in order to prevent the moving out of the population.

Q. Who made these measures?

A. The Assembly of Kosovo adopted these measures. The Federal Assembly adopted the measures also, as well as the Executive Council or the Assembly of Serbia. Measures were adopted by other political organs in the League of Communists and the Socialist Alliance. So this question became topical and it was mentioned in numerous documents.

Q. Very well, Mr. Jokanovic. Did all these measures stop the wave of emigration from Kosovo?

A. Unfortunately, they did not. These measures did not yield the expected results. When the implementation of the measures was assessed the term that was used was "insufficient activity," "inefficacy," and also "opportunism" in the implementation of these measures. So that this emigration from Kosovo continued even after the adoption of these measures, and it affected all the administrative organs.

Q. And did the Serbs and Montenegrins feel protected after these measures were adopted?

A. No, they did not feel protected. After 1981, the unrest was even greater. And then in subsequent years, starting from 1982, the so-called rallies of Serbs and Montenegrins began who began to rally together in the ^{34028 BLANK PAGE 34029} places where they lived in order to point out the problems that they were facing.

Q. When you say for different reasons, which reasons are you thinking of? What is the nature of the -- why did they rally together?

A. When a fight broke out, there was a rape, someone was arrested, or even if there was a visit by any member of the Commission for Complaints. There was such a commission comprising all the federal organs which toured all the different municipalities and reviewed all the complaints made by the citizens. So when this commission would, for example, come to visit my municipality of Vitina, we would have a large number of people who would come together in order to state what their problems were, in order to acquaint the people who had come to visit them with the problems that they were facing.

So these rallies took place in several locations around Kosovo. And when this, as well, did not yield the expected results, Serbs decided to go and take their complaints to Belgrade, to go to Belgrade to ask for help and justice. They went to visit all the republican bodies because they were disappointed with the conduct of the republican organs, because they felt that it was up to the republic to protect them. Then they would instead go to the Federal Assembly and to see officials who were members of the federal bodies. There were several such visits to Belgrade.

Q. And what was the situation at the University of Pristina at the time? Very briefly, please.

A. The university in Pristina was actually an outpost of the Belgrade University, and then first faculties were formed and then a university was ³⁴⁰³⁰ formed later. But this university was gradually turning into primarily an Albanian university, while classes in Serbian were being suppressed. And professors were complaining. I would see them, and I would hear the series of problems that they were facing in their work. This was the problem of majorisation and the problem of keys. And this keys policy was referring to quotas during -- when people were enrolling, quotas taking into account the national structure, and it brought the Serbs into an unequal position. It was positive discrimination. So then these classes were just classes that had to be there and were meant to be gradually phased out. There were fewer and fewer people from Kosovo who spoke Albanian who were moving out, so that classes in Serbian were becoming more and more threatened.

Up until 1980-something, over 60 per cent of teachers from Kosovo had left and had moved to other places in the former Yugoslavia.

Q. What was the situation with the economic development of Kosovo at the time?

A. From the late 1960s, and that's the period of my direct participation in such work, particularly from 1970, when I became the president of the municipality, the economy of Kosovo grew very quickly and dynamically, and this area used to be the least developed area in the former Yugoslavia. So there was practically a rebirth of Kosovo that took place over a period of two decades, and the progress they made in such a short time would be something that other nations would perhaps need much more time to achieve. It was a place where there were a lot of illiterate people, there was practically no industry, there were no schools. So in ³⁴⁰³¹ this period, thanks to the fund for the development of undeveloped regions, a large number of facilities were built, economic facilities, also the infrastructure was built, and there were a lot of social services that were developed.

In my municipality during my mandate, more factories were built -- several factories were built, and the number of employees in those factories doubled. I remember out of 3.800 workers who were there when I took on office, when I left my office, there were 9.000 workers.

THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter did not hear Mr. Milosevic's question.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The first problem that I directly faced were after the demonstrations in 1981, because amongst, other things which I mentioned, you could hear more and more criticism about the constitution, and there were more and more suggestions to change or amend the constitution. And also saying that the constitution itself, perhaps, was among the causes of problems in Kosovo.

In 1980, already they talked about the essential changes that had to be made to the amendments in 1981. This was something that was dealt with by the federal, republican, and provincial organs. In 1982 and 1983, the conclusions of the Central Committee of LCY of Yugoslavia were presented in an analysis in order to achieve unity in the Republic of Serbia where all the different aspects were pointed out how to achieve unity and what the problems were in that and what had to be changed in certain regulations and what had to be stated more specifically.

Q. Very well. Could you please tell us when the work on the draft ³⁴⁰³² amendments to the constitution of Serbia began, and how long did this work take?

A. I would like to talk about the things that I participated in directly. For the first time, I took part in a meeting of the Presidency work group, the Presidency of Serbia, together with my colleagues, Albanians.

Q. Just one moment. What was your function? On what basis did you participate in this working group of the Presidency of Serbia; as a representative of Kosovo or were you invited by the Presidency of Serbia?

A. Of course I was a representative of Kosovo because I was a member of the Kosovo Presidency, in charge of constitutional questions and the political systems.

Q. How many of you from Kosovo took part in this work?

A. Two of us. The vice-president of the Executive Council, who was also in charge with constitutional questions and legal matters, and then later we had a professor from the Pristina University. Both of these people were Albanians.

Q. This was in 1986 in Boticeva Street at the government of the Republic of Serbia. This first meeting --

Q. Could you please tell me who presided over this meeting.

A. The meeting was scheduled and presided over by the president of the Presidency of Serbia at the time, Ivan Stambolic. And from Vojvodina there was a member of the Presidency. It was my colleague, his name was Vujadinovic.

Q. Was the composition from Vojvodina also ethnically mixed? ³⁴⁰³³

A. From Vojvodina the composition was the same. This Vujadinovic person was probably a Serb or a Montenegrin, I don't know. There was also a secretary for legal matters. I don't know what his ethnicity was.

Q. So work on this draft amendment began in 1986. Is that true?

A. Yes.

Q. And this is what you participated in?

A. Yes. In 1986 I participated as a member of the Presidency.

Q. Could you please tell me now whether this working group which was formed and this constitutional commission which was formed had to consult with their grassroots, with their electorate.

A. This was essential. We were not there as free shooters representing our own opinion. Before the meetings and after the meetings which we had as a group, we were obliged to inform the Presidency of Kosovo, the constitutional commission of Kosovo, the Presidency of the Kosovo provincial council. They would form their views based on our positions, and then we would convey these positions back again. We would try to coordinate and harmonise this position.

There was a large number of meetings on each particular matter discussed at the level of the province and also in order to reach a consensus with our constituency. There were also meetings with representatives of Serbia and Vojvodina.

Q. So work on the draft that you had and work at the commission which was presided over by Ivan Stambolic began in 1986.

A. Yes. The drafting of proposals began in 1986, and that was the direction and the scale of changes. So this proposition or proposal ^{34034 BLANK PAGE 34035} discussed about the things that needed to be changed. And then when this proposal was adopted, then this work was transferred to the constitutional commission of the Republic of Serbia and such commissions of Kosovo and Vojvodina.

Q. When was this transferred to the constitutional commission?

A. In 1987.

Q. Very well. That was in 1987. Here in paragraph 79 of this paper that I'm quoting to you from, which was prepared by the other side, it states: "In early 1989" -- so this is what it states here: "In early 1989, the Serbian Assembly proposed amendments to the constitution of Serbia which would strip Kosovo of most of its autonomous powers, including control of the police, educational and economic policy, and choice -- as well as its veto powers over further changes to the constitution of Serbia."

Please, could you comment on that.

A. I would like to be as brief as possible. The constitutional amendments were worked on for a long time. It took three years to harmonise positions. In 1989, a draft was adopted by the Assembly, and this was then put out for public debate. So after a long time of hard work, which included all of the organs of the Vojvodina and Kosovo provinces as well as the republican organs. So by that draft, the province of Kosovo was not stripped of its autonomous powers. All of its jurisdiction or powers remained. The amendments just restored several functions to Serbia in the sphere of national defence, internal affairs, but not the entirety of internal affairs, only those pertaining to the ³⁴⁰³⁶ security of the Republic of Serbia as a whole.

And there was also a procedure established of joint activities with the provincial organs, but the other questions remained in the jurisdiction of the province. This draft in no way changed the position of the province within the federation. The --

Q. Very well. Very well, Mr. Jokanovic. So this passage that I quoted to you stripped the majority of its autonomous powers, including control of the police, educational and economic policy. From what you say, then, it seems that this is not true.

A. Yes. That is not true, especially the part pertaining to veto powers. I didn't respond to that.

The draft amendment, or when the amendments were adopted, there was no right of veto. The veto power was substituted with a complex procedure to change the constitution of Serbia. Instead of veto powers, which deprived Serbia of its basic constitutional function which every republic had, the amendments provided for a complex procedure, meaning that if consensus is not achieved, the Assembly cannot effect a change. This is postponed for six months, and then within that period if consensus is not achieved, then -- or if one of the provinces is opposed to that, then the Assembly of Serbia cannot adopt these changes again, and then these changes can be effected only through a referendum. But there was a solution found. A way out was found from a veto through this complex procedure.

Q. And all these things that were done, were they done in such a way as to include actively the political leadership at the level of ³⁴⁰³⁷ Yugoslavia?

A. That work could not have been done and changes would not have been possible without the direct and active involvement of federal bodies, especially the League of Communists of Yugoslavia, which had the most authority and was the integrating -- the greatest integrating factor in the country.

The positions expressed by the Central Committee of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia expressed at various sessions were very important, such as the 9th, the 16th, and especially the 17th session, especially point 5, where it said that Serbia should be able to exercise its powers throughout its territory without changing the status of the province as an integral part of the federation.

Q. All right, Mr. Jokanovic. You provided, among other documents, and that is an exhibit, 964, that has been provided to you timely, in English. We have a memo here saying Exhibits for Vukasin Jokanovic, item 6, document titled The Policy of the LCY in Kosovo, Pristina. It contains all these positions expressed by various republican authorities, as well as federal bodies, the bodies of Serbia, of Yugoslavia, pertaining --

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, the document that you have just submitted, what is it?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] This is a document of the League of Communists of Kosovo encompassing the policy of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia in Kosovo, including original records of various political meetings dealing with the issue of constitutional amendments and the situation in Kosovo in general. ³⁴⁰³⁸

JUDGE ROBINSON: Are you going to refer to specific parts of it? It's not translated.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] This was disclosed much in advance, sufficiently in advance, and I will quote, because there is no time to dwell on it a lot, but for instance, I will quote from the record of a meeting --

MR. NICE: There seems to be some confusion as to whether there's translation. We have never received an English translation of this document. We have received English translations of a number of other documents, but not of this one.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, you say it was submitted in advance for translation? How much in advance?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I really don't know, I must say.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Well, you must know. That attitude is just not acceptable. If you intend to rely on the document, you know what the general rule is: The document must be translated in one of the working languages.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right. So as not to waste more time, may I quote from this document or not? If you say I'm not allowed to, I'll move on, ask other questions. I'm sorry this hasn't been translated.

[Trial Chamber confers]

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, in light of the fact that you did submit it for translation some time ago, although we were made to understand that you were asked to identify particular passages for ³⁴⁰³⁹ translation and you're not in a position to do so, but in light of that, we will allow you to refer to it if the passage is short, because it will have to be translated by the interpreters.

What is the passage to which you wish to refer?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Here, Mr. Robinson. I will skip all the passages where I spoke, and I will quote only from page 42, the words of the then president of the Presidency of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia, a Croat by ethnicity, who also participated in that meeting, and he spoke about constitutional amendments. I have only a couple of quotations.

This particular Croat was not looking very kindly upon the Serbian leadership at the time. He you could say that he was even opposed. His name is Stipe Suvar, he says -- and I will try to think of the interpreters. He says: "Our main problem is that throughout these years, from the explosion of Albanian nationalism, accompanied by all those counterrevolutionary demands from 1981 onwards, we still have not made or achieved this in-depth transformation. We did not improve the situation or achieve stabilisation."

And he goes on to say: "Together with Albanians, who are an overwhelming majority in the province, there live there also Serbs and Montenegrins who feel the most threatened and are indeed the most threatened, followed by Muslims, who live there in considerable numbers, as well as Romas, Croats, and all the others."

Further down below, he says: "It is ludicrous to hear discussions about which nationalism is more dangerous. In Kosovo, the Albanian ³⁴⁰⁴⁰ nationalism is 100 times more dangerous."

MR. NICE: Sorry to be technically difficult, but I think if we're going to be quoting or taking extracts from documents in Serbian, what we've done in the past and what probably ought to be done now is the document ought be on the overhead projector --

JUDGE KWON: It is.

MR. NICE: I'm sorry. I'm not following and I'll sit down. But I think it ought to be read probably by the accused -- very well.

THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters would also appreciate it if they could hear the page number for each separate quotation.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, would you identify the page numbers for each quotation so that the interpreters can follow it.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I did give a page number. I started with page 42. Then there is a small quotation from page 44. And I read very slowly.

And this is not a meeting that took place in Serbia. It is a summit meeting of the Yugoslav leadership that was held in Pristina, and I was quoting the words of the leader of that Yugoslav summit, at that time president of the Yugoslav Presidency, Croat by ethnicity, Stipe Suvar. Now, page 46, he says that: "It is a good thing --"

JUDGE KWON: Mr. Milosevic, could you bear in mind so that the interpreters can follow the text through ELMO, so could you check whether the ELMO shows the relevant part of the text or not.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. On the ELMO -- Mr. Jokanovic, will you please turn to page 46. ³⁴⁰⁴¹ That's where I am now. And this is the paragraph. The end of the first column, page 46, the then president says: "In conclusion, I think what happened in the Assembly of Serbia concerning constitutional amendments is good, as well as the way it happened. First of all, I can't understand why the Albanian masses in Kosovo seem to think that something radically changed here, because the amendments relate to five or six issues, and it is quite normal that Serbia receives competence over them as a state, even if we are not reconciling ourselves with the fact that Serbia is not composed of three states; that is, unless we are willing to reconcile ourselves with Serbia being composed of three states, that is, unless we allow two provinces to grow into states and become states."

What was going on at that time at the summit level in Yugoslavia completely coincides with the description just given by Witness Jokanovic, because I asked him to what extent the political leadership of Yugoslavia was involved --

JUDGE ROBINSON: I've stopped you. Ask a question of the witness.

JUDGE BONOMY: Before you do that, could I possibly have clarification. What is the document?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It is the record of a summit meeting of the Yugoslav leadership held in Pristina, and the president of the Presidency of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia, Dr. Stipe Suvar, from Croatia - it was Croatia's turn at the time to provide the president - spoke on this issue, and he expressed the position of the Yugoslav leadership, not the Serbian leadership. ³⁴⁰⁴² And then on page 47 -- in order to save time, I skipped my own words at that meeting, but you have it in its entirety, and you can read it.

The document is titled conclusions of the Presidency of the Provincial Committee of The League of Communists of Kosovo.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Jokanovic, it was mostly Albanians in this Presidency; right?

A. Correct.

Q. So these are conclusions of the Presidency of the provincial committee of the League of Communists of Kosovo the 28th of February 1989. Page 47, paragraph 2: "They invoke the stances taken by the Presidency of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia." Paragraph 5: "The Presidency of the provincial committee of the League of Communists of Kosovo --" page 48, for the benefit of the interpreters, the end of column 1. "The Presidency of the provincial committee of the League of Communists of Kosovo reiterates once again that it supports constitutional changes to the constitution of Serbia and demands that they be passed as soon as possible in order for the Republic of Serbia to be able to exercise its powers and functions on its whole territory, because these amendments do not jeopardise the autonomy of provinces or the equality among peoples and minorities." I will just want to ask you, what is the -- what was the position of the top Yugoslav authorities at that time? I quoted to you the position of the Provincial Committee from Kosovo, which was composed mostly of Albanians and presided over by an Albanian. ³⁴⁰⁴³ Mr. Jokanovic, for the Assembly of Serbia to be able to pass these amendments, it was necessary to receive the approval of both provinces; is that so?

A. Yes.

Q. Was it necessary to have the approval of the Republic of Serbia for provincial assemblies to pass amendments?

A. No. Serbia's approval was not necessary. Provinces could change their constitutions independently.

Q. Mr. Jokanovic, we will now move on to very specific issues, questions, because as you just confirmed, you were at the time president of the Assembly of Kosovo.

A. Correct.

Q. When did the Assembly of Kosovo and, if you know, the Assembly of Vojvodina meet to give this approval?

A. For Vojvodina it was the 10th of March, and for Kosovo it was the 23rd of March.

Q. I thought Vojvodina's Assembly met on the 21st of March, but what you say is true. The session of the Assembly of Kosovo over which you presided took place on the 23rd of March.

Tell me, was it a public session?

A. The session of the Kosovo parliament was a public one. It was attended by a great number of journalists. Never in my life, although I occupied various posts, had I spoken before a greater number of the press. There were 180 journalists accredited from all over Yugoslavia and even from abroad. The interest was huge in the course and the work of ³⁴⁰⁴⁴ that particular session of the Assembly of Kosovo.

Q. Tell me, Mr. Jokanovic, was this parliament session held in a regular way?

A. This parliament session was held quite regularly, in keeping with the constitution of Kosovo and in keeping with the Rules of Procedure of that parliament.

Q. You were the speaker of that parliament. What was the ethnicity of other high officials in the parliament?

A. I was president, the vice-president was Albanian, general secretary was also Albanian. Since the parliament had three Chambers, in two Chambers there were Albanians, and in the third one there was a Montenegrin at the top. And my in my previous posts I also had a lot of Albanian colleagues. I think I explained that already.

Q. Please tell us, was any pressure exerted on the delegates?

A. To vote or not to vote?

Q. Were they pressured into accepting the proposal to consent to these constitutional amendments?

A. We functioned in the system of delegates. Delegates voted in accordance with their constituency. Their constituency were the municipal assemblies, and the delegates of social political Chambers and various political organisations. Pressures in the sense of threats or any other kinds of pressure did not exist. It was the duty of the delegates to vote in accordance with the position of those organs who sent them to the Assembly of Kosovo.

Q. Actually to vote in accordance with the position of their ³⁴⁰⁴⁵ constituency?

A. Yes, that's right.

Q. Please tell me, on the 3rd of May, 2002, Ibrahim Rugova stated here, I'm quoting his words, I took this off the transcript: "The Kosovo Assembly had to decide on the suspension of the status of Kosovo from the federation and the Assembly delegates were pressured into voting on this. The public was against this. They used violence to pressure them. There were tanks in the streets, and there were secret agents inside the Assembly building so that the members voted under pressure. I remember that ten members voted against, and these members were punished, convicted. Some were sent to prison, and some were fired." All right. So you were the president of the Assembly. Let us clear up some things. Were there any tanks around the Assembly building?

A. No, there were no tanks around the Assembly building.

Q. Did you see any tanks? How did you come to the Assembly building from your house? Did you walk there or did you come with an escort or something like that?

A. Well, the distance is relatively short. I lived in what was then called Beogradska Street. I went there on foot. I saw no tanks on the streets, no tanks around the Assembly building.

Q. Mr. Jokanovic, please have in mind the warning of the interpreters. As both of us speak Serbian, we have to make a pause in order to allow the interpreters to interpret what both of us say. So there was no pressure, and there were no tanks. But the fact that ten members of the Assembly voted against is an accurate one that can ³⁴⁰⁴⁶ be confirmed by the minutes?

A. Yes, that's right.

Q. How many members of the Kosovo Assembly attended that session where amendments were passed?

A. Hundred and 87.

Q. What was the total number?

A. Hundred and ninety.

Q. So only three members of the then-Kosovo Assembly did not attend the session?

A. Yes, that's right.

Q. And out of those 187, Rugova himself stated that ten voted against, and how many refrained from voting?

A. Ten voted against, and two delegates abstained from voting.

Q. So everybody else voted for?

A. Yes. Everybody else voted for. This was a vast majority, and the decision was followed by an applause. Everybody stood up, because in addition to working nature, this was also a formal, solemn Assembly session.

Q. Please tell me, did anybody from Serbia have an influence over the election of the members of the Kosovo Assembly?

A. The Republic of Serbia and its organs had no influence over the personnel policy in Kosovo. The personnel policy in Kosovo was something that was dealt with by Kosovo organs and other institutions in Kosovo.

Q. Well, there are documents to confirm all of these facts that you are testifying about. There were 187 delegates attending out of a total ³⁴⁰⁴⁷ number of 190, ten voted against, 2 abstained from voting. How would you characterise the claim contained in paragraph 86 of this so-called indictment which reads as follows, I'm quoting --

JUDGE ROBINSON: I'm stopping you. The indictment is proper as to form and to substance. Challenges were made at a preliminary stage, and they were dealt with. The indictment is a reality. It is entirely proper and should not be referred to in that way. Continue.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson, the indictment is an act of insolence, because everything in it is turned upside down. Not a single count --

JUDGE ROBINSON: I have cut you off. If you are going to proceed in that manner concerning issues that have already been dealt with, I will not allow you to do so. I want to hear nothing more about the indictment. That issue has been dealt with, was dealt with from over two years ago. Proceed with your questions.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right. Well, here is an example of how it has been dealt with, Mr. Robinson. You don't need a greater example from this testimony of this witness. So paragraph 86 reads as follows: "The Kosovo Assembly met in March in Kosovo, and they voted on the proposed amendments," which is correct again. And I will quote on: "And most of the Kosovo Albanian delegates abstained from voting," which is a blatant lie, because only two of them abstained from voting. And then I continue quoting: "Although lacking the required two-thirds majority in the Assembly --" which again is a blatant lie, because only ten delegates voted against -- ³⁴⁰⁴⁸

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, there will come a time when you will be allowed to make a speech. That time is not now. The evidence is to be elicited through the witness.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well. Very well, Mr. Robinson.

JUDGE KWON: Check the paragraph number again. I couldn't follow. You said 86.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes. I said 86. 86, yes. Then it goes on to say: "Although the majority of Kosovo Albanian delegates abstained from voting. Although lacking the required two-thirds majority in the Assembly, the president of the Assembly nonetheless declared that the amendments --"

THE INTERPRETER: Interpreters note that Mr. Milosevic is reading out of paragraph 81.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Ms. Anoya. Perhaps I had an old version, but the text is identical, and the new number is paragraph 81. I have it in English, and what I quoted is accurate, even in this new paragraph number. And it says here: "On 23rd March, [In English] Assembly of Kosovo met in Pristina and with the majority of Kosovo Albanian delegates abstaining, voted to accept the proposed amendments to the constitution. Although lacking the required two-thirds majority in the Assembly, the president of the Assembly nonetheless declared that amendments had passed." [Interpretation] And then in the end there's another sentence. It is not important for this witness: "[In English] Assembly of Serbia voted to approve the constitutional change, effectively revoking the autonomy ³⁴⁰⁴⁹ granted in the 1974 constitution."

[Interpretation] This is precisely what I read out verbatim.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Therefore, out of 187 delegates, two voted against -- two abstained, ten voted against, and 174 voted for; is that right?

A. Yes, that's right.

Q. All of these delegates who had some reservations and who voted against, were they given an opportunity to speak publicly in the Assembly?

A. The session was held in a democratic atmosphere. All of those who wanted the floor were granted the right to speak, and you can see that in the tape recording. All of those who wanted were able to discuss publicly. I think that a lot of those who voted for also spoke up publicly. I think that there were a total of 34 people taking the floor.

Q. How many?

A. I think 34. I have it here in a press excerpt, because the press, on the following day, wrote about all of these facts that I'm describing here. It wrote about the debate, about those who attended, and so on. And there is also a videotape which is not complete because our technical facilities were not very modern at the time.

JUDGE ROBINSON: What was the ethnic distribution of the membership of the Assembly?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The ethnic composition was in accordance with the ethnic composition of the population. Therefore, there were over 70 per cent of Albanian delegates in the Assembly, and at the time there were 77 per cent of Albanians living in Kosovo and ³⁴⁰⁵⁰ Metohija, and in the Assembly over 70 per cent of the delegates were Albanian. If I remember well, there were 140 and something -- 142 or 143 Albanian delegates in the Assembly.

And then we had Serbs, Montenegrins, Turks, Muslims, and so on, again in numbers corresponding the ethnic composition of the population, because we had to satisfy the requirement for representation both as far as the ethnic composition was concerned and the social composition. That was very important in our then-system.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. All right, Mr. Jokanovic. I have here the English translation and the Serbian text, so there are no problems with translations here. I also have the tape recording from the session of the Assembly held on the 23rd of March, 1989. I marked certain portions. You received this text in English. This is Exhibit 963. And I ask that this be admitted into evidence.

You will be surprised to hear that even those who voted against did not have very firm views, were not firmly opposed to the constitutional amendments. However, it is their democratic right to vote, so there is no problem there.

JUDGE KWON: I don't follow the number you said 963 is coming from.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] This is the number indicated on the list. It says here "DPK 963, tape recording," and so on.

JUDGE KWON: 65 ter number, yes.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Proceed, Mr. Milosevic. ³⁴⁰⁵¹

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Therefore, my question was, Mr. Jokanovic -- in view of the significance, I have to repeat this question. In view of these facts that you are testifying about, and in view of these documents, how can you qualify the claims in paragraph 81 - and I thank Mr. Kwon for helping me with this - this claim that on the 23rd of March, 1989 the Assembly of Kosovo met in Pristina and, with the majority of Kosovo Albanian delegates abstaining, voted to accept the proposed amendments even though the required two-thirds majority was lacking, and the president of the Assembly - meaning you - declared that the amendments had passed, full stop.

On the 28th of March, 1989 the Assembly of Serbia voted to approve the constitutional changes effectively revoking the autonomy granted in the 1974 constitution. So this is paragraph 81 of the English version. So please tell me, in view of these facts that you told us here, how do you assess this paragraph?

A. This is not correct. This is fabricated. This fabrication is an attempt to justify what was going on in Kosovo.

I think that the Office of the Prosecution received this information which they deemed to be reliable. They received this -- these facts from those who use such fabrications to strengthen their separatist objectives of breaking Kosovo away from Serbia and transforming it into an independent state.

I don't think that something like this, a claim like this, is even logical. I don't think that it would even be possible, realistic, because ³⁴⁰⁵² as a speaker of the parliament, I'm not a magician, so I could not, in the presence of 187 delegates, and in the presence of 180 journalists, in a situation where all leaders, the most prominent leaders from Kosovo and from the federation were present, how could I, under those circumstances, say the amendments have been passed when, in fact, they have not? The press reporting both in Serbian and Albanian will clearly show that the situation was, as will the tape.

Q. Mr. Jokanovic --

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we play the tape, Mr. Robinson? And this will allow you to gain an impression. We have a videotape, a very brief one.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. Yes.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could you please play the tape.

[Videotape played]

JUDGE ROBINSON: Stop the tape. Mr. Milosevic, was it your intention to have the tape played without there being any translation? Because we're not getting any translation, so it's -- it's of no use to us.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It was not my intention to play it without interpretation, because I assumed that it could be translated because it's very brief when you play the tape. So I thought that what is being spoken and what is being seen about all the organs supporting the Assembly session, that there was major interest in that, I thought that several of these key things could be interpreted. But we can continue. You can see what the atmosphere at the Assembly session itself was like. ³⁴⁰⁵³

JUDGE ROBINSON: Well, before we continue, let me find out whether the interpreters are in a position to translate, to interpret.

THE INTERPRETER: Your Honours, it's very fast.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, I just heard that. The interpreters say the speech is very, very fast. It's very difficult for them.

THE INTERPRETER: Without a transcript, Your Honour.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The following clip is not very fast, and it's pretty indicative, and I think it will show the actual place where the Assembly was held and the declaration of the adoption of the amendments. We do not have to interpret this very fast clip, but let's look at the next one.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Very well, yes.

JUDGE KWON: And if you could also indicate the relevant page number of this transcript. It's not interpreted?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] This next clip, you will see now and then I will try with the help of the witness to identify when it was taken and so on.

[Videotape played]

THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover] "There is the Socialist Republic of Serbia became a state throughout its territory after the decision of the republican -- after the parliament on Kosovo the constitution of the Socialist Republic of Serbia will be announced on the 28th of March. It is well known that the provincial parliament of Kosovo gave its approval to the wording of the amendments." ³⁴⁰⁵⁴

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Very well. Mr. Jokanovic --

JUDGE ROBINSON: Before you proceed, let me ask the witness, just to clarify this. There's a reference to paragraph 81 of the indictment to which Mr. Milosevic referred. You say it is -- it does not reflect the factual situation because the reference to the required two-thirds majority not being present is wrong because there was a two-thirds majority. Please answer that.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There was a two-thirds majority and agreement was reached by an overwhelming majority, much greater than a two-thirds majority. A two-thirds majority was required, however, under the constitution.

JUDGE ROBINSON: So that in declaring the amendments as having passed, you acted entirely properly.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I acted completely properly, in accordance with my agenda and in the way I conducted the meeting, asked who was for, who was against, how many abstained, and I declared that agreement was reached on the amendments to the constitution of Serbia, and this was followed, as you could see, by applause. All the deputies who were present got to their feet.

This happened before 180 journalists and TV crews who happened to be accredited for that event that day. I have the original newspapers with me where what I'm saying now was published at the time. These are both newspapers in Serbian. I also have a newspaper in the Albanian language, Jedinstvo Politika in Albanian. It's the newspaper Rilindja ³⁴⁰⁵⁵ Komunist. There are pictures and so on.

JUDGE ROBINSON: You've answered the question.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Jokanovic, at the moment when you declared the amendments adopted and when the Assembly session got to its feet and the applause began, we could see on this brief clip many figures who were sitting there. Can you please remember and tell us who we can see. Who was sitting in the front row? Who were those who were present as special guests and who also applauded and got to their feet and so on?

A. The session was attended by leaders and officials from the federation who were representing Kosovo in the federation. The member of the Presidency of Yugoslavia was there. The member of the Presidency of the Central Committee of Yugoslavia.

Q. I apologise for interrupting you, Mr. Jokanovic, but it would be useful, if you remember, if you could also tell us their names and not only just their posts.

A. Member of the Presidency of Yugoslavia who was before the vice-president and the president of the Presidency, his name is Sinan Hasani.

Q. And what is his ethnicity?

A. He's an Albanian from the village of Pozharanje from my own municipality Kosovska Vitina. He's also a writer, an author, who published the first novel in the Albanian language. He's a very prominent, respected figure. He's a novelist called "Rrushi ka filluar me u pjek." That's in Albanian. In Serbian the title is The Grapes are ³⁴⁰⁵⁶ Beginning to Ripen.

Next to him was Ali Shukrija, who was a member of the Presidency of the Central Committee of Yugoslavia. Remzi Koleci, the president of the Presidency of Kosovo.

Q. Remzi Shukrija [sic] Was also an Albanian?

A. Yes, an Albanian from Kosovska Mitrovica. He participated in World War II and was decorated for that, and he was in the political life of Kosovo and the federation for many years.

Q. Continue. Remzi Koleci, what about him?

A. Remzi Koleci was the president of the Presidency of the Autonomous Province of Kosovo. This is the top function in Kosovo. Rrahman Morina, the president of the Presidency of the Provincial Committee of Kosovo.

Q. All Albanians?

A. Albanian. Daut Jasanica, the president of the Presidency of the Socialist Alliance of the Albanians. The president of the Executive Council, also an Albanian, Nazmi.

Q. Was that Jusuf Zejnullahu who was the person at the time?

A. Jusuf Zejnullahu at the time actually -- actually, at the time it was either Nazmi Mustafa or Jusuf Zejnullahu. There are many years that have gone by since then and there were people always changing in those functions. I think it was Jusuf Zejnullahu.

Q. Well, I'm not sure either. I'm trying to remember.

JUDGE KWON: Excuse me, Mr. Milosevic. Mr. Jokanovic, at the last page of this transcript I notice you ³⁴⁰⁵⁷ were saying at the time, "Those in favour, please raise your hands. And who is against?" My question is whether this method of voting, which is raising their hands, is a usual method of voting at the Assembly, instead of using some ballot paper?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That was the usual method of voting, not only in Kosovo but also in the republic and in the other republics. Voting was public, by acclamation, by the raising of one's hand. It was also possible to have a secret ballot if a delegate proposed such a measure and the Assembly agreed to have a secret vote. In this case, there were no such proposals. It's possible that nobody proposed such a measure because all the organs in the province and all the municipal assemblies in the province had already made their decisions and obliged their delegates to vote in accordance with their constituency, which delegated them to come and vote. The reporter - and this was the clip that was not interpreted - says that the decision is based on the decision of all the forms of organs who coordinated and made the decision to vote in favour of the amendments. So the voting was public, and that was the practice. There was no electronic voting at the time. We did not have such a possibility then.

JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Jokanovic, I have a very short question for you. It was you we saw on the video clip, was it, making the announcement? Who was the person who made the announcement immediately before we saw the applause?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That was me. I was the president of the Kosovo Assembly, and that is my voice. ³⁴⁰⁵⁸

JUDGE BONOMY: I --

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm much younger, but that was me.

JUDGE BONOMY: I understand that. Now, the transcript we have ends with a reference to, "The Chambers of the Kosovo Assembly have agreed to hold a joint session of all three Chambers. We should now decide when shall we take a 20-minute break."

Is the part that's on the video after the 20-minute break?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Bonomy, I would just like to explain something. This is the part that pertains to the constitution. Then the rest of the meeting deals with current issues and has nothing to do with this. What you have here only deals with the constitution. The session then proceeded to deal with regular matters.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] May I answer, since the question was addressed to me?

JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The Assembly began its work by sitting in the different -- in its separate Chambers. It set the agenda. The amendments were just the first item on the agenda. Then the other items were also adopted.

When the session pertaining to the amendments was finished, the session went on to deal with the rest of the items on the agenda. But I was not presiding over that whole session. It was presided over by the presidents of the Chambers.

The constitution continued its session. The opening speech was heard, which was submitted by the vice-president of the Executive Council, ³⁴⁰⁵⁹ Kazeb Susuri [phoen], dealing with other matters, economic issues and other topics that were on the agenda. So the Assembly session continued with its regular work.

JUDGE BONOMY: Perhaps it's Mr. Milosevic who can answer the question, then. Where in the transcript do we find the part which we saw in the video?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It's on the last page in the Serbian version. It says when it was noted that there were ten against, that there were two abstentions, then it states: "I hereby declare that the Assembly of the Socialist Autonomous Province of Kosovo has approved the text of the amendments after democratic discussion, and this outcome of our Assembly session, allow me to say a few things." Then Mr. Jokanovic gives a brief speech, but then what you saw on the video was him declaring the Assembly approving the text of the amendments.

JUDGE BONOMY: Well, it may be my mistake, but it's not how I saw it on the transcript but I'll review it later and clarify the position for myself.

MR. NICE: Before we move on and while we're considering to the degree we are the transcript, and just in case the Chamber takes it with it when it adjourns very soon, there's a bit of a problem in handling this exhibit. It's most easily seen from the Serbian original but you can actually pick up the problem in the English transcript. As I hold up the Serbian original, which has page numbers in the top right-hand corner, you will see that pages are sequential to a degree until page 87, although ³⁴⁰⁶⁰ there are missing pages. There's then a series of pages starting again at 24 and running through, in the original Serbian, to 88 by simply being a collection of pages which should probably be inserted into the earlier series of pages. But even, I think, by inserting them we don't have a complete record.

If you look at the English version, you can see the problem at various places. For example, if you take the English version and look at page, bottom right-hand corner, 36, and then look to the top of that, you'll see that there is a reference there to the first three lines ending page 71 and the record picking up at page 74, indicating that pages 72 and 73 are missing. Now, I think you'll then find, if you go back to the collection of pages at the end, that 72 and 73 aren't here at all. So that we've got a slightly muddled record and, I think, an incomplete one. The accused may not have focused his attention on this. It may be something he will want to do during the forthcoming break in the proceedings.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, you heard that. Some pages seem to be missing.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, yes. I did hear what is being discussed. Sometimes it happens that the stenograms repeat several times, that they start from 1 and then some parts begin again, depending on the person who is actually transcribing the stenogram. You have page 7, then you have 10, then 35, then 37, and so on in the stenogram. As Mr. Nice rightly said, you have page 80, then 87 on the last pages in Serbian, but before that, for example, you have many pages. ³⁴⁰⁶¹ Before that you have 84, 85, 83, again 84, 82, 81, because this last page, 80, has the words Kurtesh Salihu, then Kurtesh Salihu, then a blank space. Many pages before that you have Kurtesh Salihu on page 81, then he says, "Comrades, delegates ..." and then you have his speech. So that means his speech was not dropped, it's just a question of how it was arranged. Mr. Jokanovic has already pointed out that the technical facilities were not the best for transcription. This is what we have. This is the actual stenogram that exists. There's also the video recording, which is also quite clear. There are the facts.

I would just like to ask you, after the break, of course, because I know it's time for the break, that regardless of the fact that we did not translate this, because it's very difficult to translate the newspapers, you can admit not my photocopies, but you can admit the originals which Mr. Jokanovic has, where you can see in the newspapers from that time - for example, we will put that on the ELMO - we have a clip from Rilindja, which is the Albania newspaper, and you can see the entire Assembly session delegates on its feet. There is also the part by Sinan Hasani, the president of Yugoslavia. I can recognise him in the photo. I can recognise Ali Shukrija, I can recognise Rrahman Morina; all of these people that Mr. Jokanovic mentioned. So both in the transcripts and in the newspapers -- in the video clip and in the newspaper you can see all of these officials very well. So it -- there can be no doubt about the public nature of the meeting, the people who were present, the reporting from it. And you will not find anywhere in Albanian newspapers either any mention of any presence of police forces or any other nonsense ³⁴⁰⁶² that we heard in relation to this.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Very well, Mr. Milosevic. Mr. Jokanovic, you will be pleased to know we're going to follow your practice by taking a 20-minute break.

--- Recess taken at 12.23 p.m.

--- On resuming at 12.47 p.m.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, we considered in the break how to deal with these newspaper clips which you would like the witness to refer to and which are in his possession, not in yours. We have the same problem of translation, but if the passages are short, then they can be put on the ELMO and the interpreters can translate them.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson, there is no particular need to quote from the newspaper. I just wanted you to see them on the ELMO for you to see newspapers in Serbian, newspapers in Albanian, all the media coverage that accompanied this event which reflects the atmosphere of complete consensus that was typical, that characterised the enactment of the amendments.

I have copies of the newspaper that Mr. Jokanovic has before him, and of course we have a full set of these newspapers, but they have not been translated. We thought it would be a waste of resources to make these translations. Everything is explained in both Albanian and in Serbian newspapers.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, but if -- if they're put on the ELMO, they'll have to be translated, and for that purpose we just want to have a specific portion or whatever it is identified so that it can be ³⁴⁰⁶³ translated. Otherwise, it's not of any benefit to us. Alternatively, you could leave them, identify what you want to have translated, and we would have them submitted for translation, and we would mark them for identification.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right. That can be done on a general basis. I would just like to put a few things on the overhead projector.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. For instance, Mr. Jokanovic, would you please put on the ELMO the first -- the cover page of the Politika of the day following the passage of the amendments, 28th -- sorry, 24th of March, showing your picture. Show, please, this part where the text begins and where it says: "Twenty-four delegates took part in the discussion, in the debate. The amendments were passed by an overwhelming majority of votes (out of 187 delegates, ten were against, and two abstained.)" Then you see the highlighted part, and as Mr. Jokanovic explained, it also states the number of press representatives present, the number of deputies who took part in the debate, and the number of those who voted and how they voted.

That's the front page of Politika. And now for the sake of balance, let us see the Rilindja newspaper.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Let the witness confirm, Mr. Milosevic.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I kept this copy of the newspaper in my own documentation. ³⁴⁰⁶⁴

JUDGE ROBINSON: Witness. Witness. I just wanted to confirm whether what Mr. Milosevic read is in the paper.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

JUDGE ROBINSON: [Previous translation continues] ... the interpreters who should have translated it.

What's the next newspaper, Mr. Milosevic?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I will skip many newspapers in Serbian. Let us have the Albanian newspaper Rilindja. It is in this set.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. And since you, Mr. Jokanovic, are fluent in Albanian, can you please interpret the headlines or, rather, the captions below the pictures. Do you see this on the ELMO? Because I don't have this copy before me.

Let me just see if what you put on the ELMO is exactly what I meant. Yes.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Why don't you -- is it the highlighted portions that he is to read?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] He can read whatever he wants out of the highlights, but I would like him to read -- or, rather, to identify the people in the first row. This is an Albanian newspaper.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. You can see everybody standing and clapping. What is written below this photo, and who are people in the first row?

A. It says in Albanian, because I know the Albanian language: "Deputies to the Kosovo parliament applauding the passage of amendments to ³⁴⁰⁶⁵ the constitution of the Republic of Serbia."

In the first row I'm showing Ali Shukrija, Rrahman Morina, both Albanians; Sinan Hasani, member of the Presidency of the SFRY, also Albanian; and Mr. Koleci, president of the Presidency of Kosovo, also Albanian.

The headline is: "Approval given to amend the constitution of Serbia." Here, where I'm pointing, it says: "180 journalists and photo reporters."

In another photograph you see the moment of voting.

Q. Thank you, Mr. Jokanovic. I will not go through any more of these newspapers, although there are many of them, including interviews with Albanian officials, their photographs.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could you please play the third clip we have on the video recording showing the session of the Republic of Serbia parliament. I have been told that this is --

[Videotape played]

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] We have seen this. Next excerpt, please. This clip we have already seen. I was expecting the following clip.

JUDGE ROBINSON: When the clip is played, the interpreters should interpret if that is possible.

THE INTERPRETER: This is fast, and the interpreters do not have the transcripts.

JUDGE ROBINSON: I appreciate that, yes.

[Videotape played] ³⁴⁰⁶⁶

THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover] "Pursuant to Article 431 of the constitution of the Socialist Republic of Serbia and the Assembly of the Socialist Republic of Serbia at the session of Chambers of associated labour, Chamber of municipalities, and the socio-political Chamber of the 28th of March, 1989, adopts the decision to proclaim amendments 9 to 49 to the constitution of the Socialist Republic of Serbia. Hereby proclaimed are amendments 9 to 49 to the constitution of the Republic of Serbia, as adopted by the Assembly of the Republic of Serbia at the sessions of the Chambers of associated labour, the Chamber of municipalities, and the socio-political Chamber, and as agreed by the assemblies of provinces, including the province of Vojvodina at the joint session of all Chambers held on the 10th of March and the provincial parliament of Kosovo at the joint session of all Chambers held on the 23rd of March, 1989."

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Very well, Mr. Jokanovic. You had occasion to be reminded of this event by this video. You saw yourself in the first row. Who else did you recognise in the first row among the officials that you think are noteworthy?

A. I could see you. I could see Sinan Hasani. I could see the president of the federal government or, rather, the Prime Minister, Ante Markovic, as well as other prominent figures of our public life.

Q. Very well. Thank you. Please tell me, Mr. Jokanovic, after the parliament session of the 23rd of March, did anyone, either in newspapers or in public speeches or maybe in a non-public way, at any gathering at all, question the procedure and the adoption of decisions in Kosovo ³⁴⁰⁶⁷ regarding these amendments?

A. There were no such objections voiced. On the contrary, and we can see that in the documents of the League of Communists of Kosovo, it was considered a great victory of the progressive forces in Kosovo. It was considered to be a great victory of progressive forces over the separatists.

Q. But were there any objections at that session of the parliament of Kosovo?

A. No. I didn't hear any such objections, at least not before 1987 when a journalist from Kosovo, who I believe testified here, asked me about the course of that session and told me approximately something to the effect of the words in this indictment, and I answered him the same way as I testified under oath before this honourable Tribunal.

Q. Thank you. After the parliament session of the 23rd of March, you had talks with the delegation of the European parliament that visited Kosovo; is that correct?

A. Yes. A very high-placed delegation of the European parliament arrived. I received them and acquainted them with the general situation and with the progress made in Kosovo. I spoke to them about the constitutional amendments and the problems we are facing.

Q. We have to save time. Did they have any objections or observations? Did they question in any way the procedure in the course of that parliamentary session? Did they voice any problems they might have had about the amendments?

A. No. They had no objections, they had no questions as to the ³⁴⁰⁶⁸ course of the session. That was not in dispute at all. After that, I held a press conference for all the domestic and foreign journalists, and I answered a great series of questions, and none of the accredited journalists had any questions or doubts as to the work of the parliamentary session. The same is true of the European parliamentarians and all the future meetings.

Q. After the passage of the amendments, and I don't mean several minutes later when the session continued after the 20-minute break, I mean in the following weeks and months, did the parliament of Kosovo continue to operate normally?

A. It operated normally, and already in May I was re-elected speaker or president of the parliament of Kosovo for another one-year term.

Q. That was in May, because your term of office of one year had expired.

A. Yes. And that was two months after this session.

A. Yes. I was re-elected unanimously. At that same session, the member of the Presidency of Yugoslavia, Riza Sapundzija was re-elected by secret ballot. Two candidates were nominated for the Presidency of Kosovo. One of these candidates is not receive the necessary number of votes and was not elected into the Presidency. The Assembly continued to work normally and in June it adopted amendments to the constitution of Kosovo. These amendments to the Kosovo constitution harmonised the Kosovo constitution with the constitution of the Republic of Serbia and the amendments that had previously been adopted by the Federal Assembly.

Q. All right. What about this June session of the Kosovo parliament? ³⁴⁰⁶⁹ Did it have any problems, and how did it work?

A. It worked quite normally. Again, as usual, I held an introductory speech. I have reports to corroborate it here. The amendments were again passed unanimously by the same Assembly, the same deputies, just as happened at the previous session of the 23rd of March which only gave approval to the amendments.

Q. All right. Tell me, now, what happened, if you know, because after the expiry of your second term of office a new speaker of the parliament was elected, so if you know, tell us how the parliament continued to work in 1990. As far as I understand, until the end of your term of office, there were no problems.

A. That is correct. I thanked the deputies. I still have the speech that I held then. And after that, elections were held for the new parliament of Kosovo. The parliament of Kosovo was elected in a new composition. Sixty-four per cent of the citizens voted, and that parliament worked normally at the beginning, electing Djordje Bozovic as president. From December to June it worked normally. In June, very serious problems occurred in the work of the Assembly.

Q. Why?

A. I know that because at the time I was vice-president of the Serbian Assembly, and the president of the Assembly, Djordje Bozovic, talked to the president of the Serbian Assembly who then informed me, in view of the fact that I am from Kosovo, telling us that there were problems in the Assembly because a group of deputies wanted, outside of the agenda and beyond of the rules of procedure, to declare a declaration ³⁴⁰⁷⁰ on independence of Kosovo and the fact that Kosovo was a republic. So this was the position taken by one group of deputies. The other group of deputies opposed that. The normal working procedure was disrupted, and the president of the Assembly, Djordje Bozovic, had to -- had to disrupt the session on a number of occasions because there was a danger that clashes would erupt between the deputies. One set of deputies wanted to follow the agenda and the established procedure, whereas another set of deputies wanted to read out the declaration on the independence of Kosovo.

Q. Please tell us, who was in that group who wanted to read the declaration on the independence of Kosovo?

A. Well, I don't know. I was not there, I was not present. The official statements always identified them as a group of deputies who apparently read out this declaration in front of the Assembly building, in front of the entrance.

Q. All right. So you don't know how many people were in that group?

A. I was not in Kosovo at the time. I can give you secondhand information from the then president of the Kosovo Assembly who said that there were about 40 deputies in that group.

Q. All right. He said about 40 of them. And the total number of deputies was the same as when you were the president, 190?

A. Yes, 190 because the constitution was the same and I don't know exactly how many people were in that group.

Q. What was the cause for that reaction of those deputies?

A. Well, the cause was the situation in Yugoslavia. Yugoslavia started disintegrating already. Slovenia and Croatia had already declared ³⁴⁰⁷¹ their independence, and a group of these deputies in Kosovo thought it was the right moment for them to take the same path and to declare Kosovo an independent republic. They naturally picked a moment that was most advantageous for their causes.

Q. So this attempt of theirs to read the declaration on the steps outside the Assembly building took place after the event that you mentioned, the declaration of independence of Slovenia and Croatia?

A. Yes.

Q. So after they had announced their intention to secede.

A. Well, the intention of Slovenia to break away from Yugoslavia was clear. The situation was already such that federal organs were not functioning properly. Neither was the League of Communists. So the situation was very tense, and that kind of atmosphere was very beneficial to those who had the design of turning Kosovo into an independent republic.

Q. All right. So Djordje Bozovic, who was your successor in that post, who was the president of the Assembly after that, what did he do? He went and spoke to the president of the Serbian Assembly?

A. Yes, that's right. They had telephone contacts and other contacts. And then one day the president of the Assembly, with a large group of deputies, came to Belgrade. He demanded a meeting. He wanted a solution to be found, because he believed that that wasn't his responsibility alone; that was something that the republican organs had to deal with. And then a large meeting was organised, attended by the top leaders from Serbia, including a group of deputies from Kosovo. ³⁴⁰⁷² During that meeting, Djordje Bozovic briefed everyone on the problems. He said that the situation was abnormal, and he could not continue with his regular work, and as president of the Assembly, he could not allow the Kosovo to be declared a republic, and he did not want to be held responsible for that. He wanted instructions.

Q. What was my position regarding that?

A. I attended that meeting together with the president of the Assembly who took me along in view of the fact that I was from Kosovo. Other leaders from Serbia also attended the meeting, not just leaders from Assembly but also from other organs, and I can give you their names because I remember those people. Milo Nirminic [phoen], was there, Zoran Andjelkovic, and so on.

However, the deputies from Kosovo were persistent, including Djordje Bozovic. They wanted the Assembly to be dissolved temporarily. That was a key issue. And then Djordje Bozovic also wanted to inform the president of the Presidency - I believe you held that post at the time, I think you did - so you came and attended that meeting briefly. You were informed on what was going on, and your position was that they ought to go back to Pristina and use the rules of procedure, apply them to give the floor to those who wanted to speak, and those who were against the declaration had to use that procedure to speak, although you spoke very decisively, very firmly. Djordje Bozovic was somewhat anxious, and he stood up, and those others from Serbia who attended the meeting, they said, after your arrival, "Well, Djordje, perhaps you could still continue with the work." And Djordje said, "No. I'm not the president of the ³⁴⁰⁷³ Assembly any more," and you left the meeting, saying that the Assembly should go on with its work.

Q. However, the Assembly could not continue with its work.

A. No, not under normal, regular circumstances. Djordje Bozovic was still president of the Assembly, and the deputies officially demanded a temporary dissolution of the Assembly of Kosovo.

Q. So the session of the Assembly actually commenced.

A. It was scheduled, and it actually commenced, and the then deputy Stane Dolenc on behalf of the deputies who were against that move, condemned the conduct of the other group of deputies. He said that there was no other solution but to dissolve the Assembly. And then problems ensued, commotion, dissatisfaction of certain deputies, and then Djordje Bozovic again disrupted or brought the session to an end.

Q. Were any decisions adopted?

A. No. No decisions were adopted. Simply a demand was addressed to the Assembly of Serbia to dissolve the Kosovo Assembly.

Q. And did the Serbian Assembly adopt this demand? Did it approve it?

A. I wasn't present, so I couldn't tell you what was the result of the vote. The atmosphere was not a regular one. However, this demand was read out, and then a commotion ensued. The deputies wanted this to be forwarded to the Serbian Assembly, and it was.

Q. And what was the reaction of the Serbian Assembly when it received this demand?

A. In one of its sessions, which I did not attend for some private ³⁴⁰⁷⁴ reasons, the Serbian Assembly in this session held in the afternoon hours adopted the law on temporary dissolution of the Assembly of Kosovo and the Executive Council of Kosovo.

Q. What you just stated about the position of the Assembly and the deputies of the Kosovo Assembly, and then you said that the Serbian Assembly adopted the decision to dissolve the Kosovo Assembly temporarily.

A. Yes, that's right.

Q. Very well. What can you tell us about the so-called Kacanik constitution?

A. I'm very familiar with that term. It was frequently mentioned in the media. I went to that area frequently. Kacanik is a small town in Kosovo where an illegal session was held. Some deputies attended the session. I don't know exactly who attended it, but secondhand or thirdhand information indicate that the then vice-president of the Serbian Assembly chaired that session and the session was held there. Now, who exactly was present there and what exactly transpired there is something that nobody really knows. But at any rate, the press described that as an illegal gathering contrary to the Kosovo constitution, constitution of Serbia, constitution of Yugoslavia, and it was a mono-ethnic session. At the time, mono-ethnic decisions or decisions lacking the proper procedural requirements were considered invalid, especially if they were passed in violation of the constitution of Yugoslavia, constitution of Serbia, and constitution of Kosovo.

Q. So it was in violation of all of these constitutions. All right. And finally, please tell me briefly, what were your personal ³⁴⁰⁷⁵ relations with Albanians that you lived and worked with in Kosovo?

A. I was born, I grew up there. I was friends with Albanians. I played with them as a child. We went to each other's houses, went to school together. I have a lot of friends who are Albanian both when I was a child and later on. To this day, I continue my contacts with not an insignificant number of Albanians, mostly telephone contacts, but not with Albanians in the territory of Kosovo but, rather, in the territory of Central Serbia.

Q. Please tell us, what happened to your birth town, your birthplace, the village where you were born? What is the situation like there now?

A. Well, the situation is tragic. Prior to the arrival of KFOR, my village had 35 houses inhabited by Serbs, ten households of Roma residents. All of these houses were first looted and then destroyed so that nowadays there is not a single Serbian or Roma house left intact, including my own, although Albanian neighbours wanted to protect my house and some other houses in the village; however, that put themselves under risk. As they told me, they were threatened that they could be liquidated.

My friend, Albanian, sent me photographs of my house. So if you want me --

Q. Put it on the ELMO. As I understood it, they first protected your houses, and then after that they were powerless to do anything else?

A. After that, they were powerless. Not only my house. They wanted to protect the house of my relative Bane Petrovic, who had helped some people there, protected them from a paramilitary group, and they even gave ³⁴⁰⁷⁶ guarantees to Bane Petrovic, telling him to remain there in the village. However, the guarantees lasted only some 15 days, and after that the same neighbours told him, "We cannot protect you any longer." So he moved out. And in the meantime, a friend of mine was also killed, Mr. Radenovic.

Q. All right. Just put it on the ELMO, these photographs, and this will bring the examination to a conclusion.

So this is your house in the village of Grmovo in Kosovo.

A. Yes, my house as it looked before and after the arrival of KFOR. This is my house. This is my house as it looked, and nowadays there is nothing left. Nothing remains of my house. The church has also been destroyed, and a lot of monuments desecrated as well. However, this was not done initially, at the very beginning. Initially, only three Serb houses were set on fire, the houses belonging to those who bore arms, in the police or in the army. And only after some 15 days, as Albanian neighbours told us, slowly they started taking off construction material, roof tiles, doors, windows, and so on, everything that could be detached, and then they continued destroying the houses, whereas the church was blown up by an expert.

Q. Thank you, Mr. Jokanovic. I have no further questions.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Jokanovic, where do you now live?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I have the status in our terminology of a temporarily displaced person. Therefore, in reality, I'm a refugee, currently living in Belgrade. My two sons were in Pristina, however, they live in Belgrade now as well, as do my other relatives who are dispersed ³⁴⁰⁷⁷ throughout Serbia, living in various collective shelters and various outbuildings, and all of them used to be quite wealthy people before.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Nice, we are going to deal with the exhibits from the examination-in-chief now.

MR. NICE: Your Honour, yes. There's, of course, the issue of the transcript, which I understood the accused was going to take the witness to as to some extracts. We haven't returned to that at all, but that's a matter for him.

JUDGE KWON: First we have to deal with the records of political meetings of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia and Kosovo. Should we give the number?

THE REGISTRAR: The number is D253.

JUDGE KWON: That will be marked for identification until the translation is done.

And the next, tape recording of the joint session. Transcript, yes.

THE REGISTRAR: That will be marked as D254.

JUDGE KWON: And next we have two news clips, first from Politika and second from Rilindja.

THE REGISTRAR: D255.

JUDGE KWON: And then video clips.

THE REGISTRAR: Video clips, D256.

JUDGE KWON: And finally, the photos.

THE REGISTRAR: The photos will be marked as D257.

JUDGE KWON: Is there anything else you want to exhibit? ³⁴⁰⁷⁸

THE REGISTRAR: Your Honour, would you like the ID admitted as well?

JUDGE ROBINSON: I don't know. Mr. Milosevic, do you want the ID, the identification, admitted?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] If you believe it to be useful, useful evidence.

JUDGE ROBINSON: It's for you to determine, not for us.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Let it be admitted then.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.

THE REGISTRAR: Okay. So the ID will be marked as D258.

JUDGE KWON: Mr. Jokanovic, are you ready to hand over the photos as well as the ID? Or you can just hand over a photocopy of the ID.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, if possible, I would like to hand over a photocopy. And if you believe it to be important, I'm ready to give up my ID and even these photographs which are important to me. They're a memento. Because once you lose your home place, then you've lost a lot.

JUDGE ROBINSON: We can have copies made of them.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson, since the witness had some other documents pertaining to a large number of meetings on constitutional changes and from which you could see how broad this activity was, how free the discussions were, what was discussed, this is a whole set of documents. So if you believe that this would be of some use to you, I believe that they could be admitted as exhibits. I did not have time to deal with them in detail because I simply -- my time simply went ³⁴⁰⁷⁹ by much faster than I expected.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, that's not the procedure. We can't just admit documents like that. You have to introduce them through the witness.

MR. NICE: Your Honour, there are a large number of them, and of course I was interested to know to which particular parts of them, if any, we were going in order that I could deal with them. As far as I'm concern, I obviously -- it's a matter for the Chamber and the accused how long he's allowed in evidence with any particular witness.

JUDGE ROBINSON: No, we won't admit those. Mr. Nice, you may begin your cross-examination.

MR. NICE: Yes. For my part, if it were convenient for the Chamber, I would prefer to start tomorrow because I was expecting to deal with a large number of additional documents and the documents we would wish to put to the witness have yet to be marshalled and prepared in an easily usable way. If you wish me to start today, of course I can and I can put a couple of documents on the overhead projector.

[Trial Chamber confers]

JUDGE ROBINSON: All right. I think you may start, Mr. Nice.

MR. NICE: As you please. Cross-examined by Mr. Nice:

Q. We've heard a lot about publicity from you, in local press, and we've heard a lot about allegations of bias in Western press. So I'm afraid we don't have this copied in the way I would most prefer.

MR. NICE: May this document go on the overhead projector, please. ³⁴⁰⁸⁰ Thank you very much. First page. We're going to go through it all. And Your Honour, what I would suggest is, if you allow me this indulgence, we'll just look at this document today and then I'll produce it tomorrow in such form as is convenient for all of these exhibits.

Q. Mr. Jokanovic what we have here, and I'll read from my version, is something from the Washington Post of November the 29th, 1986. And it includes within it --

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Milosevic.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Is it Mr. Nice's obligation, if he wishes to submit a document, to also provide a copy for me and not only provide a copy for the witness?

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Nice, you gave an explanation.

MR. NICE: Yes.

JUDGE ROBINSON: I think he's going to produce that tomorrow. In the circumstances, we can proceed. You can see it on the -- on your monitor, Mr. Milosevic.

MR. NICE:

Q. Now, Mr. Jokanovic, this report, as we're going to discover, includes the product of an interview with yourself, but I'd like you, please, to help us with the general picture painted here for November of 1986.

MR. NICE: I'm so sorry. Will Your Honours give me one minute. In order that things can be done sequentially, I'd rather start with the one of 1982. It's the same topic, that is, how Kosovo's problems were ³⁴⁰⁸¹ being described externally. You can put mine on and I'll read it on the screen. Thank you.

I'll read, I hope, slowly enough. It comes from Pristina. Can you just show me the top of the document so that we can see the headline and byline. No, right at the top first. Thank you very much.

Q. New York Times, July the 12th, 1982. "Exodus of Serbians stirs province in Yugoslavia" by Marvine Howe. Dateline Pristina. "Danilo Krstic and his family are hardworking wheat and tobacco farmers, Serbs who get along with their Albanian neighbours. "'You have to love the place where you live to stay on the land here,' Marko Krstic, the eldest son, told visitors to the farm at Bec, a few miles from the Albanian border. There have been no serious troubles between Serbians and Albanians in Bec, but Serbs in some of the neighbouring villages have reportedly been harassed by Albanians and have packed up and left the region.

"The exodus of Serbs is admittedly one of the main problems that the authorities have to content with in Kosovo, an autonomous province of Yugoslavia, inhabited largely by Albanians.

"Rioting Brought Awareness. "Last year's riots --" so that would be the 1981 riots, Mr. Jokanovic -- "in which nine people were killed, shocked not only the troubled province of Kosovo but also the entire country into an awareness of the problems of this most backward part of Yugoslavia, which is made up of many ethnic groups. ³⁴⁰⁸² "In June a 43-year-old Serb, Miodrag Saric, was shot and killed by an Albanian neighbour, Ded Krasniqi, in a village near Djakovica, 40 miles south-west of Pristina. According to the official Yugoslavia press agency TANJUG, it was the second murder of a Serb by an Albanian in Kosovo this year. The dispute reportedly started with a quarrel over damage done to a field belonging to the Saric family.

"The local political and security bodies condemned the murder as 'a grave criminal act' that could have serious repercussions, according to the press agency. Five members of the Krasniqi family have been arrested and investigations are continuing.

"The authorities have responded at various levels to violence in Kosovo, clearly trying to avoid antagonising the Albanian majority. Besides firm security measures, action has been taken to speed political, educational, and economic changes."

There's then a short headline, "Past Errors Acknowledged." "Privately, some officials acknowledge that the rise of Albanian nationalism in a society that is based on the principle of equality of nationalities is the result of past errors - at first neglect and discrimination, and more recently failure to act against divisive forces or even to recognise them."

I'll pause there. We're going to look at the rest of this article which includes your own contributions to it, but there is a suggestion here of recognition of past errors, neglect and discrimination against Albanians.

Do you accept that this is a fair description of the position at ³⁴⁰⁸³ the time?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The question is not proper, Mr. Robinson.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Why?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Because neglect and discrimination is not being spoken about vis-a-vis the Albanians but vis-a-vis the Serbs. This is something that is being ignored.

MR. NICE: It is not for the accused --

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, the question is quite legitimate and proper. The witness is to answer it.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. Nice, if you could just repeat your question briefly so that I'm sure to understand it properly.

MR. NICE:

Q. Certainly. Of the last paragraph I've read to you, where it describes an acknowledgement by officials at the rise of Albanian nationalism was based -- arose in part as a result of past errors, at first neglect and discrimination - I'll come to the last bit later - do you accept that neglect and discrimination, and I'll be neutral, discrimination against one group or another, was a cause of the rise of nationalism?

A. This article and what you are asking me now refers to mistakes in the past by Albanians committed against Serbs. So this is the spirit of the article. Mistakes from the past are discussed here, because in the past Albanian nationalism was not dealt with, which made it possible for it to spread. In 1981, this was the assessment of official organs of the ³⁴⁰⁸⁴ province and the federation, and they drew the consequences, and those who were in power were punished in the province because of discrimination and the exodus of Serbs. I think that these are the mistakes that are being talked about here.

Q. Very well. It goes on, if you remember this paragraph, to say: "More recently, a failure to act against divisive forces or even to recognise them."

Now, "forces" are in the plural, "divisive" is the description. What do you say? Just one divisive force or were there more than one?

A. The demonstrations themselves in 1981, as I have already said, considerably disrupted inter-ethnic relations, and there was a cooling in relations between neighbours, between the different groups. Albanian nationalists, whose objective was an ethnically pure Kosovo, felt that it was favourable for them to disrupt these relations and to cause conflicts.

Q. So again, it's all the Albanians' fault, is it? I just want to be quite sure what your position is and whether you think this newspaper's got it right.

A. As I understand it, this article adopts a realistic approach towards the position of Serbs, the killing of Serbs, and the errors committed by the Kosovo leadership as well as the causes which led to these large demonstrations.

Q. The killing of Serbs by 1982, the time of this article, yes? You're saying that that was already well under way, was it?

A. I said in my testimony that there were already killings. There ³⁴⁰⁸⁵ were also other forms of pressure. And I cited in my testimony these very same examples that are given in the article.

Q. Read on a little, then. "The nationalists have a two-point platform, according to Becir Hoti, an executive secretary of the Communist Party of Kosovo, first to establish what they call an ethnically clean Albanian republic, and then the merger with Albania to form a Greater Albania.

"Mr. Hoti, an Albanian, expressed concern over political pressures that were forcing Serbs to leave Kosovo. What is important now, he said, is to establish a climate of security and create confidence." Next page, please. Thank you very much. If we can go to the top of the page. Or if the -- thank you very much.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Nice, I should say this should be the last question.

MR. NICE: Thank you very much.

Q. "The migration of Serbs is no ordinary problem, because Kosovo is the heartland of Serbian history, culture, and religion. Serbs have been in this region since the seventh century, long before they founded their own independent dynasty."

And then this: "Fifty-seven thousand have left the region. Some 57.000 Serbs have left Kosovo in the last decade and the number increased considerably after the riots of March and April last year, according to Vukasin Jokanovic, another executive secretary of the Kosovo party." Well, that's you, isn't it, Mr. Jokanovic?

A. Yes. ³⁴⁰⁸⁶

Q. And your evidence -- not your evidence, your contribution on this topic to the newspaper at this stage was that the riots of the previous year, which you say were all Albanian separatist inspired, drove some 57 -- no, not 57.000 Serbs but drove a number of Serbs out of the community; is that right?

A. That's probably what I said. The number of those who moved out is probably much greater over a longer period, but this is probably the figure that I gave at the time. I cannot remember this interview. Becir Hoti, by the way, is a person that I know, and what he is describing was the actual state of affairs at the time, just as it was what I was saying. He was an Albanian, I was a Serb, we were implementing the same policy.

MR. NICE: Thank you very much. Well, Your Honour, we'll come back to this tomorrow. If I can have that version back, then we will provide this and the other open-source material that we'll be relying on in part in a compendious form that will be easy to handle.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Jokanovic, we're going to adjourn now. We're going to adjourn for the day, and we'll resume tomorrow morning at 9.00 a.m.

--- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.49 p.m., to be reconvened on Thursday, the 2nd day of

December, 2004, at 9.00 a.m.