³⁹⁸⁹²

Thursday, 26 May 2005

[Open session]

[The accused entered court]

[The witness entered court]

--- Upon commencing at 9.04 a.m.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Milosevic.

WITNESS: OBRAD STEVANOVIC [Resumed]

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

Q. [No interpretation]

JUDGE ROBINSON: We're not having any translation.

THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters cannot hear the speaker either.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Is it all right now?

THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters note yes.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. General, what do you know about the killing of civilians in Mitrovica on the 15th of May, 1999?

A. I know that on that day in Mitrovica two or three civilians were killed by members of the reserve force of the unit for special operations. According to what I know, it was first identified as a case with NN perpetrators, perpetrators unknown; and later on, through police work, the perpetrators were identified, a criminal report was filed against them, they were arrested and handed over to the appropriate judicial authorities.

JUDGE ROBINSON: General, were you there? ³⁹⁸⁹³

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Well, then, you must let us know how you got your information. That enables us better to determine what weight to attach to it, and Mr. Milosevic knows that.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Please look at tab 171. Is the criminal report that you referred to contained in that tab? Criminal report. You say that the killing took place on the 15th, that it was established that the perpetrator was unknown, and that later light was shed on it. Can we see that the criminal report is dated the 19th of May?

A. Yes, in this tab 171. The SUP in Kosovska Mitrovica sent the criminal report to the district public prosecutor on the 19th of May, and then we see enclosed a copy of the criminal report itself on a few pages, specifically five pages.

Q. Since that happened on the 15th and the criminal report was already on the 19th, that means that within those four days the perpetrator was found and the criminal report was filed?

A. Yes. The perpetrator was found very quickly, and the criminal report was filed as well.

MR. NICE: No translation of this document, I think.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. There is also a decision here, a decision on detention.

A. Yes, that's right, within that same tab. There are two decisions --

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic. General, please wait. ³⁹⁸⁹⁴ There's no translation. We must make a decision as to how that is to be dealt with.

Mr. Milosevic, how many pages do you intend to rely on in this untranslated document?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, it could be placed on the ELMO, the first page of the criminal report, and then the description of the crime is not really needed. After that, in the same tab, there is a decision on detention. The form is the regular police form used.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Very well. Let the first page be placed on the ELMO.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. General, you said that the killing took place on the 15th of May, and what's the date of the criminal report?

A. It can be seen on the criminal report here the 19th of May, 1999.

Q. Who is the criminal report addressed to?

A. The district public attorney of Kosovska Mitrovica.

Q. Who sent it?

A. The Secretariat of the Interior of Kosovska Mitrovica.

Q. Are the names of the accused persons mentioned here?

A. Yes. Veselinovic Goran, and number 2, Todosijevic Dragan; and it can be seen that both of them are in detention.

Q. All right. From the criminal report we can see that they are both already arrested and that that is when the charges were filed. And what follows?

A. That they committed a killing in accordance with Article 47, ³⁹⁸⁹⁵ paragraph 2 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Serbia. Around 1700 hours in the street of Ivo Andric --

Q. We don't need to proceed. Does this tab also contain a decision on their detention?

A. Yes.

Q. Can you place it on the ELMO.

A. I can.

Q. Is this the regular form for this kind of decision?

A. Yes. Also, the Secretariat of the Interior in Kosovska Mitrovica on the 17th of May, and we can see that these two perpetrators are to be placed on remand.

Q. All right. And what does it say? What is the crime committed?

A. Murder.

Q. The next decision is the same, isn't it?

A. Yes.

Q. That's why we're not going to put it on the ELMO. Does it have signatures, numbers, dates, et cetera?

A. Yes, including the signatures of the perpetrators that they received this decision.

Q. Oh, that they received this decision.

A. Yes.

Q. On the 15th the event happened, on the 17th they were arrested, on the 19th charges were filed.

What do you know about the killing of civilians in Orahovac on the 9th of May, 1999? ³⁹⁸⁹⁶

A. I had also been informed that on that day a killing had been committed of two civilians, at least, and after that, when the crime was fully investigated, I was informed by the people in Prizren that the perpetrators were an active member of the police force and a reserve member -- a member of the reserve police force.

Q. Can you please put the criminal report on the ELMO.

A. I can.

Q. The two killings took place on the 9th.

A. I think that both took place on the 9th.

Q. All right. The criminal report was filed on the 15th.

A. Yes. But this criminal report --

MR. NICE: I have --

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Tab 173.

A. Tab 173.

JUDGE ROBINSON: 173, no translation.

MR. NICE: Your Honour, it's going to be very difficult to deal with these documents. I don't know, first of all, what the accused is attempting to prove through them.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Let me just ask him. I was going to ask. What does this go to, Mr. Milosevic? Is it to show that the police acted properly in carrying out investigations and making arrests, or does it go to a specific incident in the indictment?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I want to show on the basis of these documents that the police did their work efficiently. You can see that ³⁹⁸⁹⁷ the perpetrators of crimes are apprehended within a few days only. Also, these perpetrators were members of the police force. Since they were found within only a few days, obviously the police did not hesitate at all to act in accordance with the law as far as its own members were concerned.

May I draw your attention to the fact that this is mid-May 1999. The NATO aggression was at its height, and also the clash with the KLA. So even under all these circumstances, the police was working very efficiently. Otherwise, yesterday you refused to admit those documents that have to do with the NATO bombing, the bridge in Luzane. I have just one more reason to add to you in favour of admitting it. You can see there that the police identically investigated on-site crimes committed by NATO and crimes committed by anyone else. You can see quite clearly the pattern of police work in terms of on-site investigations and everything else that sheds light on a crime committed. It's not only that NATO was accused of having committed this but the pattern of policework was exactly the same in case of dealing with all crimes, especially those involving loss of life.

JUDGE ROBINSON: I take that, Mr. Milosevic, as a motion for reconsideration. We are more familiar with such a motion coming from the Prosecutor. We will have regard to it, but I make no ruling on that now. Well, we now know why you're leading the evidence. What's your next question?

In relation to tab 173, which is not translated, we may place that on the -- we could place that on the ELMO, the section that you wish to ³⁹⁸⁹⁸ refer to.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. General, have you got it in front of you?

A. Yes, on the overhead projector.

Q. That's a criminal report?

A. Yes, that's right. Against perpetrators unknown, because on the 15th of May, there was no knowledge as to the identity of the perpetrators.

Q. What can be seen on the basis of this document?

A. The next document is a supplement to the criminal report and it shows that the crime was fully investigated and that the perpetrators were found. I can place that on the ELMO too.

So the date here is the 21st of May.

Q. That is to say six days after the criminal report was filed.

A. Yes, that's right.

Q. Six days after a criminal report was filed against perpetrators unknown.

A. Yes.

Q. Does it say here that this is a supplement to the criminal report?

A. Yes.

Q. And it can be seen now that the crime was fully investigated and that the perpetrators were found, Boban Petkovic and Simic, I think his first name is Djordje, if I can read it well. And it can be seen that they are the persons who perpetrated the previously registered crime. Further on in this tab there are decisions on detention? ³⁹⁸⁹⁹

A. Yes, that's right, for both perpetrators in detention, and also an order to the prison administration to take them into prison. This is one decision on remanding them into custody.

Q. They're both identical --

A. Yes.

Q. -- in terms of form and substance?

A. Yes. And these again are two decisions instructing prison authorities to admit them.

Q. Very well. What knowledge do you have, if any, about killings of civilians in Zegra near Gnjilane?

A. I had information from daily reports about these killings. Two civilians, I believe, were killed and the perpetrators of this crime were members of the army of Yugoslavia.

Q. In tabs 175 and 176, can we find documents related to official action with regard to these events?

A. In tab 176 we see the criminal report filed and decisions to place in remand.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Nice.

MR. NICE: We're moving at some speed and there was a reference to the next document, but I take it that 174 is not being covered at all. We're moving straight on to 175.

JUDGE ROBINSON: I would take that too.

MR. NICE: Thank you. And I must repeat the obvious, that even though these reports may be peripheral to the allegations -- not peripheral but not central to the allegations in the indictment, it is ³⁹⁹⁰⁰ essential, if I'm to deal with them properly, that I have translated versions and, what's more, have the time to consider them. And without translated versions, I may be -- I'll do my best but I may be quite unable to deal with these documents in any satisfactory way in cross-examination.

JUDGE ROBINSON: We'll deal with that when the time arrives if you're in any way prejudiced, Mr. Nice.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. General, in tabs 175 and 176 -- let me take only 176, because the other one contains just a report. The other one contains a whole collection of documents. Could you tell me what they represent?

A. The first document in this tab is a document from the SUP in Gnjilane, attached to which is a criminal report submitted to the military prosecutor in Pristina.

Q. What is the date?

A. 2nd of April.

Q. When did this killing happen?

A. On the 31st of March, 1999.

Q. All right. Kindly place these documents on the overhead projector one by one and explain each one of them.

A. I don't know if I'm placing them well. So this is the document of the Secretariat of the Interior in Gnjilane, dated 2nd of April, addressed to the military public prosecutor in Pristina, and it concerns perpetrators of the criminal act of murder.

Q. The next document.

A. The next one is the criminal report that was attached to the ³⁹⁹⁰¹ previous document.

Q. Again on the usual form?

A. Yes, the usual form. The date is the 1st of April, and this is a criminal report for the crime of murder. It has several pages.

Q. Does it list all those involved in the investigation as well as the suspects?

A. The perpetrators are named as well as the victims.

Q. This criminal report has a total of four pages.

A. Yes.

Q. Does it contain all the data, all the information that the police managed to collect?

A. Yes. Every information is provided together with the criminal report, everything known about perpetrators and victims.

Q. Then follows some determinations, five determinations to place persons on remand.

A. There are five because there are five perpetrators. This determination is again written according to the usual form for every perpetrator individually.

Q. And here it says, "Due to a well-based suspicion that he or she committed the criminal act of murder," et cetera, et cetera.

A. Yes.

Q. Thank you, General. General, how do you explain these criminal acts committed by members of the police that we have just seen?

A. Well, the police took action regardless of who the perpetrators were. It is obvious that these crimes committed by the police are cases ³⁹⁹⁰² of excess, incidents that happen -- happened beyond any orders, beyond any official policy or rules.

Q. And how did the local policemen react to such criminal acts committed by their colleagues?

A. Every criminal act was treated in the same way.

Q. And what was the attitude of the police leadership and the leadership of the state regarding the treatment of criminal acts in Kosovo and Metohija?

A. Everywhere and at all times it was always perfectly clear that it is the policy of the state authorities to have all crimes investigated as soon as possible and to hand over perpetrators to the judiciary.

Q. Was there any difference in the treatment of criminal acts committed by members of the police? Was there any pressure exerted one way or another?

A. I know of only one such case related to the killing of this Bljakcori family. The police was under a lot of pressure to have the policeman concerned released because the citizenry was convinced that they had not committed the crime.

Q. And did the police give in in the face of -- faced with such pressure?

A. There was not enough -- there was enough evidence that the policemen did commit that criminal act, and despite all the pressure exerted by the citizens, they were kept in detention.

Q. Do you have any information - because we will have to establish this, it seems - how the procedure went on after the perpetrators were ^{39903 BLANK PAGE 39904} arrested, after criminal charges were filed? Do you have any information how the procedure continued before the courts?

A. I was not able to follow that in any detail. We can see that some of these crimes were committed in the course of May. As of the 26th of May, I was already getting ready for the negotiations in Kumanovo and I had some personal commitments and at that time I dealt only with issues related to Kumanovo agreement. Later on, as you know, the police withdrew from Kosovo, local and effective control by the police was lost, and the work of the judiciary was slowed down on these cases, and as I explained yesterday, the procedure is still undergoing before the courts in Serbia.

Q. Well, complex cases related to murder are always lengthy, but they are still live cases?

A. Yes. They are still being worked on.

Q. As long as we have jurisdiction. Let me just remind you, General, of what you said yesterday, namely that we should find out what happens before the courts. That's something Judge Robinson said. I have here a page provided to me by my assistant, Mr. Rakic. That's Q298306. It says: "Could the president of Yugoslavia hold a court accountable if the court failed to properly apply given and military laws?"

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, what is this all about? You appear to be making a speech.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I just quoted a constitutional expert of the other side in response to your remark that it is necessary to present evidence on what the courts did. ³⁹⁹⁰⁵

THE INTERPRETER: Interpreters note that we did not manage to interpret everything that Mr. Milosevic quoted.

JUDGE ROBINSON: We won't engage in that legal discussion now. Proceed with your questioning.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right, Mr. Robinson.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Tell me, General, did members of the international force in Kosovo and Metohija participate in any incidents involving loss of life that you know of?

A. According to the information I obtained while I was personally present in Pristina during the application of the Kumanovo agreement, I know of at least one case, and this documentation contains reports on many more cases.

Q. Are these incidents described in tabs 195 to 201?

A. Yes, those are the incidents. The one I know about is described in 196. That one I have direct knowledge about.

Q. You say "direct knowledge." You must have been in some way directly involved.

JUDGE BONOMY: Can I ask the relevance of this, particularly since it looks as though we're talking about a period after 1999.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The relevance of this lies in the comparison. Namely, if it happens that a policeman on our force kills somebody, he is immediately apprehended and turned over to the judiciary. However, if the same happens with a member of the international force, no action is taken. I suppose that that is relevant. If it is irrelevant, ³⁹⁹⁰⁶ then it is up to you to prove it.

JUDGE ROBINSON: It is not relevant. Move on to another topic.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson -- no.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. General, how did the NATO aggression affect the efforts of the state authorities and the police force to act lawfully, to investigate criminal acts, and to enforce the law in general?

A. The NATO aggression adversely affected the efficiency of policework in all areas, especially in such incidents involving murders which need to be investigated on site. That couldn't be done effectively if you are constantly under fire or in danger.

Q. But in your opinion, in your assessment, despite the difficult security conditions, did the police act with maximum efficiency possible?

A. Yes. The police did their best even though they were in danger of being killed or wounded in the process.

Q. To what extent was it possible for the police to continue working in Kosovo and Metohija to investigate crimes that have been recorded when they lost jurisdiction?

A. The loss of jurisdiction seriously affected work on those 150 cases that we've mentioned, but there is still in our possession enough material and enough evidence to continue working on them should we regain the ability to do so.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, I've been wanting to say something about your construction of Article 7(3) responsibility. Article 7(3) responsibility relates, in my view, to the crimes with which you have been ³⁹⁹⁰⁷ charged. For example, count 1 charges you with deportation, count 2 with other inhumane acts, counts 3 and 4 with murder. Article 7(3) responsibility means that in relation to those counts you were -- you had a position of superior authority and crimes were committed and you failed to take the necessary and reasonable measures to prevent such acts or to punish the perpetrators. So that evidence which relates generally to the conduct of the police force and which generally goes to show that the police force acts properly in investigating crimes and arresting offenders is not very helpful to the specific charge in relation to Article 7(3), because that responsibility attaches and relates to the crimes with which you have been charged in the -- in the indictment. It may, it may have some relevance in going to show that the police had a history, a culture of proper investigation and proper conduct, and you may be asking us to draw an inference from that, but it is not really central to the charge of liability under Article 7(3). I'd like to hear Mr. Kay on that, and Mr. Nice.

MR. KAY: Yes, Article 7(3), criminal responsibility for the acts and conduct of subordinates. Of course it is count specific and the Court will be looking at the counts and how they are dealt with in relation to liability to this accused. However, the accused, if it is found that crimes were committed in relation to the counts, if he was able to show that there was generally a system in place, a constitutional system, a lawful system, remembering that the crimes go from the bottom up, if he is able to show that such a system existed, and it was reasonable, given the light of the circumstances and facts as known by him, to believe that that ³⁹⁹⁰⁸ system was working properly, then in our submission he could not be held criminally responsible for crimes committed on the ground by others if he has taken the best steps and best measures to ensure that protections are in place for the civil population.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Because the system is in place.

MR. KAY: Because the system is in place. Everyone would have to accept that crimes can be committed. Crimes can be committed, and it's the duty of the government to have in place a proper procedure to protect the civilian population. If he can show that that was in place constitutionally and it operated so that, as far as he knew, matters were being dealt with properly, he is able to show that it would have been unreasonable to expect him to know or to have been able to prevent those crimes that were committed.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you, Mr. Kay. Mr. Nice, if you wish.

MR. NICE: I don't wish to add anything to that. Thank you.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Very well, Mr. Milosevic, continue.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. General, I'm going to ask you a few questions now with regard to the sanitisation of the terrain. The concept of sanitisation of the terrain is brought into -- is linked with the persons that lost their lives. Now, what does this term mean, "mop-up" or "sanitisation of the terrain"? Could you explain that to us.

A. Mop-up of the terrain, or sanitisation, is a well-known military concept. Other terms might be used in other languages. ³⁹⁹⁰⁹

THE INTERPRETER: Interpreters note that in B/C/S the word is "asanacija."

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] But "sanitisation" means the burying of corpses after battle in the legally prescribed manner, as well as livestock that were killed, and generally cleaning up the area from mines, radioactive devices, chemical devices and dealing with the debris and blockage of roads, the aim of which is to protect the people, to ensure their safety and security and normal functioning of life in general and communications and moving around the area.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. General, in tab 88 we have a page from the Military Encyclopedia, published in 1970, and under the provision mop-up or sanitisation of the terrain we find almost two columns of explanation as to what the term means, the concept and the word means.

A. Could you repeat the number of the tab, please? I didn't hear it.

Q. The tab number is 88. This is a Military Encyclopedia. As I said, it was published in 1970. Volume 1, page 266.

A. That's right. I've found that tab. For all intents and purposes it's a copy of page 266 of the Military Encyclopedia, published in the 1970s -- or, rather, 1970.

Q. Does it say more or less what we have just explained?

A. Well, it's set out at greater length but I think the substance of it and a precis of it is what I said.

Q. It says: "Clearing up of the battlefield asanacija bojista [from Latin sanus healthy] taking measures in organised manner to remove ³⁹⁹¹⁰ corpses, biological waste and anything that might become a source of infectious diseases on the front (an area where combat operations are conducted) or in populated areas." And then it goes on to explain that apart from the preventive and health measures, they also include the rest.

A. Yes, the other measures that are taken.

Q. That's right, the other measures. Mention is made about the new Geneva Convention in 1906 and the Second Hague Convention in 1907 binds all warring parties after battles to find, identify and bury the dead after every battle, make a list of their belongings, and send them to their armies. And it speaks about the medical service and so on and so forth. So we have the regulations of Second Hague Convention 1907 and the Geneva Convention 1906. Registration, records, and so on and so forth later on in the text.

Now, tell me this, please, General: We see how this is defined, how the concept is defined in the Military Encyclopedia. You have given us a brief explanation too. Now, tell us this: How did the police act during the war? What did it do with human corpses?

A. The police during the war always, whenever it was possible, undertook the same measures it would undertake in peacetime. That, in practical terms, means that in events which resulted in death during the war, the police did more than the term "clearing up of the battlefield" would require.

Q. How do you mean more?

A. Well, in the sense of carrying out on-site investigations, crime technology investigation, taking papillary line prints in order to ³⁹⁹¹¹ identify -- or the identity of the body.

Q. General, does "asanacija," clearing up the battlefield, mean covering up a crime?

A. Of course it does not.

Q. Now, the cases that were mentioned, the transportation of bodies from Kosovo to the territory of central Serbia, for example, several hundred kilometres away from Kosovo and burying them, does that come under the concept of asanacija, clearing up the battlefield, and does it fall into the general practice of the police and the army in any way when corpses are found?

A. Events of that kind do not come under the concept of clearing up the battlefield and they have nothing to do with the concept of clearing up the battlefield and sanitisation of the terrain as I explained it a moment ago.

Q. Now, did you have any explanation at all for that, or do you have an explanation for what appeared over there?

A. For a long time I did not believe that it was true at all. I have absolutely no explanation for what happened because it is quite illogical that somebody would dig up some people who had already lost their lives in order to bury them so far away from Kosovo and Metohija. In my opinion, that is still a great mystery.

Q. Who could have had a motive? Who could have wanted to do anything like that?

A. Well, the person with the motive was anybody who had the intention to prove alleged crimes and ascribe them to the country and not somebody ³⁹⁹¹² who wanted to cover them up at all from anyone outside.

Q. Batajnica is mentioned here. Now, the area around Batajnica, and you at the time occupied a high post on the police force, what is this area around Batajnica? What does it represent? What is it?

A. Well, where the mass grave was located is the centre of special anti-terrorist units. That's the centre and their base. It was the base for the Belgrade special anti-terrorist unit. Of course, in wartime it was not under the control of the police because all the police forces in war were used by reserve locations.

Q. So you mean that during the war the area wasn't used by the police and it wasn't under the control of the police force; is that right?

A. Yes, that's right. And perhaps it's even more important to state that the first NATO bombs hit the Novi Sad centre of the special units and the Pristina centre for special units and it was quite illogical and unexpected that the Batajnica special units centre should not be hit by a NATO bomb.

Q. Are you saying that NATO did not bomb the centre, the police centre in Batajnica, throughout the war?

A. Yes, that's right. That's quite correct.

Q. Do you have an explanation for that, because NATO bombed Batajnica a great deal.

A. NATO hit a large number of MUP facilities and buildings, in my personal opinion, at the airport in Batajnica. Most of them fell, however, the centre was not hit although we expected it to be targeted and hit the very first day. ³⁹⁹¹³

Q. And it was never targeted?

A. No, never.

Q. Thank you. I'm going to ask you a few questions now which have to do with crimes against human dignity and morale -- morals. I'd like to draw your attention to the fact that in point 5(c), paragraph 68, those crimes are mentioned. They are crimes of rape, et cetera, and it describes the kind of practice that exists, that is described. Now, did the police register such crimes against human dignity, et cetera, morality, et cetera?

A. The police did register those crimes just as it registered all other types of crime, not only in Kosovo and Metohija but the territory of Serbia as a whole.

Q. The documents with respect to these crimes, are they to be found in tabs 177 to 194?

A. Yes, that's right. Those are the tabs.

Q. Let's just find the binder. Unfortunately, there's so many binders that I can't seem to find it now, but would you please extract those documents so that we can take a look at them.

A. I'm not getting the interpretation.

Q. The binder is binder number 5.

A. It's tab 177.

Q. I have a note here that they are to be found in tabs 177 to 194.

A. That's right.

Q. That makes it 17 tabs, roughly. Could you tell us the main characteristics of the procedure with respect to crimes of personal and ³⁹⁹¹⁴ moral degradation, et cetera, what the police did?

A. In tab 177 -- may I proceed?

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, you may.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Yes. Explain that to us, please.

A. Thank you. Now, in tab 177 we have a summary of the crimes of personal and moral degradation committed from the 18th of July, 1998, to the 31st of May, 1999. And there were a total of 17 such crimes. Of course, this refers to Kosovo and Metohija.

JUDGE KWON: General, could you first of all who summarised -- identify who summarised this, who made this summary.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The summary comes from the Ministry of the Interior, and as a supplement in continuation of the tab we have the case files for each of these events, each of them.

JUDGE KWON: Proceed.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] So let me repeat: We have a total of 17 events during the period of time that I read out, and from tab 178 onwards for each of these events there is at least one document attached. And what I could also add is this: Throughout my time in Kosovo, or our time in Kosovo, we did not receive information or gain the impression that crimes of this kind were happening more frequently than the rate -- than the normal rate in the republic. So they didn't immediately spring to mind or come -- they weren't -- there wasn't an obvious increase in the number of crimes of this kind but in all the cases the police took the necessary steps; identification of the perpetrator and filing a criminal ^{39915 BLANK PAGE 39916} report if the perpetrators were uncovered, and in most cases the perpetrators were found.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Here under (c), which I quoted, 5 (c), 68 5 (c) "Sexual assault of Kosovo Albanians, especially women, by the FRY forces and Serbian forces, including sexual assault in paragraphs 57 and 63." Paragraph 57 says that they were intimidated, abuse -- sexually abused and assaulted, and so on. So -- and then paragraph 63 mention is also made of sexual assault. Now, General, what it says here, can it be correct in any way at all?

A. To the best of my knowledge and to the -- on the basis of MUP documents, that cannot be correct.

JUDGE ROBINSON: What did you ask the witness? "Can it be correct," in relation to what? What is "it"?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The forces of the FRY with respect -- yes, the allegations. With respect to the quotation I read out from point (5) where it says the forces of the FRY and Serbia sexually assaulted, et cetera, et cetera. That assertion is quite unbelievable and I'm asking the general whether it could be true.

JUDGE ROBINSON: It's a meaningless question. There's a whole range of allegations to ask him whether that is correct. If he answers yes, it's not helpful. You should really direct the witness to a specific incident and ask him about it.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] There's no reference to a specific incident here for me to be able to ask him that. It just mentions sexual ³⁹⁹¹⁷ assault, and he presented data about how many proceedings were taken against how many perpetrators of crimes of that kind.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. So take a look at tab 177, 178, 9, 180, General.

A. Well, I've just opened tab 181, for example, which contains a criminal report against a known perpetrator of the crime of rape. Then we come to tab 185. For instance, that is a record of --

JUDGE ROBINSON: In tab 181 --

THE WITNESS: [In English] Yes.

JUDGE ROBINSON: -- give us some information about the perpetrator. Does the tab give any information about the perpetrator; his ethnicity, whether he was a soldier, civilian, et cetera?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In the criminal report itself, it can be seen that Zeljomir Bogicevic is the perpetrator, born in Pec. I'm not sure that I can find his profession very quickly, but it should be somewhere there. Rape, from Article 103, is the crime committed, and on page 2 there is a description of the actual crime. This criminal report was filed with the district public prosecutor in Pec.

JUDGE ROBINSON: And he's a civilian, is he?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm not sure at this moment. I can't --

JUDGE BONOMY: Well, according to the summary, he's a civilian. It's case number 4 in the summary, which we do have in English. I mean, I don't think anybody is suggesting that Serbia didn't have a justice system that dealt with civilian rape cases. ³⁹⁹¹⁸

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. General, in response to my question related to crimes related to human dignity and morality, did you say a few moments ago that the crime of rape was not committed with any greater frequency than during peacetime?

A. Yes, that's what I said.

Q. You did not note it as something that happened more frequently than usual?

A. No. It was -- there was nothing unusual about it.

JUDGE BONOMY: What we do see from the summary, though, is that during the wartime soldiers were committing rape, whereas there's no evidence of that in the records during the peacetime.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I am sorry, Your Honour, but that statement is not correct. In peacetime a soldier can still commit rape. I cannot say that I can quote a particular case to you right now, but I'm just saying it's possible.

JUDGE BONOMY: Yes, of course it's possible. All I'm saying is this little summary you've given us has no examples of police or soldiers committing rape in peacetime, but it does have examples of police and soldiers committing rape in wartime. Is that not correct?

JUDGE ROBINSON: Sorry, did you answer? Did you answer the question, General, asked by Judge Bonomy?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] My answer was that there are cases of soldiers committing rape during the war.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, just -- I'm trying to remember ³⁹⁹¹⁹ when the Prosecution brought witnesses, victims of rape, your general position was that you had no responsibility because those rapes were committed by criminals, ordinary criminals.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It's only a criminal who can commit that kind of crime. That's quite clear. It can only be that kind of a person who can commit that kind of thing. You see from these documents --

JUDGE ROBINSON: A criminal as distinct from -- a civilian, rather, an ordinary criminal, as distinct from a soldier, say a member of the JNA or a paramilitary for whom arguably you might have some responsibility. I'm not quite sure what the relevance of this is since it's a civilian here who is -- who was charged with rape. I imagine you would say that it goes to show the general system, the general pattern of police investigation.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Not only the way in which it's done. You forget, Mr. Robinson, that I asked the general very clearly whether there is a single case that the police found out about where criminal proceedings were not instituted. His answer was no. What is presented here concerning rape are all those that were recorded by the police. Now, if the police does not know about any other case, then somebody should explain to me how could I know about this, who it was that could have informed me about this kind of thing, what else happened, that is.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. Proceed.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. General, do these tabs contain all information pertaining to rape ³⁹⁹²⁰ in Kosovo and Metohija about which the police had any knowledge?

A. All the crimes pertaining to this chapter are in this list and these tabs. If the perpetrators are members of the military or the police and the police learned about this, the police would transmit this kind of information to the military police, and then of course this was within their jurisdiction.

Q. All right. How many such cases are there in the survey?

A. I have not done any proper statistics, and perhaps I'll have to read it and look at each and every one of the individual cases referred to here. But for example, number 13. Persons in uniforms of the army of Yugoslavia, that can be seen. The mentioned persons were taken over by Rasic Milan, born in Nis, a policeman. So the military personnel who were reported to have committed a crime were taken over by a military policeman, Milan Rasic from Nis. The policework was completed, basically, by then.

JUDGE BONOMY: That's an interesting example. It would be very interesting to know what happened after that.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. But it's only someone from the military security that can answer that.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson, I would like to draw your attention to the testimony of General Gojovic here. He presented the facts that had to do with how the military organs acted in such cases. You already have that in the exhibits and in the transcript. It's the military organs that prosecuted such cases when it was a soldier concerned. ³⁹⁹²¹

JUDGE BONOMY: Can you remember if this particular example featured in his evidence?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I cannot say now. I don't know now. I don't know the name, but we can check it.

MR. NICE: And the Court will remember that General Gojovic also spoke of the handing back of cases from the military at a certain time to the civilian authorities.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Continue, Mr. Milosevic.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. General, is it usual practice to hand over any perpetrator of a crime belonging to the military to the military organs?

A. That is quite customary and in accordance with the law. Under number 15, you can see that a criminal report was filed with the court in Pec and also the appropriate military authority.

Q. So the police reports this to the regular civilian authority and the responsible military investigation organ.

A. Sometimes the person who allegedly committed the crime has a capacity that is uncertain, and in that case the documents are submitted to both types of organs.

Q. All right, General. Since you said that they -- these crimes were not any more frequent than during peacetime --

A. In terms of numbers.

Q. -- could you collaborate on this?

A. The 18th of July until the 31st of May --

THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters note that they did not get the ³⁹⁹²² exact date when 17 crimes were committed.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. So it's 17 crimes.

A. Yes.

Q. How many civilians, how many perpetrators?

A. At this moment I cannot say if I were not to look at the summary in greater detail.

Q. I'll ask you to look at this during the break. So the total is 17 from -- 17 crimes committed from mid-July 1998 to the end of May 1999.

A. Yes.

Q. General, I would like to put a few questions to you now pertaining to the movement of civilians, refugees, about what is called deportations here. Since this has to do with deportation, and I've had it here for a while now, before I move on to that -- or, actually, it does have to do with that topic. I'm going to give you a piece of information. I'd just like you to have a look at it. Just have a look at it.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson, this has to do with deportations. This is a document that was contained in tab 2. During the evidence of the chief of SUP of Pec, Paponjak, Mr. Nice examined him specifically about it because he claimed that this was prepared in order to assist me with my Defence because The Hague indictment is referred to. Count 7, that is.

Since the current witness is an experienced member of the Ministry of the Interior, I would like him to have a look at the document. Could the general please look at this document. Could he explain the nature of ³⁹⁹²³ this document. Could he tell us why The Hague indictment is referred to.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, give it to the witness.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The Hague indictment count 7. That's what it says.

JUDGE KWON: If the court deputy can find the English version of that.

MR. NICE: I don't think it ever was translated. If there was a translation, it hasn't come to me yet, or to us yet, and I recall cross-examining, for want of a translation, on the basis of the Cyrillic version that we had.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Let's see whether we can proceed, Mr. Nice. Mr. Milosevic, direct the witness to the particular section of the document.

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. What kind of a document is this, General?

A. This is really the first time I see this document. It does have some markings that I'm familiar with, though. DJ or CH /3 is something that I'm familiar with. This CH is one the subdossiers of the entire dossier of Kosovo and Metohija in the Ministry of the Interior. This subdossier, especially its last page, obviously has to do with checking out events referred to in the indictment. So the indictment itself is the source of information for this subdossier of the Ministry of the Interior. Obviously the Ministry of the Interior decided to double-check what is mentioned in the indictment, whether those events actually occurred, and ³⁹⁹²⁴ what the relevant units of the ministry know about them.

Q. That is an indictment. It's not contained in count 7 here that I have, but it is some indictment.

Tell me, then, General, who gives this kind of assignment and who gives this kind of heading? What kind of a check or verification is asked for?

A. Of the counts of the indictment. This specific information pertains to allegations contained in an indictment related to alleged force deportations of Albanians. The structure of this dossier is established by the Ministry of the Interior, and according to such a structure and according to such thesis he asks the secretary for Kosovo and Metohija to act.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Nice.

MR. NICE: I think it's fairly important to look at the careful structuring of the last question. The witness speaks of an indictment as a source of information and then we see what the accused draws from that; and if that isn't leading by intent and purpose, I don't know what is. This witness clearly doesn't know what this document is about. We aren't being treated to, apparently, the originator of the document in the ministry, and I really wonder whether this evidence is of any value save by way of being an attempt to get round a real difficulty that appears in this document.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, I'll hear you on that very briefly.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson, I didn't react a ³⁹⁹²⁵ moment ago when Mr. Nice spoke of various authorities, saying that the military sent cases to civilian authorities and vice versa. Of course cases were referred to the proper authorities depending on the status of the perpetrator. This is obviously a valid document. It was described by a witness we heard here, Colonel Paponjak, chief of the Pec secretariat. And since Mr. Nice cross-examined on this document claiming that the document was drafted in order to assist me, I am just asking the witness to tell us if this has anything to do with an attempt to assist me.

JUDGE ROBINSON: I'll allow you to continue. Ask a question to show its relevance.

MR. NICE: And, Your Honour, I'm not quite sure what tab we're looking at. I think the accused referred to tab 2, but that certainly wouldn't be appropriate so I don't quite know what I'm looking at at the moment. Perhaps the witness could turn over to the first page of the document and we'll know what he's looking at.

JUDGE ROBINSON: But let us satisfy ourselves as to whether the witness knows anything about the document.

General, are you familiar at all with this document?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I am seeing this document for the first time, but from the codes and markings I drew my conclusions and gave an answer, and I'm absolutely certain that this answer is correct.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. General, what is the heading of this brief and who determined it?

A. The heading of this brief was determined by the Ministry of the Interior so that all secretariats could prepare identical documents for ³⁹⁹²⁶ their respective areas. That is a brief on forcible transfers and deportations of Albanians, their persecution on racial grounds and confiscation of their IDs. If -- the underlying information was taken from the indictment and this is an attempt to verify it or to check it out.

[Trial Chamber confers]

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Milosevic. We'll allow you to continue questions relating to the document. The witness apparently is familiar with the -- with that kind of document, is able to identify specific markings. Let us see if he has any information that would be helpful to us.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. General, if I understood you correctly, the ministry gave an assignment, including this heading, ordering the subordinated SUPs to provide every information they had on the subject.

A. Correct.

Q. And this is an assignment that was received by every secretariat in Kosovo and Metohija.

A. Yes.

Q. What does the first line say?

JUDGE BONOMY: General, it's now being put to you that certain things are a matter of fact in a very leading way. I understood you earlier to be saying that you'd never seen this document before, you were not part of the exercise by which arrangements were made to compile it. So is what you're saying any more than your supposition from your ^{39927 BLANK PAGE 39928} recognition of some marking on the document?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I'm not speaking to the substance of the document because I'm seeing it for the first time and I haven't had time to read it, but from certain elements on the cover page and from the signature I can tell what it's about because I'm familiar with the structure of Kosovo and Metohija documents. I can tell you, for instance, what the III means. It refers to the SUP of Pec because the seven secretariats each were assigned a certain number. However, subdossiers within the Kosovo and Metohija dossier were marked by letters of the alphabet, so this letter CH or DJ certainly designates incidents alleged in the indictment, and this specific document refers to allegations in the indictment concerning forcible transfers, deportations, et cetera.

JUDGE BONOMY: I must say I'm completely confused about what you say is your knowledge of this. For example, it's just been put to you that you know that this was an exercise that was instructed by the ministry. Now, you don't know what question was asked, do you? You don't know what instructions were given, do you? Or have I misunderstood?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know the exact wording of every question, and I cannot tell you about the exact substance of each part of this dossier, but I know that there is a dossier and subdossiers including one subdossier based on allegations in the indictment. And I know that the ministry asked the secretariats to provide the ministry with all evidence and information concerning incidents described in the indictment that they might have information about. That is what I'm ³⁹⁹²⁹ absolutely certain of.

JUDGE BONOMY: How do you know that?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I know because while I was preparing to testify here I spoke to certain people, including Mr. Paponjak, while we were at the hotel waiting to appear before this Court.

JUDGE BONOMY: So this is based on conversations that took place while you're in The Hague.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] While we were both waiting to enter the stage of testimony.

JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. General --

JUDGE ROBINSON: One more question before the break, Mr. Milosevic, and it must not be a leading question.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. When the term "indictment" is used, is it a reference to the indictment brought against me or to any information available to Mr. Nice and his office, including those published?

A. It is a reference to the text of the indictment.

Q. Did the police always check, regardless of the source of information given the police, any allegation about a crime that may have been committed? Does the police always check out such information whatever the source; a NATO aerial photograph, an indictment, an anonymous telephone call, a personal report by a civilian from any man in the street, et cetera? ³⁹⁹³⁰

A. Every piece of information, every report, no matter where it comes from, is checked out meticulously. The source of information can be anyone; an accidental passerby, an anonymous phone call, anything.

Q. Tell me about the first lines in this brief introduced through Colonel Paponjak. It says "Brief about forced deportations," et cetera. What does it say?

A. The first sub-heading reads: "Information is not correct."

Q. What does that mean? You've seen hundreds of these documents.

A. Well, it certainly means that the information by -- about deportations is not correct.

Q. You --

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I understood, Mr. Robinson, that you wished the break to start now.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. It's time for the first break. We'll adjourn for 20 minutes.

--- Recess taken at 10.30 a.m.

--- On resuming at 10.54 a.m.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Milosevic. I understand the tab we are looking at is 2.4 from Mr. Paponjak's evidence.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. I just wanted to ask the general if he knows how this dossier was compiled, the dossier called Kosovo and Metohija, regardless of what was introduced through Paponjak. You know what you need to know from the witness directly.

Do you know how this dossier Kosovo and Metohija was compiled? ³⁹⁹³¹

A. I know about it because I had occasion, while I was at the Ministry of the Interior, to see the structure of the dossier, and I wanted to complete my answer.

Q. I found my binder in the meantime, the binder that includes documents such as the summary of crimes of personal and moral degradation. This summary deals with the period 18th July 1998 to the 31st of May, 1999. In that period, there were 17 such incidents registered by the police.

A. Correct.

Q. Could we go very quickly through tab 177, which contains the summary of these criminal acts.

Under item 1, we see that the injured party is an Albanian woman, that the perpetrators were detected and that they were both Albanians, ethnic Albanians. Can you see that in item 1?

A. Yes, I can see that. The injured party is Gashi and so on.

Q. What does it say about the perpetrators?

A. The perpetrators are, of course, named, and it says that the case was filed with the district public prosecutor's office.

Q. In the second case out of the remaining 16, the perpetrator -- or, rather, the injured party is a civilian belonging to the Roma community, and the perpetrator is a member of the civilian police.

A. Yes. He was arrested.

JUDGE ROBINSON: What's the significance of this evidence?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The significance, Mr. Robinson, lies in the fact that in that count which I quoted, let me not go back to it ³⁹⁹³² again, it says that forces of Serbia and the FRY committed crimes of sexual assaults against ethnic Albanian women, that this general has a summary of all such incidents from mid-1998 - the cases in the beginning all relate to 1998 - and the total number of such cases is 17. This means that the incidence of these crimes was not particularly high. It was nothing special. And not all of these cases involved crimes by Serbs against Albanians. Perpetrators vary in status and ethnic background. In the first case, the injured party is an Albanian woman, in the second one it's a Gypsy woman, in the third case the perpetrator again is an Albanian from Gnjilane, Fazlije Recica, from Gnjilane. In the fourth case both the victim and the perpetrator are Serbs.

JUDGE ROBINSON: All right. Well, we have the document here. Your point is only 17 cases of rape and sexual abuse are documented, and in many cases the perpetrators were not Serbs.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] But in some cases the victims are Serbian women. Look at the fifth case, for instance.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Well, then why don't we have the witness just identify the perpetrators and victims and their ethnicity and then I think your point would be made. Just go through --

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well. We'll go through it quickly.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation].

Q. We've already gone through the first three. Let me not go back to them. In the fourth case, who is the perpetrator and who is the victim? Only from the point of view of ethnic background. ³⁹⁹³³

A. Both are Serbs.

Q. Fifth case, who is the victim?

A. Serbian woman. The perpetrator is a Muslim.

Q. What about the sixth case?

A. The injured party is a Serbian woman and the perpetrator is a Serb.

Q. Seventh case?

A. The victim is an Albanian woman. The perpetrator is obviously unidentified, but it says that they spoke in the Siptar language, or the Albanian language.

Q. Eighth case?

A. Victim is an Albanian, and the perpetrator is also an Albanian.

Q. Ninth case, two unidentified persons -- oh, no, it goes on. Who are the perpetrators? In the ninth case, look at the last paragraph. It says: "In further work it was established that the crime was committed --"

A. By policemen of the Pec Secretariat of the Interior.

Q. The Pec SUP. What about the tenth case?

A. The victim is an Albanian woman, and the perpetrator is an unidentified man. Unidentified perpetrator.

Eleventh case, the victim is an Albanian woman -- rather, two Albanian women.

Q. They wanted or asked for the assistance of members of the Ministry of the Interior.

A. There is a reference to military organs, the headquarters in ³⁹⁹³⁴ Pristina.

Q. Twelfth case?

A. The victims are Albanian women. The perpetrators were soldiers.

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] So the perpetrators were soldiers, the victims were Albanian women, and a criminal report was filed. Case thirteen, the victim was an Albanian woman.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. And the perpetrator, it says a woman from Gornje Nerodimlje reported the case to the police. It was a Serbian woman who reported the case, saying that persons in uniforms of the army of Yugoslavia kidnapped two Albanian women.

A. Yes. And she named the names. The case was taken over by the military police.

The fourteenth case, in Kosovska Kamenica, a member of the reserve force committed indecent acts against an Albanian woman. He was arrested and remanded in custody. It was brought before the investigating judge of the district court in Gnjilane.

In the fifteenth case, the victims were Albanian women. The perpetrators were in camouflage military uniforms. Yes, military uniforms. An on-site investigation was performed and criminal charges filed.

Item 16, two members of the Yugoslav army committed the criminal agent of rape against an Albanian victim. An on-site investigation was performed. ³⁹⁹³⁵

Q. This case was solved.

A. And the perpetrator was remanded in custody.

Q. In some of these cases perpetrators are Serbs. In other cases the perpetrators are non-Serbs, sometimes ethnic Albanians. The victims are sometimes Serbian women, Albanian women, or even a Roma woman. Are these all the cases that the police was informed about?

A. Yes.

Q. On the basis of what we have just reviewed, is it possible to say that the incidence of rape was very high in Kosovo and Metohija?

JUDGE ROBINSON: That's a leading question.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well. But the facts speak for themselves. I don't think they need any questions.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. I'm going to ask you a few questions now which have to do with the movement of civilians and refugees and alleged deportations. General, we're not going to dwell on the material compiled by MUP, the Ministry of the Interior, that I pulled out of the Paponjak testimony, but can you tell us, what do you know about the mass movement of civilians from their homes in 1998 and 1999?

A. During 1998, civilians were moving around from their homes to the surrounding villages, and this started at the beginning of the war in greater numbers and went on throughout the war.

Q. And what were the main causes for this displacement of civilians from their homes?

A. There were a number of causes, and there are some basic causes. ³⁹⁹³⁶ Some of them I have already explained. The first -- the principal cause was the fact that there was combat activity in the various areas and zones, and so persons internally were displaced to other places.

Q. Are you talking about 1998 now?

A. Yes, 1998. The other two reasons I have also explained in part, the second reason being that the terrorists were moving the civilians around to prevent -- to prevent themselves from being arrested. And the third reason could be this movement of civilians and displacement in order to portray alleged deportations to the media. And the basic reason was the NATO aggression. And the basic reason for the mass movement or mass displacement of citizens was the beginning of the NATO aggression and everything that happened, the circumstances surrounding the NATO aggression, and I have partially explained that already. All I can do is to illustrate that first night when the first attacks were launched and when everybody was in panic, fear, confusion, because the lighting in the towns and villages were extinguished. There was total darkness. There were planes, bombs, explosions, sirens, shots, and everybody was doing their best to protect themselves, save their lives. And under circumstances of that kind, there could, of course, have been uncontrolled actions both on the part of individuals, neighbours, terrorists, and everybody else there.

Q. And what ethnic group did the people belong to who were displaced?

A. All ethnic groups were leaving, but the Albanians left en masse. They went towards Macedonia and Albania.

Q. Mr. Nice claims, and according to what is written down here it is ³⁹⁹³⁷ claimed that the police, together with the army, evicted Albanian citizens from their homes, made them leave their homes. Is that true? Did the police do this? Did the police push Albanians out of their homes?

A. None of the information and data that the police possesses testify to that except for the wording of the indictment, the allegations in the indictment. The police did not force Albanians out of their house nor was that part of any plan or policy or order at all.

Q. And did the police take any violent measures or forcible measures to have the Albanians return to their homes?

A. No. The police didn't evict them or move them out violently, nor did they prevent them from going where they wanted to go or forcibly have them returned, but it did take steps to try and convince them to stay in their homes, in the places they had come from, and to give them assistance in that respect.

Q. And did the police take any other steps and measures with regard to this phenomenon that was taking place?

A. The police did take steps to protect the columns of refugees or displaced persons regardless of what their intention was and where they were moving to, and it helped other state organs to take additional measures, such as measures of humanitarian assistance to these people.

Q. All right. Now, as we're dealing with this mass movement of citizens, was that the role the police had, what you've just stated, or was there anything else, any other reactions?

A. Well, what I just said, precisely that. And I could add to that the fact for internally displaced persons, they were asked to report their ³⁹⁹³⁸ place of residence, new place of residence for them to be given humanitarian assistance and all other types of assistance as well.

Q. General, let me ask a hypothetical question now. Would it be possible nonetheless that members of the police force or soldiers expelled Albanians?

A. Well, of course it is possible, but it could just be a form of excessive behaviour outside the command structure, outside the orders given, but let me repeat we had no knowledge of things like that actually taking place.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, do you intend to ask the witness about any of the specific allegations of deportation in paragraph 63?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I think that the questions I'm going to ask him now have to do with the overall conduct vis-a-vis the movement and displacement of civilians and the attitude they took. When I say "they," I mean those who represented the authorities in Kosovo and Metohija during that period of time and their treatment of civilians.

JUDGE ROBINSON: For example, paragraph 63(k)(ii) alleges that forces of the FRY on 27th and 28th of March 1999 attacked the town of Kacanik and they harassed, detained, beat and shot many Kosovo Albanian residents of Kacanik. "Thousands of persons fled to nearby forests and eventually walked across the border into Macedonia." Do you have any specific information about that, that incident, General?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I do not, Your Honour Mr. President. All I can say is that the formulation according to which the forces ^{39939 BLANK PAGE 39940} attacked the town really doesn't correspond to the truth. And I've explained this on several occasions, what the goals of police intervention were when the police intervened. We never ever had the object of attacking any town, and that formulation, that phrase means -- would mean that we wanted to destroy something, and that really didn't correspond to the efforts made by the police and army and their goals and objectives in their anti-terrorist actions.

JUDGE ROBINSON: So what you can say in relation to that allegation is that it is inconsistent with your understanding of how the police behaved.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Absolutely so.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Milosevic.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Just a moment, please.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] While we're waiting, perhaps I could tell you my personal experience with respect to certain groups of refugees that were moving towards Albanian, for instance. So I personally took care of this large movement of civilians. One day towards the end of March or around about that date I went to Malisevo, for example. Malisevo is a well-known place as being a stronghold of the KLA. That's what it's known for. And when I got there, I came across about 30.000, maybe more, people who were on tractors, who were in different vehicles, expecting somebody to send them buses and trucks to transport them further on to Albanian. I spent, with a group of my associates and people from Prizren, at least two hours, maybe three hours, talking to the people, talking to ³⁹⁹⁴¹ these people and trying to convince them to go back home, to go back to their villages and homes, and I guaranteed that the police would not do anything but protect them. And in Malisevo, together with the civilians, there were a large number of policemen who communicated with the people, and they were very tolerant, highly tolerant, and did their best to convince them that we're not there to persecute them in any way but to help them and to protect them from persecution.

JUDGE ROBINSON: And did you ascertain from any of them why they had left their homes?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, they were very reticent in talking to us at all. Their position was that they were mistrustful, distrustful. But usually the answer given was NATO. Whether that was indeed what they thought, I believe it was. I can't, of course, claim that it was, but that's it.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Milosevic.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Tell me about the state policy with respect to this displacement of civilians and what you yourself as the leadership of the police force conducted and what you saw was implemented by the staff in Pristina, for example.

A. Everything that I saw myself clearly indicated the concern that existed with regard to the situation and that everything was done to prevent this exodus. The only thing was that we didn't wish to exert pressure and prevent them from leaving forcibly. We considered that that wouldn't be conducive to the rights of citizens to leave territory of ³⁹⁹⁴² their own free will if it came into the war zone.

Q. Now let's take a look at tabs 82 onwards, General, please. They are documents which are linked to the conduct and behaviour of the police. For example, tab 82. Take a look at tab 82 now, please, and tell us what it contains. It is a dispatch, I believe, a telegram. Have you found that tab, General?

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please, Your Honour.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, it's -- we have a translation.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well. Since there is a translation, then it's easier for us to go through this document.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Whose dispatch is this?

A. It is the dispatch from the MUP staff in Pristina. It is dated the 15th of April, 1999.

Q. All right. Fine. Is it addressed to all the organs of the MUP in the territory of Kosovo and Metohija?

A. Yes. You can see that, that it is sent to the units stipulated.

Q. Could you read it out, please.

A. It says: "Despite the fact that on the 5th of April, 1999, an order was issued to prevent civilians from leaving their place of residence and to guarantee their safety (and take security measures to protect this population), it was observed that some commanding officers addressed here are not obeying the order and tolerate departure of civilian population on a massive scale."

Paragraph two reads as follows: "Therefore --" it's not a very ³⁹⁹⁴³ legible copy.

Q. "All the measures..."

A. Yes. "All the measures ordered regarding the police members' treatment of the civilian population must be implemented consistently and any deviation from the order issued brings with it accountability. Inform the staff in writing of any problems."

Those are the contents of the dispatch that the MUP sent out to all units in the field. And from this dispatch we can see what I explained a moment ago in answering the previous questions.

Q. Thank you, General. Now, what do we have in tab 183? Let's skip the first part. Once again it has been sent by the staff; is that right?

A. Yes, that's right.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Tab 83, do you mean, not 183?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, 83. 83. The next tab. We were dealing with tab 82. The next tab is 83.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. As we were saying, this was addressed to all the police organs in Kosovo and Metohija, as we can see; is that right? Is there anybody who was left out?

A. It says that all the organisational units in Kosovo and Metohija received this, and the dispatch is dated the 20th of April, 1999.

Q. Right. Fine. Now, what does it say as the subject?

A. It says the subjects are the displaced population or refugees.

Q. And then we find, "Please find attached an order of the 3rd Army commander, Colonel General Nebojsa Pavkovic, regarding treatment of ³⁹⁹⁴⁴ refugees."

A. That's right. And then we have the order from the commander of the 3rd Army as an attachment.

Q. What does it say at the top? It says that the subject is care of refugees, and then Order.

A. That's what it says in the order by the commander of the 3rd Army.

Q. And what does it say exactly?

A. Do you want me to read it all? It says: "As a result of the unending air raids of the NATO forces on the units of the army of Yugoslavia and the expected aggression by the ground forces, the number of movements of the civilian population in the unit's areas of responsibility has increased thus significantly complicating the overall security situation. With a view to protecting the civilian population and directing them to safer areas, I hereby order," et cetera. And then the order contains a total of nine points.

Q. Tell us, now, what is being ordered? We see that this is an order issued to protect the population and to direct them to safer areas. What does point 1 stipulate? What?

A. "The corps commands and MUP organs shall establish the exact distribution and number of refugees in their areas of responsibility and extend to them through the competent organs the necessary help in food and other necessities," and they're referring to the refugee population, displaced population.

Point 2 says: "They shall identify villages outside the areas of unit deployment in the areas of responsibility where the refugees can be ³⁹⁹⁴⁵ accommodated."

Point 3 reads as follows: "They shall monitor each day movements of the civilian population in their areas of responsibility and ensure for them the necessary protection and return to their homes or areas outside the areas of combat operations."

Do you want me to read on?

Q. Well, I think that we would need to do so because point 4 reads: "They shall protect the refugees and their property in the villages --"

A. Yes, "... in the villages and specified areas from the operations of the STS --"

Q. And what does that mean; Siptar terrorist forces?

A. Yes, Siptar terrorist forces "and attacks by other persons in the territory."

"5: They shall take vigorous measures to prevent the appropriation of personal effects and private property of the refugees. Criminal charges shall be brought against the perpetrators. "6: They shall prevent the arson of houses and other structures owned by the Siptars in their areas of responsibility. "7: They shall take measures through the authorities to extend to the refugees help in food and required medical assistance. "8: They shall take all security measure in the areas of refugee reception and protection to shield them from the STS operations - Siptar operations - from the territory among the refugees."

Q. And then, finally, it says that areas should be pinpointed where they can be sent to for safety. ³⁹⁹⁴⁶

A. Yes, that's right.

Q. Now, in keeping with an order of this kind, did everybody behave along those lines lower down the chain?

A. This was an order which was binding. It had to be applied at all levels down the chain of command.

Q. All right. Fine. Now tab 84 is one that we have already looked at when we discussed another topic during your testimony, so I don't want to dwell on it now. You've already quoted portions of that tab and we discussed it during your testimony, but tell us, please, what the other tabs contain, tabs 85 to 87 inclusive.

A. This is quite obviously correspondence between one police unit and the staff in Pristina, the headquarters in Pristina.

Q. And it recommends certain points and accommodation, et cetera.

A. Yes. That's the first note, tab 85, where the command of the 122nd Intervention Brigade informs the staff of the lines reached. Of course, codes are used to denote those lines, so we have figures here denoting the lines reached. And they say that positions are 78 to 90 and 111 to 90 and 92. And I'm -- I propose points 138 and 139, and is asking that these persons be accommodated in these two recommended points.

Q. To move them geographically to areas of safety?

A. Yes, that's right. And he expects the staff to answer along those lines, and the army is asked to tell them whether those are points of safety and security.

Q. Very well. Just briefly, this dispatch that was sent to the Pec SUP, for instance, what is this Djurdjevdan operation, that civilians ³⁹⁹⁴⁷ should be returned to their place of residence and all security measures taken?

A. Well, this is a dispatch by the MUP staff dated the 8th of May, sent to the SUP of Djakovica with respect to the return of civilians to their original place of residence after an anti-terrorist activity, which is coded once again.

Q. All right. And do we also find an answer to the previous dispatch that was sent where accommodation was asked for? That's tab 86, the last document there, where it says, "Civilians should be returned to their villages, and if that is not possible, then we agree to them being accommodated in the areas you have designated."

A. Yes. That is an answer to the dispatch from the 122nd Brigade where they suggested the areas they should be accommodated.

Q. All right. In tab 87, there is a document entitled "Accommodation situation for refugees in the autonomous province of Kosovo and Metohija on the 19th of April, 1999."

A. Yes.

Q. Not to go through all of this now in great detail, Pec, Gnjilane, Djakovica, Urosevac, these are actually all the secretariats of the interior?

A. Yes, all the secretariats. In the first paragraph you can see that on that day the total number registered was 2.300 -- 231.780 refugees.

Q. Some were staying in homes and others in the open?

A. Yes. ³⁹⁹⁴⁸

Q. Let's just leave -- look at the first sentence. "According to reports from SUP concluding on the 19th of April, about 231.780 refugees have been registered, mostly accommodated in family and friends' houses, in large-scale accommodation facilities, and in the open."

A. Yes.

Q. And then information is provided, for example, for Djakovica. What does it say about Djakovica, the SUP of Djakovica?

A. It says --

Q. You don't have to read all of it.

A. "... assistance was offered to 6.700 refugees, members of the Albanian ethnic community, for them to return to the area where they're resident in Kosovska Mitrovica and Vucitrn municipalities."

Q. So that is the 18th of April, 1999 when, according to what Mr. Nice claims, the police was evicting Albanians.

A. "They were offered assistance in the form of transport and foodstuffs. At about 1300 hours on the 19th of April, 1999 assistance was given to the final group of about 4.500 refugees to return to Kosovska Mitrovica, Vucitrn, and Srbica municipalities..."

Q. "... to their places of residence"?

A. "... to their places of residence."

Q. Thank you, General. Let me just have a look. I have another tab noted here that we should look at with regard to these questions. Let me just have a look. I think we already looked at this. All right. General, we've seen a few of these examples. What was the attitude of international organisations towards refugees? ³⁹⁹⁴⁹

A. Well, during the war itself I at least was not in a position to see the activity of any international organisation there. Possibly they were there, but I didn't see them.

Q. Before the war operations started, that is to say before the 24th of March, there were different international organisations there.

A. That's right. During 1998 and all the way up to the war there were different international organisations there. I do not have a great deal of knowledge about their attitude towards civilians, but I do know of a case that I witnessed myself and that I have already referred to. Istinic, the end of the summer of 1998, when I was directly involved in returning tens of thousands of Albanians to their places of residence, to their homes after a terrorist campaign.

I had a serious problem with a team of the International Red Cross, I think it was the International Red Cross. There is a telegram about that. And practically behind our backs they were trying to persuade more influential Albanians not to act in accordance with what we were saying at all because that would be a bad choice for them. In spite of these problems, during three or four days we managed to return all the internally displaced persons from Istinic to their places of residence. And I wish to note that in that group of civilians there were several terrorists and a large quantity of weapons that were handed over. I explained that in greater detail a few days ago.

Q. In relation to what you're saying, in tab 81 there is a letter of General Lukic to the minister of the interior, to his office. It says: "Our information number 13/98 of the 13th of September, 1998." That is a ³⁹⁹⁵⁰ document that has to do with what you were talking about just now, the village of Istinic where you were personally?

A. Yes. That is quite certainly the incident concerned.

Q. And now the name of this representative of the international organisation is mentioned. This is the third paragraph: "When the policemen called on the representatives of the Siptar ethnic minority from Istinic and other villages to return to their homes, this person warned them on several occasions and asked the people present to return to their homes because it was not safe, thus causing panic, insecurity, and uncertainty among the residents on whether to return or not."

A. This is an absolutely accurate description. I do not know which organisation she belongs here -- ah, yes, I see here: Representative of the International Red Cross from the Belgrade mission. That's what it says in the second paragraph.

Q. General, in relation to this treatment of persons who had left their homes, what can you say about the campaign regarding the reporting of residence of displaced persons?

A. That's the tab that we skipped a few minutes ago. That is tab 84.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, I believe there is a specific reference to this village -- municipality, rather, in tab 8 -- tab 81, in the indictment.

JUDGE KWON: 63(l).

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. 63, 63(l). This is September --

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'll have to have a look.

JUDGE ROBINSON: September 1998. The allegation in 63(l) relates ^{39951 BLANK PAGE 39952} to the 29th of March, 1999, and it speaks of an attack by forces of the FRY and Serbia, men and women ordered to undress. You see, I'm trying to relate the evidence to specific incidents in the indictment, if it is possible, but this document in tab 81 does relate to the charge but to September 1998. How is that assisting your case, Mr. Milosevic?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, Mr. Robinson, I'm trying to establish how the police behaved in respect of the movement of the population, what the police did by way of assistance. We went through a few documents where orders are given to take care of the civilian population. All these measures and orders are totally incompatible with what is stated in the indictment. If what the indictment says were true, then it would be quite impossible to have such orders and such positions taken by the police. It is impossible to have orders like this that we've been quoting here, and these orders say how to help the population, how to give them food, shelter, how to put them into safe areas, and that is quite incompatible with what the indictment says. It is in total contradiction. Documents from the area concerned are in total contradiction to the -- to the indictment. That simply cannot be the case. The police and the military cannot behave in contravention of the orders they receive.

JUDGE ROBINSON: A wide gap between what is in an order and the actual enforcement of it. I am reminded of the time I spent on the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. We visited many countries, on-site visits, and some of the worst offenders had the best written laws ³⁹⁹⁵³ to protect human rights. But carry on, Mr. Milosevic.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson, this doesn't have to do with laws and regulations. Only they have -- this has to do with orders as well.

As far as the police is concerned, before General Stevanovic, I had Colonel Paponjak here, who was speaking from a local level about conduct in terms of the implementation of orders that he received. Now we have General Stevanovic who is talking about the conduct throughout the province, and we're going to see --

JUDGE ROBINSON: Carry on with the questioning. We must conclude this witness's examination-in-chief.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. I would like to draw your attention to paragraph 63 that you mentioned a few moments ago, that the assertions regarding Kotlina are contained there too. That is in (k)(i). We presented very clear documents about that yesterday which are -- which totally contradict what it says here. Kotlina, speaking of murders and also persecutions --

JUDGE ROBINSON: Continue with the -- continue with your questions. Continue with your questions.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. General, just give us the briefest possible answers. You said that there was this campaign about registering places of residence. That is generally known, but what can you say about that, for temporarily displaced persons?

A. The objective was to deal with that number of internally displaced ³⁹⁹⁵⁴ persons - we saw the figure in a document that we looked at recently - to deal with it statistically according to the places where they were staying, to have documents in this respect in addition to all the measures that are ordered in the tab that we skipped, including local security.

Q. All right, General. You've been repeating this, that we've skipped that. So in tab 84, that is the document signed by General Lukic of the ministry staff. I'm going to ask you about number 1. "Organise a residence registration service in all places accommodating refugees who had left their domicile --"

A. Yes.

Q. "-- due to bombing by NATO forces. In the registration of domicile include persons who have not registered their place of domicile but were found at their address where they are living."

A. Yes.

Q. "Make it possible for all persons to register their residence on the established form number, and issue certificates of residence registration."

JUDGE KWON: Yes. We've been through this. Move on.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Kwon.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. What was the aim of this campaign?

A. The aim was to regulate the affairs of the displaced persons in the places where they were staying temporarily. That was used for two purposes; security and taking care -- security of the persons concerned and their general safety. There were statistics at border crossings. ³⁹⁹⁵⁵ That's where statistics were kept, when the persons crossed international borders, but not persons crossing to Montenegro or Serbia.

Q. So it was only at the state border.

A. Yes.

Q. In paragraph 63, with regard to all the allegations, it is stated that the personal documents were taken from Albanians who were going to Albania and Macedonia, that the police were taking their documents. Do you know about that?

A. I know that from the indictment, or the presentation of the indictment, but this wording is really a generalisation of perhaps a particular incident at a particular border crossing. Perhaps I even saw a film about this. But I claim that, as I have said several times, that this is not part of any policy pursued or orders issued. This was excessive behaviour on the part of a particular shift at a particular point in time at a particular border crossing.

Q. General, now I'm asking you about a person who professionally dealt with police matters for many years. If a person's documents had been taken away, would that deprive him or her of the possibility of ascertaining his or her identity or jeopardising his or her status or whatever?

JUDGE ROBINSON: You dealt with that already.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. General, yesterday we showed the electronic system of registering citizens. Would anybody who was familiar with this system get the idea that he should prevent the return of citizens to the country by taking ³⁹⁹⁵⁶ away their personal documents?

A. Absolutely not.

Q. Do --

MR. NICE: [Previous translation continues] ... mere speculation about what other people in general might do.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Move on to another area. You've dealt with this already. I said so. Move on to another area.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Excuse me, Your Honour. May I just make a comment about this qualification speculation?

JUDGE ROBINSON: No. Move on to another question, Mr. Milosevic.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. General, I'm going to ask you about a concept which is often mentioned here; shelling and devastation of buildings. In many paragraphs, reference is made to a particular wording or, rather, a pattern. Forces of Serbia and FRY go into a particular place, separate men from women following shelling, et cetera, et cetera. That is the wording frequently used.

I'm going to ask you, during clashes with terrorists, did the police and the military destroy civilian buildings?

A. Destruction of civilian facilities was never the purpose of any operation carried out in Kosovo and Metohija.

Q. Did devastation of facilities in Kosovo and Metohija occur?

A. I don't know what the term "devastation" could encompass. If we take it to mean deliberate destruction of buildings, that certainly didn't happen in Kosovo and Metohija. That was not our practice and would have ³⁹⁹⁵⁷ served no purpose.

Q. According to your understanding and the understanding of the Ministry of the Interior, would buildings whose purpose was normally civilian but which are used as a place from which to shoot at the police and the military continue to be regarded as civilian facilities?

A. No. They are no longer regarded as civilian facilities. But even then, the purpose of the police and the army is not to destroy such facilities. They only seek to suppress the armed resistance coming from such facilities.

Q. Did you notice any considerable discrepancies in the degree of destruction of buildings from one place to another since you travelled a lot across Kosovo and Metohija?

A. I noticed large differences in terms of the degree of destruction between various places in Kosovo. I can cite an example. The greatest number of destroyed buildings could be seen in the area of Suva Reka, in the area of Pec, whereas many, many villages I passed were absolutely intact.

As an example of that, I can cite Rogovo between Djakovica and Prizren, the town of Prizren, the town of Urosevac, Gnjilane, Pristina. For instance, the villages around Gnjilane were almost intact. The villages, rather, around Pristina.

Q. But you don't mean to include destruction by NATO bombing?

A. No, no.

Q. And were there any cases of damage or destruction to public utilities, infrastructure? ³⁹⁹⁵⁸

A. No, not that I know of, or very rarely. If such facilities, infrastructure were damaged, that was always by terrorists, so that all the public utilities, electricity, water supply and such things functioned quite well under the circumstances.

Q. You were there on the spot. You travelled a lot. Tell me, could you distinguish clearly between destruction caused by NATO airstrikes and destruction or damage resulting from clashes between our forces and the KLA?

A. Absolutely. Maybe not in a few specific cases, but it was normally very clear what was caused by NATO bombing and what was not.

Q. Is it still possible that certain civilian facilities were destroyed by our forces beyond what was necessary in terms of anti-terrorist combat?

A. That could only have been part of incidents and excessive behaviour, but I don't know of any such cases.

Q. I'm now going to ask you about paramilitary groups and volunteers. According to your information, were paramilitary formations active in Kosovo and Metohija? Do you know of any paramilitary formation that was under any sort of control by any body or state authority?

A. Paramilitary units under the control of the state authorities in any form did not exist that I know of. There could have been uniformed or un-uniformed armed groups that could have committed occasionally criminal acts.

Q. But in view of the disposition of police forces and military forces, could there have been an important paramilitary unit that they ³⁹⁹⁵⁹ failed to notice?

A. Paramilitary units could have been active and present as something beyond and contrary to the law but not under the control of the police or the army.

Q. Do you have any information of the activity of such groups from other wars in other areas of ex-Yugoslavia?

A. I'm familiar with some paramilitary groups that were active in the territory of ex-Yugoslavia from 1991 onwards, and I know that members of some such groups had residence on the territory of Serbia.

Q. Were they ever active on the territory of Serbia?

A. No. Moreover, all members of such groups identified in Serbia were arrested, their weapons, if found, were seized, and they were instructed that if they wished to join the army they had to follow the regular procedure, and whether they were eventually accepted into the army depended on the regulations.

Q. Now we are talking about the beginning of the 1990s. Did the police take any action, conduct any operation on the territory of ex-Yugoslavia together with such a paramilitary group?

A. No, never.

Q. And during the 1990s, what was the attitude of the authorities of Serbia toward such paramilitary formations?

A. It was extremely negative, and I've already stated what measures were taken against members of such groups.

Q. Let us return to Kosovo and Metohija again, General. Have you ever heard of any paramilitary unit in Kosovo and Metohija? Did you have ³⁹⁹⁶⁰ any information about the presence of such a group in Kosovo?

A. No.

Q. Did the Ministry of the Interior of Serbia participate or assist in the arming of any group outside their own personnel?

A. The police of Serbia armed only its own reservists, but the reserve force of the police are an integral part of the police.

Q. Since you've mentioned 1990s, what particular paramilitary units and groups did you hear about in those years?

A. I heard of various units in the Republic of Serbian Krajina, in Republika Srpska, such as the Serbian Volunteers Guard, Green Berets, Red Berets, the National Guard Corps, et cetera.

Q. You are talking about paramilitary units on various sites?

A. Yes, on various sites. Some of them belonged to various state bodies or party organisations.

Q. You mentioned the Red Berets. What units were known under that name?

A. The name Red Berets was extremely -- extremely popular. Every unit wanted to be called the Red Berets, and any unit that included in its uniform a red beret often assumed that name, so that there was a multitude of units that were mistakenly known as Red Berets.

Q. What does that mean? In which area?

A. In Serbian Krajina, in the Republic of Serbia itself, but also the Republika Srpska.

Q. In the Republic of Serbia, who wore red berets?

A. I know of a special anti-terrorist unit that wore red berets, and ³⁹⁹⁶¹ the citizens called them Red Berets. There was another unit in the special forces of the VJ also wore red berets, and the citizens called them Red Berets. Arkan's Guard also wore red berets.

Q. A question was raised here about the date of establishment of this unit for special operations of the Serbian police, the JSO.

A. Yes. They, too, wore red berets.

Q. When was it established?

A. In the spring of 1996, according to my information.

Q. And what information do you have?

A. Well, I was invited to attend the ceremony that was organised on the occasion of their establishment. I believe it was in the spring of 1996. I can't be more precise.

Q. So you personally attended the ceremony of establishment of that unit?

A. Yes.

Q. And it was in the spring of 1996?

A. Yes. I remember it was raining.

Q. We will now move on to some issues, and we will refer to the documents we have here related to various meetings which discussed these problems. So we're talking about meetings, not regulations, not orders, but specific meetings.

Let me ask you first: Did you attend various meetings that discussed state policy regarding the situation in Kosovo and Metohija, combat against terrorism, and what was the official state policy at the time, anyway? ³⁹⁹⁶²

A. I attended several such meetings, and I've already explained what the policy of state authorities was regarding the need to combat terrorism.

Q. Did you attend the meeting that was held at the staff of the Ministry of the Interior in Pristina on the 21st of December, 1998?

A. I would have to check, because I attended most such meetings, but I don't remember them by dates.

Q. That's not what I expect from you anyway, because we have precise records of all these meetings, tab by tab.

Look, for instance, at tab 68.

A. I have found it.

Q. Good. Is this the record of the meeting of the ministry staff that included the minister of the interior and chiefs of secretariats held in Pristina? We can see that you were present too.

A. Yes. You can see that in the first paragraph.

Q. And in the -- and in the third paragraph, the minister says: "The conditions of work are complex. Although we defeated terrorists and seized their weapons."

Does it follow from this that it was not their objective to kill the terrorists, just to disarm them?

A. Absolutely. The objective was to neutralise, to liquidate the terrorist organisation, not to kill the terrorists.

Q. Very well. On page --

MR. NICE: [Previous translation continues] ...

JUDGE ROBINSON: Where is that paragraph, Mr. Milosevic? ^{39963 BLANK PAGE 39964}

MR. NICE: He said it's paragraph 3 but I can't find it on the third paragraph.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Paragraph 3 would be on page 2?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Just before the end.

JUDGE KWON: Page 2, the end of Minister Stojiljkovic's comment: "... even though we defeated the terrorists and took away their weapons."

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. On page 2 in the original Serbian version, in the second sentence of this paragraph it says literally: "The main task of the police is to protect and defend the country from such terrorist actions and criminals."

A. I can't find it.

Q. It's the second paragraph on the second page.

THE INTERPRETER: Interpreters note it's page 3, paragraph 2.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. The most important item was for the police to maintain control of the area and secure free passage and --

We are going to go through this rather quickly. The sub-heading seems to say "Assessments, conclusions." It says: "Every campaign and operation of the police has to have an objective and has to be reported to the OSCE mission." Have you found this?

A. Yes, I have.

Q. Read this line.

A. "Every activity of the police has to have a specific reason and must be notified to the OSCE mission. Every action must be taken in keeping with the regulations and the law, not in a soldierly way. There ³⁹⁹⁶⁵ must not be any looting or pillage during police activities. The police should act professionally and lawfully as it did in Kapasnica [phoen], Pec and Glodjane."

Q. Reference is made to the OSCE mission although it seems to be inclined or to sympathise with the terrorists. "They must be allowed to stay."

A. Yes.

Q. On the next page, the conclusion says that the following actions need to be taken. What is written in this section? I would like to mention just a few things.

A. The fourth line from the bottom says: "Weapons should be used only in self-defence and only proportionately to the force of attack."

Q. Yes, that's in the document, but before that, it says: "In order to use heavy weapons and large calibre weapons, we must be provoked (attacked) by heavy weapons. We cannot take heavy weapons and equipment in our vehicles."

A. Yes that's in keeping with our rules.

Q. And then it says: "The police should act as if we were working in Belgrade."

A. Correct.

MR. NICE: I do wish the accused would recognise that not only I but, more important, the Court has to be able to follow documents. There's very little point in just racing through them.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, I've mentioned this to you before that leading evidence is not a private dialogue between yourself and the ³⁹⁹⁶⁶ witness.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, I understood it that you do have a translation of this document, Mr. Robinson.

JUDGE ROBINSON: We have it, but proper protocol requires that you identify the passage and you must not proceed until the Chamber has found it so that we can follow it. That's not only a matter of courtesy, it also goes to the efficiency of the proceedings.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I had the impression that you were able to follow because I identified the subtitle on the basis of -- based on that which was presented, it was concluded that "The following should be undertaken," and then that's the passage after that. Now, under that heading we also find the bullet points and the various positions. I could read them all, but to avoid reading them all I quoted just some of them.

At the end of the seventh bullet point, it says: "In order to use heavy weapons and large calibre weapons we must be provoked, that is to say attacked also by heavy weapons. We cannot take heavy weapons and equipment in our vehicles." Have you found that passage?

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] And underneath, the next bullet point that I quoted is the following: "The police should act as if we are working in Belgrade."

And then five lower down, just one line, it says: "Use weapons only in self-defence and in proportion to the strength of the attack." So that's what I wanted to quote. I hope you found those passages ³⁹⁹⁶⁷ now.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, we have.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. General, did the police behave in keeping with these instructions?

A. This had the aim of having the police act in conformity with this, and all the leaders had orders to implement all conclusions from this type of meeting. Therefore, the police did act accordingly, according to these instructions and guidelines.

Q. In tab 69, General, we have the minutes of a meeting that took place on the 17th of February in Pristina, 1999. Did you attend that meeting in the MUP headquarters?

A. Yes, I did. And you can see that from what it says.

Q. And who else attended and what did you discuss?

A. It has a list of members attending, or persons attending the meeting. And the question discussed was the security situation and the tasks stipulated, and we can see that from the document.

Q. Very well. Now, let's just go briefly through this document. On page 2, the last paragraph, which begins with the following words: "Minister Vlajko Stojiljkovic," it says.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I hope, Mr. Robinson, that will be readily identified by you, the passage. It begins on page 2.

THE INTERPRETER: Interpreters note page 3, "Minister Vlajko Stojiljkovic."

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] ³⁹⁹⁶⁸

Q. I'm going to skip over that first portion and then I shall go on to quote from the middle of the paragraph. He assessed that the basic problem in Kosovo was terrorism and separatism by certain members of the Siptar ethnic minority.

Is the minister making a clear distinction between Albanians and separatists and terrorists there?

A. I've already explained that. Insistence was always made on a clear distinction between terrorists and the other citizens of the Republic of Serbia.

Q. Furthermore, it says: "He assessed that since the arrival of the OSCE mission the number of terrorist attacks and provocations had increased but without any significant consequences." Is that what it says?

A. Yes, that's what it says.

Q. And then he goes on to say, because he is a government member and minister of the interior: "The state of Serbia will do everything in its power to resolve the problems in Kosovo by peaceful and political means. Kosovo will be multi-ethnic and a part of the existing constitutional and legal system of Serbia and the FRY."

A. That's what it says.

Q. And then on the next page, since the date is as it stands, the 17th of February, that is to say just prior to the aggression, very close to the aggression, we have direct reference to the tasks, the forthcoming tasks of the police force to mop up the territory of terrorists. So once again reference is made to terrorists. ³⁹⁹⁶⁹ And then the next bullet point, gathering intelligence and information about the movements to eliminate misinformation and propaganda, then to maintain law and order, ensure personal and property safety in the fight against terrorism and crime. Can you find that?

A. Yes. Those are conclusions as to forthcoming tasks, because the aim of the meeting was to analyse the security situation and to determine tasks for the forthcoming period.

Q. Right. Fine. RPO. Could you remind me of what that abbreviation is?

A. Reserve police department.

Q. So it says: "Tell the PRO -- RPO and the people that civil war must be avoided at all cost but that in case of conflict the aggressor should be killed, not women and children."

A. This is a message to reserve police units whose task it was to protect inhabited areas, settlements, because they thought that in -- that clashes might ensue between neighbours and so on and so forth.

Q. Right. And then it says later on engage volunteers and -- "Approach and engage volunteers, carefully linking their engagement through the reserve police force when assessed as necessary, which means to exclude all voluntariness and arbitrary conduct." And the penultimate bullet point --

JUDGE BONOMY: Can I ask, what is meant by a volunteer?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] May I be allowed to answer, Your Honour? There are citizens who simply express the wish to become members ³⁹⁹⁷⁰ of the army or police force, or join the army and police, especially in situations when problems are expected to arise such as aggression and so on and so forth, and we really did have people who came forward. They came to the police station and said they would like to join us and become members of the police force. Of course, both the army and the police has procedure in place and criteria for a reserve force. The mere fact that somebody wants to join up doesn't mean they'll be admitted to the reserve force.

JUDGE BONOMY: Was this a particular feature of the time that this meeting took place?

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please. Microphone for the witness.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There were always people like that, people interested in doing that, in joining the police force, even now. But of course a large number of them do not fulfil the criteria and are not taken on. We can even say that's the majority. The majority are not taken on.

JUDGE BONOMY: I'm not understanding this at all. Either you get into the police or you don't get into -- surely in time of --

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's right, yes.

JUDGE BONOMY: [Previous translation continues] ... if you want to be a policeman, you become a policeman. So what's this particular reference here to approaching and engaging volunteers carefully, and why does it arise in the context of this meeting?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, that was mentioned because of the fact that individuals like that can be suspect, so we must ³⁹⁹⁷¹ be careful of not admitting people who might act in a way that does not coincide with police ethics, and quite obviously people were interested in joining up, because this was mentioned. And I know for a fact myself that people came in to us, asking to be taken on board, even from abroad.

JUDGE BONOMY: Well, really I'm trying to find out was that something that happened around this time because of the NATO threat that was looming or are you saying that there was nothing unusual about that at this time, that this happened all the time? I mean, I find it a very strange comment in the context of this meeting unless it was a feature of the time.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Perhaps I wasn't clear enough or perhaps I wasn't interpreted clearly enough. This is something that occurs at all times. Of course, just before a war, as indeed before events of this kind, the number of people interested in joining up was larger. There were more people wanting to join the police force to help the country in defending itself against an aggression.

JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.

JUDGE KWON: General, before we break -- before we break, I have a quick question. About these bullet points of your forthcoming tasks, you referred to a passage which says, "We have to put our plans in motion and use the time to mop up the territory from terrorists." Is that very mopping up also "asanacija" in B/C/S?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Of course not. Asanacija is clearing up the terrain of human bodies and carcasses from livestock, and clearing up the territory of terrorists, the mop-up, means the ³⁹⁹⁷² anti-terrorist activities of the army and police to neutralise terrorist groups, apprehend the terrorists, and so on.

JUDGE KWON: What's the B/C/S term for this mop-up, please?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Literally as it was interpreted. We say "cleaning up the territory of terrorism," of terrorist groups. It's a more complex concept, of course. It involves the uncovery, apprehension, taking into custody, and so on and so forth.

JUDGE KWON: Could I get the assistance from the interpreter as to the B/C/S for this mopping up? What word was used in the B/C/S version?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'm not following the --

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please. Microphone. Microphone.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The word "ciscenja --" I'm not following the interpretation. If you're asking about the word "ciscenja," then it is the most common use. In English, it would be "cleaning."

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. Let me direct the interpreters to page 5. This is the page Judge Kwon was referring to, the end of the first paragraph, the penultimate sentence says: "Within two or three days of an attack we have to put our plans in motion and use the time to mop up the territory from terrorists." And Judge Kwon was asking the interpreters what was the B/C/S for the English words "mop up the territory from terrorists."

THE INTERPRETER: The word is "ocistimo," to clean up, to mop up.

THE INTERPRETER: The word that is used is "ocistiti."

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson, that is precisely what I was quoting. I wasn't following the transcript but I quoted that ³⁹⁹⁷³ sentence in B/C/S when I asked the general.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm afraid I can't find that portion of the text.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. General, I'll let you know --

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, we'll all be speaking B/C/S at the end of this case. But it is now time for the break. We will adjourn for 20 minutes.

--- Recess taken at 12.25 p.m.

--- On resuming at 12.49 p.m.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic to continue.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I am sorry, Mr. Robinson. Actually, they've drawn my attention to the fact that I should use the microphone on the left-hand side, but it seems to be making some kind of noise so I have to go back to the other one. I hope that you can hear me now.

JUDGE ROBINSON: I understand the microphone which is on now is the one that you will use.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes. Ah, this one. Okay.

JUDGE ROBINSON: It's to your right. No? It's to his left?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. General --

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Actually, Mr. Robinson, you had some questions in relation to what had been quoted in tab 69. Have you finished? Would you like me to move on? ³⁹⁹⁷⁴

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. Yes, Mr. Milosevic. Thanks for the concern. Are you finished with 69?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes. I had finished before you put your questions.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Judge Bonomy has some questions.

JUDGE BONOMY: I have one more question. One of the items on this document listing the tasks to be undertaken was "raise discipline, behaviour, and appearance of policemen to a high level. Do away with Rambo-style caps and bandannas."

Was the wearing of that sort of clothing a problem?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, there were cases of people wearing that kind of clothing. The entire staff, all the senior officers, were afraid of things like that happening.

JUDGE BONOMY: That's your answer, is it? Thank you.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Milosevic.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. General, did you attend the meeting held on the 4th of April at the staff? The minutes are in tab 70.

A. Yes. It's evident that I attended the meeting.

Q. All right. Can it be seen here that all the chiefs of secretariats were reporting at that meeting?

A. Yes. That can be seen here.

Q. First the chief of Pristina secretariat?

A. And then of Kosovska Mitrovica.

Q. Let's just see a few of these things that he says. In the second ^{39975 BLANK PAGE 39976} bullet after the beginning, in the third row, actually, "Measures were taken to curb terrorism and criminal acts."

A. Yes.

Q. "35 persons were detained." That means arrested; right?

A. Yes.

Q. "Three of whom are police officers and four members of the reserve composition."

Towards the end of the page the chief of secretariat from Pec says: "11 persons were arrested because of crimes and 25 vehicles had been commandeered, probably those that were considered to be stolen.

A. Yes.

Q. The chief of the Djakovica secretariat says that 38 persons were arrested for perpetrating criminal acts?

A. Yes.

Q. And in Prizren 19 persons?

A. Yes.

Q. The chief of the Urosevac secretariat says that 58 civilians and 8 volunteers were arrested?

A. Yes.

Q. In Gnjilane, 34 persons, and there was a problem with volunteers in Zegra.

A. It's not the perpetrators of the crime that we referred to, but perhaps the word "volunteers" is used wrongly here.

Q. In what sense?

A. That they were members of the military. Perhaps they volunteered ³⁹⁹⁷⁷ to join the army but they did not act as members of the military outside the military.

Q. All right. And then it says about 50.000 persons moved out and about 15.000 persons were returned from the Vranje area. And then paragraph 2 says "Tasks in the future."

Is it General Lukic, the head of the staff, speaking at the end?

A. Yes.

Q. What does he say at the very outset? "In wartime the Ministry of the Interior carries out all its work as in peacetime." I hope you've found that.

"Has the same attitude to perpetrators of criminal acts as in peacetime, regardless of their ethnicity. Courts will receive instructions on further work in the course of the day."

A. Yes.

Q. And then the fourth bullet from the bottom of the page: "Rigorous measures to be taken against paramilitary units."

A. Yes.

Q. Is this a general statement, a general position?

A. A general position that was always made clear because of bad experience from the previous wars with such groups.

Q. There's a reference to you on the last page. It says "Obrad Stevanovic, assistant minister."

A. Yes.

Q. And now, along with the other tasks that you talk about, you say in the sixth bullet: "Protection of civilians is to be carried out at all ³⁹⁹⁷⁸ times."

A. That's right.

JUDGE ROBINSON: General, may I take you back to the bullet indicating measures to be taken against paramilitary units, and you said that was necessary in the light of previous experience. Can you tell me, enlighten me as to some of that experience with paramilitary units.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It was assumed that paramilitary units outside the Republic of Serbia that are not under the control of appropriate military or civilian organs could be the perpetrators of gravest crimes. That was the assumption. We did not have any concrete data, but that was the prevailing conviction. The idea was to place them all either under the control of the military or of the police.

JUDGE ROBINSON: So it wasn't based on any actual experience, because I thought you said that these measures were necessary because of experience that you had had with paramilitary units in previous -- previous wars.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Not because of our own experience, but I can actually mention some experience --

JUDGE KWON: General, can I quote you as saying, you said, "That was always made clear because of bad experience from the previous wars with such groups." You said so.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, that's correct. I can explain. I can be very specific about this.

We had a general impression of these groups in very general terms, but I'm going to give some specific incidents as well. Paramilitary ³⁹⁹⁷⁹ groups from Republika Srpska, during 1992 and 1993, carried out the well-known attacks against the bus in Mloce near Rudo and they abducted about 17 or 18 civilians. Later these persons went missing and have been missing to the present day. Paramilitary groups also attacked a Yugoslav train on the Belgrade-Bar railway way in the village of Strpce, which happens to be in the territory of Republika Srpska and similarly kidnapped civilians. As far as I know, they have been missing until the present day.

I can give a few other incidents of this kind but I would need some time to recall them.

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

JUDGE ROBINSON: What were the characteristics of paramilitary unit? Yes. I was asking how would you define a paramilitary unit, or could you tell us the characteristics, the features of such a unit.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That was also one of the problems involved. The question is what is denoted by this. I can say at the very outset that we considered irregular groups to be that. They had military insignia but they were not under the official command of the military or of the police in the state concerned.

Of course, we were aware of the fact that this word can denote some regular forms, like the police. In foreign literature and in foreign countries, even the police can be meant by that term. Our interpretation was groups that wore uniforms, that carried weapons but were outside the military chain of command or perhaps were not even under police command.

JUDGE ROBINSON: You said that they had military insignia. How ³⁹⁹⁸⁰ have they come by military insignia?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It must have been a misinterpretation. I said military uniforms and carried weapons but possibly they also had some insignia, some insignia. I cannot recall any of the insignia at this moment because I did not see a person myself whom I would say belonged to a paramilitary unit in terms of uniform, weapons, et cetera.

JUDGE ROBINSON: If they did have military insignia, how would they have come by that?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It depends on what kind of military insignia we mean. They had insignia, but I didn't say of any particular army. Every paramilitary group calls itself a certain name and then they make their own insignia. I repeat, I never had occasion to see anyone like that.

If they had insignia of the army, then they would belong to the army, they would not be paramilitary. That is most probably what the case would be. I don't think that an army would allow a paramilitary group to wear its insignia, although abuse of this kind is always possible.

JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Stevanovic, the two specific examples you gave relating to the Republika Srpska, were these examples of Serb paramilitary groups?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] ³⁹⁹⁸¹

Q. General, we've dealt with this now, and then General Lukic says: "During the war, the MUP does all its work as in peacetime, has the same attitude towards perpetrators or criminal acts in peacetime regardless of their ethnicity."

What you say also, civilians should be protected at all times.

A. Yes. It's a bit difficult for me to follow these minutes, I am sorry, because I saw them just now. Obviously they were submitted through the Prosecution.

Q. Yes, because they have the appropriate number on the top.

A. I never had occasion to see them or read them before.

Q. All right. But I'm sure that you recognise this to be a meeting that you attended?

A. Yes.

Q. I imagine that this is not being challenged?

A. No.

Q. All right. Did you attend the meeting at the staff on the 7th of May in Pristina? The minutes in tab 71. It also has an ERN number.

A. Yes, I did attend the meeting. That can be seen on page 1.

Q. We can see from here that this meeting was attended, among others, by the deputy federal Prime Minister, it says in the first line, Mr. Nikola Sainovic.

A. Correct.

Q. There are many quotations here from his contribution to that meeting. I will draw your attention only to a few of them. Namely, at the beginning it reads: "Mr. Nikola Sainovic said..." In the sixth ³⁹⁹⁸² paragraph below, it says: "Apart from destroying the terrorist organisation KLA, our main task will be to secure peace in Kosovo and Metohija. This must be felt by both our citizens and the entire world."

A. Yes. That is towards the bottom.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic. Mr. Milosevic, I've already told you you are not to proceed until the Chamber has found the passage.

MR. NICE: English page 4.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Page 4. Thank you.

MR. NICE: Just over halfway down.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. You may continue. Yes.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Further below, towards the end of that paragraph, it says: "Securing stable public law and order and securing citizens and their property must be done by the MUP because we cannot allow the Serbs to be stigmatised --"

THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters apologise, we haven't found this.

JUDGE ROBINSON: That's on page 5 at the top.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. You attended that meeting. It says: "Health care must be ensured. Food and medicine must be delivered to those who have abandoned their homes because of the bombing and terrorist actions."

A. Yes.

Q. I will not quote more, but he says that during the first days of the bombing, the terrorists, led by Hashim Thaci, signalled the terrorists ³⁹⁹⁸³ to launch a general attack on civilian facilities, et cetera. A great number of casualties in consequences.

Next quotation: "Organise the life of the Albanian population in villages and settlements where the population lives in by registering their places of residence. The loyalty of Albanians towards the state rests on organised life. The goal of organising the Albanian population is that when refugees return, they can come back to a regulated situation in which people have already registered their place of residence. Demand that Albanians establish a body or local commune in each village and that they set up a local authority and local police in grey uniforms to maintain law and order. Record the number of settlements that have been organised in this way and the number of those that haven't had the time."

A. Yes. We talked about that when we discussed the campaign to have citizens register in their new places of residence, the temporary places of residence.

Q. Three paragraphs below, it says: "Organise mix and organise patrols to check all uniformed and motorised persons. Every uniformed persons must be held accountable for theft because with his uniform he brings shame not only upon himself but upon the state. Those in charge of the police bear great objective responsibility and this responsibility is appreciated if it is said that a specific task cannot be done and why, instead of remaining unsaid."

Do we see here another instance of the authorities urging lawful action and proper application of the regulations?

A. Yes. This is an example of how the authorities insist that the ³⁹⁹⁸⁴ police and the military act always in conformity with the law.

Q. I don't have time to quote much more, but I will end with the conclusions of the leader of the staff, General -- Major General Lukic, who stressed the following: "Speaking of cases and incidents with serious consequences --"

JUDGE ROBINSON: [Previous translation continues] ... Mr. Milosevic.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] At the beginning of the section dealing with the contribution of Major General Sreten Lukic.

THE INTERPRETER: Interpreters note page 22.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] In the Serbian version, it's the third page from the end.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. "Regarding cases involving grave consequences, everything must be processed as seriously as possible."

THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters cannot find this particular passage.

JUDGE ROBINSON: The interpreters can't find it. We're looking at -- we're looking at a paragraph beginning, "In his closing speech, the head of staff, Major Lukic, said..." Is that where you're reading from?

THE INTERPRETER: Interpreters note page 19, towards the bottom of the page.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Page 19.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I am reading what it says here: "When cases and incidents result in grave consequences, they must be ³⁹⁹⁸⁵ processed in a very -- in a way suitable to these working conditions." Have you found it?

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, we've found it.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. "Regardless of whether the act was carried out by terrorists, whether persons died in the army of Yugoslavia and MUP clashes with terrorists or whether these are consequences of NATO bombing, or even crimes of murder under the Criminal Code," et cetera. He also says: "The number of 27 crimes of murder is not realistic as we have information that a greater number of on-site investigations has been conducted and that the number of criminal reports concerning this crime is greater."

Is this another indication that actions were lawful?

A. It says here that the number 27 sounds too small, and he urges the police to record every incident and take appropriate action.

Q. General Lukic goes on to say that in cases involving arson and murder there should be no delay. The suspects must be handed over to the competent judge at once and, "You must ask for a sentence to be pronounced immediately. These sorts of problems have still not be cleared up, especially in Kosovo Polje and Podujevo and Prizren and Djakovica, while Gnjilane has clearly resolved some problems."

Next bullet: "Based on the above, it has clearly been stated and specified that no omissions in any case will be tolerated or forgiven." It is an expression in our language that means nobody should be ³⁹⁹⁸⁶ given any leeway or margin of error.

A. Yes. I read this at the time, although it was a long time ago and I couldn't remember the details until now.

Q. Follows your contribution. You say: "Crime prevention, especially of crimes involving violence and anarchy, is a police priority, because the internal affairs organs shall be held responsible for every broken shop window and each murder."

You go on to speak of anti-terrorist actions, about the sanitisation of battlefields, building of defences, preparation of defence against aggression by ground forces. And towards the end of your contribution you suggest that supervisory units be organised in order to be able to take specific measures in case of misconduct by the police. That means an internal control body within the police.

A. Yes.

Q. This meeting was held on the 7th of May, when the working conditions were the hardest, and still the leadership insists on lawfulness in the conduct of the police.

A. I believe this is clear from the passages of these minutes that you quoted.

Q. General, did you attend the meeting at the ministry staff of the 11th of May? It's tab 72.

A. I did.

Q. What was the agenda of that meeting? Let me just draw your attention to a couple of things. The tasks include -- or, rather, the tasks are related to the defence of the country, anti-terrorist struggle ^{39987 BLANK PAGE 39988} and the establishment of general security in Kosovo and Metohija. Measures undertaken to prevent crime and maintain public law and order in a state of war.

Reports are made at this meeting by?

A. The commander of the special police units detachment.

Q. Here the pages are not numbered, but I can use the ERN number. In fact, they are numbered but this is a bad copy. The ERN number is K0497277. Can you see that?

A. My copy is bad as well.

Q. In Mr. Nice's service, something was probably glued on top of this, so one part is hidden.

This is your contribution. Under item 2, you say: "The incidence of crime was especially discussed at the meeting with chiefs of secretariats. It was said that a case file has to be compiled for every incident. Private wars should be banned because the reputation of the police must be protected and civilians must not be afraid of the police. Special action should be taken to prevent arsons and looting." And you stress how important it is to observe the law in every respect in performing policework. You go on to say that all citizens must be treated lawfully, whereas able-bodied men will be the subject of special checks --

JUDGE ROBINSON: What's the page?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It is the last page but one in the Serbian version, which has a total of seven pages, and it is from the contribution of General Stevanovic. ³⁹⁹⁸⁹

JUDGE ROBINSON: Page 14.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I think I said where I'm reading from.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Item 3: "Departure of civilians ought to be prevented as much as possible." The rest of the text illegible.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. And you go on to say: "All citizens are to be treated pursuant to the law." I have already quoted this.

A. Follows some organisational and personnel issues.

Q. Let me just point out one thing, because Mr. Bonomy expressed a special interest in paramilitary units.

General Lukic stresses in the last paragraph of these minutes: "Prohibit the wearing of uniforms by any person who is not an authorised police member or a member of the reserve police force who has been mobilised."

How was it possible, General, that there still existed people who wore uniforms and did not have the status of policemen?

A. I can only assume that such groups could exist because the conditions in Kosovo and Metohija during the war were very complex and very difficult, and it was difficult to exercise control over the entire territory in every smallest place, and I don't say that they existed.

Q. That was tab 72, I suppose.

A. Yes.

Q. How about the conclusions of that meeting of the 17th and the 11th ³⁹⁹⁹⁰ -- of the 7th and the 11th of May? Were they delivered to the personnel on the ground?

A. I know very well that the conclusions were made available to all the personnel on the ground to be followed and acted upon.

Q. In tab 73 can we find the minutes of the meeting or, rather, the conclusions of the meeting? It says: "At meetings held on 7th and 11th of May, 1999."

A. Yes. That is a list of conclusions from both meetings we've just analysed, meetings of the 7th and 11th of May.

Q. Very well. That's the 11th of May. In item 1, it says: "The whole leadership must be informed of the text of the communications from the meeting held with the President of the FRY." We have already reviewed that text.

JUDGE ROBINSON: We have been over this already. Move on to another topic.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well. Very well.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. General, I have received from the office of Mr. Nice a copy of your own agenda where you kept your notes, your organiser. I would like to ask you a couple of questions about those notes, and they are these: To what extent if at all can we see in those notebooks the care for the civilians, equal treatment for all citizens, et cetera?

A. In the original text of my agenda or notebook this can be seen very easily. It's clearly visible.

Q. So that's your own personal diary or agenda where you make your ³⁹⁹⁹¹ own notes in your own handwriting as an aide-memoire. So can we see there, then, that efforts were made to prevent crime generally?

A. Yes, certainly that can be seen.

Q. And can we also see that you are investing efforts to bring the perpetrators of crime to justice?

A. Yes, although I don't have the opportunity of following the case through, or following these cases through, because I didn't have my agenda. (redacted)

MR. NICE: [Previous translation continues] ... can we go into private session, please?

JUDGE ROBINSON: Private session.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson, I think that Mr. Nice would have to explain why he's seeking a private session.

MR. NICE: [Previous translation continues] ... can we go into private session. The matter is the subject of a motion that's been before the Chamber. It's been before the accused. It's been before the amici, and it's extremely disturbing, matters are being dealt with in this way, but nevertheless. I'm going to ask that everything that's been said about the diary from about the last couple of questions is redacted as well, but can we go into private session?

[Trial Chamber confers]

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson.

[Trial Chamber confers]

JUDGE ROBINSON: This is the subject of a motion by the Prosecutor, and we had indicated that when the matter arose we would deal ³⁹⁹⁹² with it, but we're going to deal with it in private session. The Prosecutor will then explain his position.

Go into private session.

[Private session]

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted) ³⁹⁹⁹³ Pages 39993-39996 redacted. Private session.

³⁹⁹⁹⁷

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

[Open session]

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I would really like to ask you something. May I be allowed to say just one sentence, and I have my own security and safety reasons for saying this, for saying what I want to say. ³⁹⁹⁹⁸

JUDGE ROBINSON: We are in public session. We are in public session. Should we return to private session to hear you?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't mind. I don't mind being in open session to say what I have to say. And it is in my interests that everything we state here should be in open session, and I accept not to mention a single name because that is not an important point for me. But I would like to ask your permission for me to be able to say one sentence.

JUDGE ROBINSON: No. I think we need to be in private session for that. Let's go back to private session.

[Private session]

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted) ³⁹⁹⁹⁹

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

(redacted)

[Open session]

JUDGE ROBINSON: We're adjourned until tomorrow, 9.00 a.m. Oh, I see. Apparently it's 2.15 tomorrow. 2.15 tomorrow.

--- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.43 p.m., to be reconvened on Friday, the 27th day

of May, 2005, at 2.15 p.m.