⁹²⁹⁰

Wednesday, 22 June 2005

[Open session]

[The witness entered court]

[The accused entered court]

--- Upon commencing at 9.03 a.m.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, I see that you have complied with the Trial Chamber's order in respect of the addition to the exhibit list of a vast number of documents. You say that the documents were obtained in respect of Mr. Delic's testimony.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'm listening to the appropriate channel, but I'm not receiving any interpretation, and I don't know if the witness is receiving it either.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Can we try again? Is it working now? Is the witness hearing me? Yes.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] No, I can't hear anything.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Well, let's try again. Are you hearing?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, I can hear interpretation now on channel 6. Yes, that's fine.

JUDGE ROBINSON: I was saying, Mr. Milosevic, that I see you have complied with --

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, yes. I heard what you said, Mr. Robinson. I just wanted to point out that I wasn't receiving the interpretation.

JUDGE ROBINSON: I was saying, more specifically, that in your -- in your written application you say that the documents for Mr. Delic's ⁹²⁹¹ testimony were obtained not earlier than the second half of 2004. I'd like more specific information as to what -- what month in 2004 you obtained these documents.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All of that information was provided to you by my associates, who know exactly when they received the documents. As you are aware, I'm not able to procure any documents myself. They said that the documents were obtained in the second half of the year. I know that sometime in the fall of 2004, as I was told, those documents started arriving one after the other.

As for the documents that we are dealing with now, I'd like to tell you that the service which provided the documents provided them with respect to a particular witness. Therefore, they provided the portion of the document which pertains to the area of responsibility of General Delic. This is why other segments are not there, just the ones that pertain to the area of responsibility of General Delic. When we have another witness come here to testify, another witness that has a different area of responsibility, I assume we would receive other parts of this document or some other documents.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, you must take responsibility for what happens in relation to your case, and it is not sufficient merely to say that your associates know. You must know.

JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Nice, perhaps you could assist me. I have the impression, but it may be a wrong impression, that during the Prosecution case there were documents presented which were not necessarily within the 65 ter list. Is that -- ⁹²⁹²

MR. NICE: Absolutely the case, yes.

JUDGE BONOMY: And did you make applications in this form for these to be added to the list?

MR. NICE: I think typically not. Sometimes, yes, but the position is that there was nothing like a wholesale provision of material outside the 65 ter list. Our 65 ter list did the best we could at the time to provide all the documents. As other documents came in, we sometimes gave specific notice and sought specific request. Sometimes the documents arrived at the last minute, and we've always accepted that in our submissions about the accused's provision of material late. We always disclosed material that was not on the 65 ter list as soon as it was available to us and as soon as we knew we had any intention of using it. And of course that was in a regime where the accused was not only provided with the 65 ter list and the 65 ter material as a general provision, but he was provided in advance of witnesses testifying specifically with the materials that we expected to relate to that particular witness.

So that although, yes, there were some documents provided late and outside the list, we did everything we could to comply with the requirements of the Rules, and we did not provide material of this quantity and on this basis.

And I should, perhaps in respect of what the accused has said and of his filing, draw to the Court's attention this: If there were indeed 10.400 documents and videotapes, as paragraph 5 -- 3(A) suggests, and if as paragraph 3(B) suggests, this documentation comes from archives but ⁹²⁹³ also from the library or archive of this witness himself and, as is suggested by various members of the VJ acting presumably on request from the witness or the associates, and they providing documents from their own archives, I must make this observation: It's highly likely that many of these documents of the 10.000 from these various sources, 10.000-odd from these various sources, are documents that we would have sought unsuccessfully by RFAs over the last several years. It of course isn't possible either yet to say in respect of the 600 documents produced whether they would have been covered by RFAs that haven't been answered, it's not a priority exercise, but it's highly probable, but it's almost certain that this large volume of material from which the accused has been able to draw includes documents we would have wanted to see. And it would have been entirely open to him, if what he says yesterday about holding nothing back, it would have been open to him to tell us he got 10.000-odd documents from which he would be making a selection, that coming from various sources, and we could have a look at all of them. He is not obliged to do that, but if he's got problems with his 65 ter filings because he would know that he's not in a position to make the final selection but he knows he's got a big library, it would have been open to him to do that. In the event, we were simply provided with the material last week and there was no question of it being provided before and I have to, unfortunately, say this: Ms. Dicklich is regularly making requests for material, aware of the problems that we will face, and she has been told specifically that material cannot be provided until the accused gives the final word approving its passage to us. So that if there is a bulk ⁹²⁹⁴ provision to Registry, I can't remember what it was said, a couple of months ago, April or something like that, or May, that could have been provided to us but it wasn't. So there we are. That's the best I can help you with in these difficult circumstances.

JUDGE BONOMY: Yes. The problem for me, Mr. Nice, is that there's -- I suppose the principal issue here is the interests of justice.

MR. NICE: Of course.

JUDGE BONOMY: And wholesale exclusion of this material would not really be conducive to reaching a proper verdict in this case, would it?

MR. NICE: No, Your Honour. And I made it clear yesterday when I drew to your attention the problems we were facing that there were documents within the collection already provided that we would want to rely on, and of course I have in mind Your Honour's concern.

JUDGE BONOMY: It's extremely frustrating that this sort of application which has been made is wholly inadequate. It doesn't give any clear indication of when these documents came, the circumstances in which they came, and yet the application quite rightly says there is an issue of -- in relation to the interests of justice.

The Rules are flagrantly broken because there is a clear rule that exhibits have to be served by the Defence on the Prosecutor. There's no question of handing them in to the Registry and leaving it to the Registry to deal with, as was so blithely said by Mr. Milosevic yesterday. He has that obligation. These documents should have been passed on at a much earlier date.

So while it may be that we have to accept the frustration that ⁹²⁹⁵ goes with this inadequate presentation of a case in the interests of justice, perhaps we can do something to try to avoid it being repeated.

MR. NICE: Can I come back to that point in just a second when I make one other intervening -- intermediate point. The intermediate point is this: That there's a really serious knock-on effect of the accused's elected, chosen method of presenting his case. By presenting material of this quantity in this way, he renders it impossible for us to agree matters in advance. Had he pursued a policy of using 89(F) or using reports of one kind or another, producing voluminous documentation, as he has been repeatedly effectively invited to do by the Court, then subject to my having an increase in resources available to me - but I'm confident I might have been able to achieve that - we could have worked on the materials in advance and agreed whatever there was capable of agreement and that would have made more time available to the accused for the presentation of his case overall. By bringing this material in in this way, he takes the period of time that he does with witnesses like Stevanovic and no doubt now with this witness and will no doubt then be praying in aid the time taken when he makes an application for extension of 150 days, which he's told us he's going to do. And the Chamber will in due course be put in the position of having to make the hard decision between saying the consequences being faced by the accused so far as timetable are concerned are of his own making in part by reason of his delayed presentation of documents.

JUDGE BONOMY: Well, he's chosen not to use the resources that are plainly necessary for the present -- the adequate presentation of a case ⁹²⁹⁶ of this nature and will have to bear responsibility for that in due course, whatever that responsibility may turn out to be. But I'm more concerned to see if there is a way of improving the situation for the future because it may come to it that we have to exclude documents in their entirety in relation to witnesses because otherwise the proper presentation of the case is hampered and indeed the interests of justice are prejudiced by the way in which the documents are handed in or presented inadequately.

MR. NICE: Your Honour, I agree with that, and although I've got one my one last point to make in answer to Your Honour's earlier and my repeated observation, the interest of justice point is this: We find witnesses like, for example, Jasovic or Stevanovic leaving The Hague with a large proportion of their documents still untranslated, and although I have some resources available to provide draft translations, that does not enable me adequately to assist the Court in relation to cross-examination of relevant materials.

The immediate problem is most likely next to arise, or a similar form of problem is most likely next to arise with Momir Bulatovic. Now, apparently there are a thousand documents or more coming in - we don't know - a huge number. Apparently, from what I've heard, some of them being records of sessions, and I don't know what sessions they are, which are unknown to us, so they're likely to be very substantial documents. We've been pressing for their provision, and as a result of yesterday's hearing, we are at least told today, because Ms. Dicklich has spoken directly to the accused's associate who, of course, is outside Court but ⁹²⁹⁷ who we were able to catch briefly this morning before the session started when he was pushing the trolley in, I think, and he confirms that there will be a CD provided this afternoon.

Now, of course, CDs of this kind come without any order of the documents, and it's very difficult for us to connect them later with any tabbed versions, but it's better than nothing. So we may get some Bulatovic documents sometime today, but that is going to be a really seriously difficult document provision exercise for us to deal with.

JUDGE ROBINSON: There is one matter I'd like to raise. If the 629 documents which are being produced include documents in respect of which the Prosecutor had made an application for them to be produced and in respect of which the Chamber made an order under -- under Rule 54 bis, I think that's a very serious matter for the -- not so much for the accused but for the Serbian government, because in my view it implicates the state responsibility --

MR. NICE: Well, Your Honour --

JUDGE ROBINSON: -- of the Serbian government.

MR. NICE: It would be a serious matter. Connecting the documents with the requests and the orders is a labour intensive exercise which has to come second to dealing with the material in Court, but we will turn to it.

JUDGE ROBINSON: I'm most interested in the comment that you made that Ms. Dicklich has been told that material cannot be provided until the accused approves. That's by -- I don't know -- I'm not quite sure what context exactly. ⁹²⁹⁸

MR. NICE: Up and until the last witness, Jasovic, and up and until this witness, we've been told that material can't be handed over until it's finally approved by the accused. So that the accused says yesterday no, that's not true. He says there's never been any final interdiction by him on the provision of material, but we've been regularly asking for material and we've regularly met that response.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, I think the Serbian government must appreciate that an issue of their state responsibility, of state responsibility might arise if they do not -- if they have not produced documents in respect of which this Chamber made an order and the documents are very readily available.

That's not a matter for Mr. Milosevic.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson.

[Trial Chamber confers]

JUDGE ROBINSON: We'll grant the application. Judge Bonomy, however, wishes to bring something else to the attention of Mr. Milosevic.

JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Milosevic, I want to emphasise to you something that you ought to be well aware of, which is the terms of Rule 65 ter, paragraph (G)(ii), which relates to exhibit lists and says that along with the exhibit list which you produced close to a year ago now, the Defence is bound to serve on the Prosecutor, directly on the Prosecutor, copies of the exhibits so listed.

Now, that Rule must apply to every other document that you become aware of later as the case, the Defence case, progresses. So your obligation is to make sure that as soon as an item is potentially an ⁹²⁹⁹ exhibit it is delivered to the Prosecutor. And if that course is not followed in future, then I would be much less inclined to be sympathetic to an application made to expand the 65 ter exhibit list, and I want you to be clear about that at this stage.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic --

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson, I have to say something with respect to what was stated by Mr. Nice and what Mr. Bonomy just explained to us, namely, you remember well - when I say "you," I'm referring to you personally and to Mr. Kwon - so you remember that very frequently I would receive documents from Mr. Nice one day for the next day. I would receive many binders, a lot of documents, and when I inquired how was I supposed to become familiar with those documents, I would invariably be told by the late Mr. May that I could do that overnight, that I had enough time during the night. Therefore, this issue of providing documents is directly linked to the fact that I was never given time to prepare my case, and you're aware of that very well. When I received 600.000 pages in the course of the Kosovo, Croatia, and Bosnia presentation of evidence, Mr. May would invariably say, "We will consider that," however, that was never considered. And Mr. Nice is now abusing the fact that I was never given an opportunity, I was never given time during which I could read the documents and prepare myself.

In addition to that, I never had access to any archives. You were able to see that my associates received these documents in late 2004, not before that. These are objective reasons, therefore. ⁹³⁰⁰ Mr. Nice just mentioned Mr. Bulatovic, who was the president of Montenegro and Prime Minister of the federal government in the course of those ten years. On the list of documents there are several minutes of the meetings of the Supreme Defence Council, and I can tell you straight away that I received all of those documents from Mr. Nice's office. Prior to that I had never been granted an access to that. Mr. Nice said last year that he said about 5.000 pages of minutes of the Supreme Defence Council, and then when we addressed Mr. Nice's office, it was only then that we were able to receive some documents that could be provided with Bulatovic or in the course of his testimony. In addition to that, Mr. Bonomy explained that this way of presenting documents was inappropriate. I didn't quite understand that. I understood the procedure to be that when a witness comes to testify the documents are presented during the testimony of the witness and that that was the only possible way to have the exhibits admitted. I'm not aware of any other avenue of doing so. Please let me know clearly, what is it that you want me to do?

JUDGE BONOMY: Well, there are three matters that need to be dealt with there. First of all, if you were listening clearly this morning, you would know that I have taken account of the fact that the Prosecution did on occasions present material without the request which we have asked you to make. I've taken account of that. But at this stage of the case, when you're in possession of the documents, it's your duty to intimate them, as I've already explained, and revenge against the Prosecution does not justify not following that course. ⁹³⁰¹ Secondly, as far as the method of presentation is concerned, there are two separate issues. One is presentation to the Prosecution in the sense of giving them notice. It's your job to send copies. That's the same point as I've just been making, so that they're aware of the documents that you intend to refer to. But as far as presenting evidence in Court is concerned, it's plainly open to you to prepare written statements of witnesses who are going to refer to large numbers of documents and for these to be incorporated into the written statement to speed up the presentation of the evidence in chief and to enable you to concentrate your oral presentation of the witness's evidence on the most crucial elements. Those advising you, your associates and Mr. Kay, are in a particularly well-informed position to be able to give you guidance on that, but so far you've shown no inclination to follow that sort of course. Mr. Nice has been urging it upon you repeatedly throughout the trial.

JUDGE KWON: And if I could add one thing. Mr. Milosevic, I note there's a sort of distortion when you said that most of the Prosecution's documents were disclosed to you at a belated stage. I think, although there are some materials that are disclosed very -- at a belated stage, most of the documents were handed over to you at the beginning of the trial, and it is the courtesy copies that were disclosed just a day before or something like that.

Am I correct in so understanding, Mr. Nice?

MR. NICE: Yes.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Very well, Mr. Milosevic, continue your ^{9302 BLANK PAGE 9303} examination of the witness.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right, I'll continue. If you believe that disclosing 600.000 pages is normal time for discovery without giving more time than an overnight, then you're probably right.

WITNESS: BOZIDAR DELIC [Resumed]

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

Q. Good morning, General.

THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters note that the witness's microphone is not on.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Please have the microphones turned on for the witness.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Please look at page 54.

JUDGE ROBINSON: What document is this?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] This is the document that we looked at yesterday. That's -- let me just have a look. Tab 4. This is the annual intelligence report of the electronic reconnaissance and anti-electronic operations for 1998.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Have you found page 54, General?

A. Yes, yes.

Q. Please look at the date of the 7th of December.

A. Yes.

Q. That's the fourth paragraph from the top. Please read what it ⁹³⁰⁴ says here.

A. "We found ought that KLA members shot two Siptars, claiming that they were not their supporters. One of them had given a KLA member from his village 1.000 francs and said that many Siptars who were not able to give them contributions in money were harassed and beaten by the KLA. Particularly threatened are those who do not have relatives in the KLA."

Q. Were you aware of that practice except for the fact that it was included in this report?

A. Yes. I had the opportunity to talk to some Siptars, and my intelligence organ from the brigade did so too. We had this information from conversations we had.

Those Siptars who were supposed to be well-off were supposed to give certain amounts of money, and then members of their family would not have to participate in the KLA.

Q. And do you know about executions of certain Albanians who did not want to support the KLA? Did you know about such occurrences?

A. I know about an enormous number of such cases. First of all, Siptars who after 1990 and 1991 stayed in the state administration or even state-owned companies like public utilities, the post office, et cetera, were affected in 1998 and 1999. Many of them were killed. Also, some families that were considered loyal to the Republic of Serbia also had quite a number of problems.

In my zone, many members of such families were killed. If necessary, I can even provide their names.

JUDGE BONOMY: What do you mean by "an enormous number of such ⁹³⁰⁵ cases"?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] An enormous number is tens of such cases.

JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Take a look at the next paragraph, which has to do with the 8th of December. Just read the beginning. We're not going to read the whole paragraph. We haven't got time for that.

A. "Members of the KLA caught two Siptar women and slit their throats because they had used Motorolas to lead the police to a group of terrorists in Klecka sector and thus helped to disperse them."

Q. And towards the end of the page, please look at the date of the 15th of December.

A. The 15th of December: "Siptars were saying that they hoped that they would not be attacked and abused by the police now that the verifiers arrived, but that they had to attack the Serbs everywhere. They salute each other by saying, 'May you have luck in the new war.'"

Q. Does that mean that when the Verification Mission arrived they started killing again?

A. After the anti-terrorist operation ended at the end of September 1998, the killings went on, but to a lesser degree, until December 1998. When the verifiers arrived, the army and the police had to leave many strategic points along roads and throughout the territory. Again, these positions were taken up by the terrorist forces, and again roads were attacked, vehicles, columns of members of the MUP, and civilians. ⁹³⁰⁶

Q. And what does it say in the last line on this page, the same date?

A. "Siptars keep disseminating the information that there will be a new war again in the spring; they call it a 'Bloody spring, when they will set everything on fire, and half of Serbia will be burning if need be.'"

Q. Please look at the next page, the 16th of December. That is the second paragraph on the next page. You can start with the second sentence, you don't have to start out with the first one, it doesn't matter, "... that many came from abroad," and so on.

A. "Sabotage terrorist members are in Osljane village between Gornja Klina and Vucitrn where they staying in several Siptar houses. They brought beds to sleep in, and procured new Golfs. In this camp, two Germans have been training about 60 saboteurs."

Q. All right. And what does it say about the 19th of December in this survey?

A. The 19th of December: "They are mentioning that the war will break out in the spring and that some instructors and retired officers arrived from America and Germany to train them in handling modern weapons. Full aircraft are flying every day on the Zurich-Tirana line."

Q. The 20th of December. Please tell us what is characteristic here. A Siptar from Germany is referred to there.

A. Yes. "A Siptar from Germany asked his compatriots from Kosovo to give him information so that he could infiltrate three Mujahedin he had with him. He was advised to try to do it through the Democratic Alliance of Kosovo in Budapest."

Q. What about the 22nd of December? A number of those who are being ⁹³⁰⁷ trained in Albania are referred to. So could you just read out that sentence.

A. "There are about 10.000 Siptars being trained in Albania and there were officers among them."

For us, this was a fact that we absolutely knew. We knew that they were being trained in Albania, and we knew the bases where terrorists were being trained. That's a fact. The training started in smaller groups as far as back as in 1991. This figure of 10.000 was an immediate preparation for 1999. If necessary, I can mention the actual centres involved.

The training involved some officers of the Albanian army too.

Q. What were the centres that you knew?

A. Kuksta Polje [phoen], Vucja Dol, Sahan, Tirana, just to mention a few.

Q. Please look at the bottom of this page, the 26th of December, 1998. What does it say there in the second sentence, to omit the portion about money and sniper rifles.

A. "In some areas, the Siptars are saying that the police have so far not been coming and that the only problems they have are with KLA members."

Q. And then on the 27th of December?

A. "Every employed Siptar living abroad gives 1.000 Deutschmark for Kosovo if he is working illegally; if they have a legal company and papers, they are giving 2.000 Deutschmark respectively."

Q. Thank you, General. In the same tab, further on, there is a list ⁹³⁰⁸ of confirmed and exposed sabotage and terrorist forces members in Kosovo and Metohija in 1998.

A. Yes, I've found it.

Q. What does this list refer to? Who compiled it?

A. This list refers to exposed, revealed members of the sabotage and terrorist forces and radio goniometric devices show where they were, and also the time of identification of all of these members is listed in the list.

Q. You can also see the positions they held, some of them political positions, and command positions too. And the last column is source and time of information received. Do I conclude correctly that "RI" is radio reconnaissance?

A. Yes.

Q. So all these documents are based on radio reconnaissance; is that right?

A. Yes.

JUDGE BONOMY: If that's the case, why does RI not appear in all of them?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It is evident that all this information was received by radio reconnaissance. Please look at numbers 10 through 16 or 20 to 27. They were not fully identified. The full names and surnames are not included. The operators who were actually listening to the conversations managed to register this. And you see that goniometry did not manage to establish the exact place where they were calling from but obviously this was the only way, the only method, rather, ⁹³⁰⁹ that this unit could apply, that is radio reconnaissance and radio goniometry.

JUDGE BONOMY: Perhaps you can look at it the other way: Why is it included in numbers 1 to 6 and not 7, 8, and 9, for example?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The only explanation is the one that I've already given: For a number of these members, they could not reveal the actual location where they were, and they were not identified by their full names and surnames.

JUDGE BONOMY: If RI simply means radio intelligence, then why is it necessary to exclude that if you don't have the exact location pinpointed?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I certainly cannot give an explanation for these other cases why it was not included.

JUDGE BONOMY: Who compiled the document?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I've already said yesterday; it's an integral part of the previous document.

JUDGE BONOMY: This is just part of the report. Sorry. I misunderstood this last part. Thank you.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You can see that this is annex number 17. This document, therefore, has at least 17 annexes attached to it, or perhaps even more.

JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well. Can we proceed now?

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson, it seems appropriate ⁹³¹⁰ to me to ask you, as was otherwise customary, for the tabs or exhibits to be admitted as they are being presented. I wish to remind you that yesterday we had tabs 1, 2, 3 referring to particular video clips that you saw, and now we have tab number 4, which is an excerpt from the annual intelligence report based on electronic surveillance and anti-electronic operations for 1998.

I tender these documents into evidence along with the testimony of the general.

MR. NICE: I would ask that this document certainly be not produced at this stage. Its admissibility may depend on answers to questions that will come in cross-examination and it may indeed depend on the ability of the accused, personally or through this witness, to provide further supporting material of the kind we identified yesterday.

[Trial Chamber confers]

MR. KAY: May I make an observation? I don't want to interrupt Your Honours on this matter. It does seem easier, as we go along, to deal with admissibility. Mr. Nice's cross-examination is not relevant to the admissibility of the document if the accused lays the foundation, proves that it's probative and relevant. Whatever Mr. Nice does, that then becomes a matter of weight, and he cannot have this hold on the accused's case and his exhibits that he's attempting to exert. In my submission, as the accused is developing his defence through the witnesses and is able to deal with the documents that seem to him to be relevant as he goes through, and perhaps discard documents that he doesn't feel are relevant if a point has been able to be made, we have a ⁹³¹¹ far more satisfactory basis for dealing with his exhibits and relevance to the trial.

We seem to be getting bogged down into arguments over exhibits that do not enable the case to progress freely and flow in a normal way.

JUDGE BONOMY: You may well be right in general terms about being able to deal with these exhibits as they are presented when adequate notice of them has been given by one party to the other, but if authenticity is an issue, and there's an indication that that is the case in relation to this document, for example, where the first 13 pages or whatever aren't here and there's no indication of its date of publication or not even any indication apart from what the witness has said of its provenance, I think it's a bit more difficult, then, because the Prosecution haven't had adequate time to make a determination about its authenticity.

MR. KAY: If authenticity is in dispute perhaps we should go back to the practice we had in the Prosecution case, of MFI'ing - marked for identification - in those exceptions, which became not really the rule to everything but they were matters that we were able to attend to and more conveniently look at and consider.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you, Mr. Kay.

JUDGE KWON: Do you think, Mr. Kay, that we can have further evidence apart from this witness's evidence in relation to the authenticity of this exhibit?

MR. KAY: Well, he's laid the foundation as to where it came from and the explanation that these were Delic documents produced by the VJ, ⁹³¹² hence the way that it has been cut into the shape that it has, and there are passages -- and one can understand that the VJ would present materials in that way. If it's not relevant to this general, there's no reason why he should have possession of it, which, as I understood it, is the explanation, which sounds reasonable.

[Trial Chamber confers]

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson.

JUDGE ROBINSON: I don't wish to hear you, Mr. Milosevic. The Chamber has made a determination on this issue. By majority, we'll admit the document now. We think there is --

JUDGE KWON: Tab 4.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Is it tab 4? Majority in relation to tab 4. We think there is much wisdom in returning to the practice of dealing with the admission of documents as they arise and as they are tendered. This was our practice in the beginning. We appear to be making a separate labour for ourselves, and this is, in my view, hampering progress in the case. So by majority we will admit this document.

JUDGE KWON: Video clips will be admitted, but I have one thing to clarify in relation to that.

Mr. Milosevic, the witness yesterday said the last clip we saw was taken at the fundraising dinner in honour of Mr. Kerry in 2004, but your index has no reference to that. On the contrary, your index, number 2A, says Holbrooke, Clark, and Albanian lobby in 1998. In 2004 I would assume that Mr. Clark was also a candidate. So I wonder whether the witness was mistaken or not. If you could clarify that. ⁹³¹³

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] In the DVD, Holbrooke is in Junik, and there is the oath-taking ceremony where it says that they are struggling for unity with Albania, June 1998. In the other excerpt, that same leader that was in charge of the oath-taking ceremony was with Holbrooke in Junik also in mid-1998.

The third extract shows the role of the members of the so -- of the then American administration, which the Albanians explain themselves, and they call Clark a veteran of the KLA and Holbrooke the Golden Kalashnikov. So this was in mid-1998, where you can see a very immediate direct cooperation with the forces who wished to unite part of Serbia with Albania and the then US administration. So that is a very important exhibit, and it is footage which was taken by --

JUDGE KWON: We have to ask why the witness said that it was taken in 2004.

General Delic?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, not 1994.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The interpretation wasn't the right one. The interpreter said 1994 whereas Mr. Kwon said, and you can see that on the transcript, 2004 was what Mr. Kwon said.

JUDGE KWON: Yes. You said it was taken in 2004. Is it right?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I said that I had seen the entire version, the full version the film, and I can say that it lasts more than one hour, and there are individual details related to the arming of the KLA in 1998, then there are different meetings of the Albanian diaspora in America, and one of the latest meetings about which this excerpt speaks is ⁹³¹⁴ a meeting from a fundraising dinner, a dinner of donors, where the Albanians are giving their contributions in the pre-election campaign.

JUDGE KWON: Still I'm being confused.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, I assume, Mr. Robinson, that you can view the entire film. You have it at your disposal. We have just selected three excerpts which are without doubt authentic ones. If you take a look at the entire film, if you're interested in seeing that, then you'll be able to find many other interesting events and details which I don't have time to go into here.

MR. NICE: Your Honours, can I --

JUDGE BONOMY: This is -- this is completely to misunderstand your role in this case. Your role is to present your case, and we're trying to clarify why the witness tells us a piece of the film you showed related to 2004 and you claim in your index that it relates to a meeting in 1998. Now, the two are not consistent with each other, and if you want to leave it that way, then as far as I'm concerned the video clip should not be admitted.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Certainly the dinner where we see Clark and Holbrooke wearing dinner jackets does not refer to their meetings with the terrorists in 1998. Now, if an error has been made in the index, I'll take a look at it to see what happened there and supply additional explanation about that. But certainly the dinner, yes.

JUDGE BONOMY: Are you now saying it was in 2004?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'm not saying that. The witness said that. All I did was to show you 1998 where you can see the direct ^{9315 BLANK PAGE 9316} cooperation between the representative of the then administration, US administration, with the terrorists, and then you saw later on in America, after everything was over, as far as I understood it from the excerpt that I viewed here when you viewed it too, that this was the end of 1999, and on the footage there was certainly an excerpt with the fundraising dinner as well. But we can go back to that if you have anything against --

JUDGE BONOMY: You could perhaps deal with the question that Judge Kwon put to you, which is why in the index does it say, "Holbrooke, Clark, and Albanian lobby in 1998; source: Security service of army of Serbia and Montenegro." Now, why is that in the index if it is not accurate, and do you want to change it?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, I'll ask the witness. Let me ask the witness. He took a look at the excerpt.

JUDGE BONOMY: He's answered the question. He's dealt with it already. What is your position on it?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The Albanian lobby in America and the meeting between Holbrooke and Clark with them does not date to 1998. That's for sure. The Holbrooke meeting with the Albanians is from 1998, especially those who were striving for --

JUDGE BONOMY: What alteration do you want to make to your index?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] In the index, we should have the exact date for the third excerpt. As to the first and second excerpts, we have the correct date, but the film should be viewed again and then an explanation can be given in the index. I think there was a typing error in the index, because the Albanian lobby meeting was not the dinner ⁹³¹⁷ meeting that we saw. That wasn't in 1998.

[Trial Chamber confers]

MR. NICE: Let me, if I can assist --

JUDGE ROBINSON: Let the video be played again so we can make a final determination.

MR. NICE: I think that the -- if I can help, just this: I think what the accused has is some kind of documentary film which probably contains bits and pieces from everywhere. Now, we know that the practice of the Court in relation to excerpts from documentary films is to be limited or fairly restricted in what it allows to be produced as an exhibit and only able to do it by individual clips. The accused, who really should be taking expert assistance and advice in the preparation of exhibits, seems to have failed to understand what your practice is.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Let the video be played.

[Videotape played]

JUDGE ROBINSON: This is not the right video.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] While the tape is being found, I have a document here which says: "In September [In English] ... VPRO produced the documentary entitled The Brooklyn Connection, De Brooklyn Connectie." [Interpretation] That's in Dutch, De Brooklyn Connectie. And then that third excerpt is footage by the Dutch television. It says this commentary: "KLA terrorist Boris Krasniqi [In English]... he attends a John Kerry fundraiser and then smuggled weapons in Kosovo for a war that is being planned against American and other UN peacekeepers there. The video can be downloaded from the website," et cetera. ⁹³¹⁸ [Interpretation] That third excerpt you saw had Dutch subtitles. So that was called The Brooklyn Connection, that one there, and relates to 2004, and quite obviously the witness is right on that score, where they call Clark the veteran of the KLA and they call Holbrooke the Golden Kalashnikov.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Are we getting the video?

[Videotape played]

JUDGE ROBINSON: This is not the right one either.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The third excerpt is what we're looking for. That was the first one. And then there's the second one where you can see Holbrooke with this same person.

[Videotape played]

JUDGE ROBINSON: Can you assist us, then, General? When was this taken?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The film was shown in 2004 on our television, and I saw this film in the National Centre for Cooperation with The Hague Tribunal, where all the documents are gathered related to KLA crimes and other acts perpetrated.

JUDGE BONOMY: The simple question is: When did the event take place that we saw in the film there with Holbrooke and Clark in it meeting Albanians?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If you were to view the entire film, I said it was a fundraising dinner for Mr. Kerry.

JUDGE BONOMY: So that's got to be 2004.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I agree that that would be so. ⁹³¹⁹

JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Here you can see them talking about Wesley Clark, the supreme NATO commander in 1999, and then afterwards mention is made of Holbrooke. Holbrooke is mentioned, the US representative in Kosovo in 1999. And the footage is quite obviously 2004, as the witness just said.

There are photographs from that dinner here as well. If you wish, we can place them on the overhead projector, showing Holbrooke, Clark, and all the other participants in the dinner held -- at the dinner held in 2004.

[Trial Chamber confers]

JUDGE ROBINSON: Well, the index is clearly wrong. We'll admit the tape, and a change should be made to the index.

MR. NICE: Your Honour, before we move on, may I make, without reopening, one observation about your decision in respect of tab 4, which I hadn't fully argued, and the observation is simply this: It's not a question of my having a hold on the documents, it's the Chamber's -- or the Tribunal's Rules which determine admissibility, and if as a result of questions that I ask of a document admitted or admitted for identification it becomes clear that the document does not qualify, for example, under Rule 95, then I must be in a position to reopen the argument or the decision and invite a change then.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Well, you're doing exactly what you said you did not intend to do.

MR. NICE: I'm not -- ⁹³²⁰

JUDGE ROBINSON: In seeking to reopen it. The Chamber has already ruled on this, Mr. Nice. Let us proceed.

MR. NICE: -- announcing my position for the future, that's all.

THE REGISTRAR: D300 will be given to all the binders.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, continue. We have lost a lot of time.

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for the accused, please.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I apologise. I did not understand. Was the exhibit number given to all four exhibits, the same number for all four exhibits, or will each of them have a separate number?

JUDGE ROBINSON: It's the same number for all.

THE INTERPRETER: Could the accused please speak into the microphone.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. General, here --

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, please speak into the microphone.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. General, in tab 5, we have a report of yours entitled "Political and security situation --" "Report on the political and security situation in the Djakovica municipality." On the second page we can see that you wrote this report. Would you please take a look at this document, General.

A. Yes. This is the report that I sent to the command of the Pristina Corps, to the commander personally on the 23rd of February, 1998. This report pertains to the political and security situation in the ⁹³²¹ territory of Djakovica municipality which, in relation to other areas in my area of responsibility, at that time was quite critical.

Q. In order not to cover the entire report, would you please just select several parts of the report that you yourself would like to emphasise. It starts under 1, where it says: "Over the last few months of 1997, and particularly since the beginning of January 1998 there has been a significant deterioration in the political and security situation ..."

A. Yes. In this report that I sent to the corps commander, I identified two sectors. One sector is to the north-west of Djakovica. In the central part of that area is the village of Smonica. This is where the terrorist activities intensified, and that territory came under full control of the terrorists.

The second area is to the north-west of Djakovica, from the Radonjic Lake and then on to the village of Kraljane, the village of Jablanica, and village of Glodjane and Maznik. Later on, Dukagjin Operative Zone would be established there.

In my report, I stated that based on the information we received, the situation became particularly complex when the police detachment which was in the village of Uglane [phoen] had to withdraw to Djakovica, and later on that area was toured by police patrols only. Then in the report I go on to say that in late 1997 in this territory, a census was made of male residents aged between 18 and 60 who were given wartime assignments in the so-called KLA. Then later on in this part of territory, especially in the village ⁹³²² of Jablanica, this entire area for a period of ten years was basically inaccessible to the organs of the Republic of Serbia. Police basically never entered these villages.

Q. I apologise if I interrupted you. Please finish your answer and then I will put a question to you.

A. In this part of the territory, especially in the village of Jablanica, this was the area that people avoided visiting, the civil servants, the one -- the ones who deal with utilities and so on. They avoided visiting this area. Not a single member of MUP came into the village because he would have been attacked.

Q. Could you please explain in greater detail what is stated here in paragraph 3 where it says that they had been engaged based on the system of a peaceful farmer by day and KLA terrorist by night.

A. In this territory, all those people who were sought by law enforcement organs found refuge. They were armed constantly. In -- this pertains to January and February.

In the roads leading from Pristina and Djakovica and in Decani going to Djakovica, this is the area where armed groups started emerging. I've already given you an explanation for that. People would be engaged overnight, they would be issued weapons, they would be tasked with going out to the roads, stopping vehicles, posing as KLA members. And if the passengers were of Albanian ethnicity, then they would be allowed to pass through. And the role of these individuals was to control the traffic. In January they stopped a bus in which two of my soldiers were travelling. That happened on this road leading to Djakovica in the sector ⁹³²³ of Crmljane village. However, what was typical of that period of time was that their activities were aimed against MUP. When the passengers and the driver insisted that the soldiers be allowed to go back to the bus, they were indeed allowed. However, that was in January, and later on that was not the case. Later on, all the soldiers who were found were kidnapped. So these people operated in the following system: During daytime they would be farmers and during night-time they would go to the staff, be issued with weapons, and then either stand guard duty or perform another assignment for the staff, and then the following morning they would go back to their daytime activities.

Q. So this pertains to late 1997 and early 1998.

A. Yes, that's right. This report was written in February, and it pertains to late 1997 and 1998, up until the 23rd of February.

Q. Based on this report, could it be said that at that time there was already a very developed terrorist network existing in this territory?

A. Well, the network existed in the entire territory of Kosovo. However, in my report, I discuss only what was pertinent to my area of responsibility. In these two particular sectors, the sector of Jablanica --

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, that was a leading question.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. In that case, please do not reply to the question. The explanation provided was quite sufficient.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson, I hereby tender tab 5, ⁹³²⁴ which is a report by General Delic, Brigade Commander, sent to the corps command, into evidence.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, that's admitted. Number?

THE REGISTRAR: D300, tab 5.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. General, now let us turn very briefly, please, to the report. But first, can you tell me, what was the name of your Chief of Staff?

A. At the time, Colonel Ljubisa Lojanica.

Q. All right. Colonel Ljubisa Lojanica was the Chief of Staff of your brigade, and he was immediately subordinated to you and in a way was your deputy.

A. Yes, that's right. He was my deputy. He was the second in command in our brigade.

JUDGE KWON: General, what was your rank as commander of 549th Brigade?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I was a colonel from 1996 until 1999.

JUDGE KWON: Thank you.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Yes. But your Chief of Staff was also a colonel and was subordinated to you.

A. He was lieutenant colonel and was later promoted to colonel.

Q. Fine.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May I continue?

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. ⁹³²⁵

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] For Mr. Kwon, who seems to have some interest in the army of Yugoslavia, all of the brigade commanders were colonels, except for Guards Brigade, which was headed by a general.

JUDGE KWON: Thank you.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Therefore, Colonel Ljubisa Lojanica, your Chief of Staff immediately subordinated to you, on the 2nd of March, 1998, produced a document which we can see in tab 6, which was also sent to the command of the Pristina Corps. Did you find that, General?

A. Yes, Mr. Milosevic. This is the document produced by the Chief of Staff on my orders.

Q. That's precisely what I was going to ask you and you have just explained it very clearly.

Now, please tell us, General, this first portion discusses political and security situation and states that it hasn't changed, and then in paragraph 2 what does it say there?

A. Well, these are the events in the period following the first report, the 26th and the 28th of February. It says that the Babaloc refugee settlement was shelled several times by Siptar terrorists with hand-held rocket launchers and automatic weapons. There were no casualties in the course of shelling.

Q. All right. And then four paragraphs below that, on the 2nd of March, 1998?

A. On the 2nd of March, 1998, at around 0100 hours, the Serbian houses in the village of Bec came under attack. The Serbian families ⁹³²⁶ Djakovic, Milic, and Lakic were attacked. The villagers took in the members of these families who were later taken over by the Djakovica MUP. Let me just mention that nowadays there are no more Serbian houses in that village and no more families with this last name reside there any longer.

Q. Are you trying to say that those houses were the only Serbian households in the village and that all of them came under attack?

A. Yes. There were additional two houses in that location, however, they were vacant there. Residents would only occasionally come to visit the village.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The transcript says, "Let me just mention that nowadays there are no more Serbian houses in that village..." The general did not say that today there are no more Serbian houses. What he wanted to say was that at that time those were the only Serbian households, that there were no other houses with Serbian residents, that at the time those houses came under attack and those were the only Serbian families residing in the village at that time. He didn't say "nowadays."

JUDGE BONOMY: Can we have clarification of that from the general? Did you make reference to the situation nowadays or not?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. Nowadays in that entire territory there is not a single Serbian house for tens of kilometres, but at the time there were only those three families residing there.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. I hope we clarified that, General. Under item 2, what is it stated there? ⁹³²⁷

A. "The aforementioned events and information have caused anxiety and insecurity among Serbs and Montenegrins about whether to remain in the area. Many of them are considering leaving Kosovo and Metohija."

Q. What about item 3?

A. "It is our estimate that the situation will continue to become even more complicated and then terrorist operations and mass rallies of ethnic Albanians in the zone of responsibility will continue to increase in order to portray to the international public that Siptars in Kosovo and Metohija are threatened."

Q. All right, General. At the time, in March of 1998, the 2nd of March, 1998, when the report was drafted, and it refers to the events which unfolded in the several days prior to that, were there any activities of police or the army at the time which could have in any way displayed a bad attitude, any kind of a bad attitude with respect to the residents of Albanian ethnicity?

A. All units of the Pristina Corps and all my units were in their peacetime locations, conducting their regular daily activities, which were either training activities in the barracks or in the training facilities. In addition to that, they also secured various military facilities, barracks, warehouses, and so on. Nothing was done beyond that. The same applies to police. Police performed its regular duties. Traffic control was conducted by the traffic police, whereas the other part of police force performed also their regular activities in towns and villages. There were no other particular activities.

Q. All right. So we can see that there were a lot of activities ^{9328 BLANK PAGE 9329} carried out by terrorists at the time to which police did not respond.

A. This report that I sent to the corps command, to the commander personally, was a kind of warning that I sent them, indicating that something ought to be done and that the situation was becoming increasingly complex.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson, I hereby tender tab 6 into evidence.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Admitted, yes.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. General, once again we have a report signed by you personally in tab 7. Have you found tab 7?

A. Yes, Mr. Milosevic.

Q. Can you please read out the date of your report.

A. The 5th of March, 1998.

Q. As is stated in the beginning of the document, previous reports are mentioned and the development of this situation in the area of responsibility of the 549th Motorised Brigade in the course of the preceding ten days. What are you writing about there?

A. I am stating that the terrorist group in the Jablanica sector, that was a group of the famous criminal or infamous criminal and terrorist Lahi Brahimi, who is the uncle of Ramush Haradinaj, would continue spreading out of the Jablanica sector, and this will be proven by subsequent documents. The attacks that were carried out in the villages in the vicinity of Djakovica, Bec, Crmljane and Ratis, and the attacks would follow in the villages of Bites, Janos, Ljug Bunar and Vranic. I ⁹³³⁰ was listing those villages because there were only several Serbian families residing in those villages.

Then I go on to say that we believe the primary objective the terrorists in these attacks was not to kill Serbs but to so panic that they would vacate their land and move out of Kosovo. Judging by what we have seen, most of these objectives would be achieved.

Q. In this report do you refer to channels for bringing in weapons, and is there anything that you could tell us about that in greater detail?

A. In this report, I identified three channels leading to the territory of Kosovo and Metohija through which arms were smuggled. One is from Bajram, Curi towards Junik. That is this is part of the territory, from Bajram Curi to Junik. And further on towards the territory of Jablanica. The second one is Cafa -- Liken, or Cafa Dobruna, from Djakovica in this area, and it leads towards Rogovo, the village of Rogovo, and further on to Orahovac. And the third one is the Stojanovic border post here on the mountain of Koritnik, and from there along the Plav river valley towards Opolj.

Q. You indicate the fact that weapons were being brought in along these three channels and this was a warning, and I see that in the first paragraphs of your report you say how these weapons are being brought in, what the quantities involved were, and what was going on in general.

A. I'm cautioning through this report, because we had several such situations, I'm cautioning that one of the ways weapons were brought in until then was that smaller groups would bring in a few pieces of weapons or that they would take cattle along so that they could bring in a few ⁹³³¹ dozen weapons.

However, in view of all of our preparations and the fact that practically a bridge was established between Jablanica via Smonica and Junik with the territory of Albania, it is possible with a single well-prepared action to bring several thousand weapons -- rifles and other pieces of weapons during a single night only.

I also point out another possibility which did occur in practice later, namely persons without weapons from the territory of Kosovo and Metohija would go to the border escorted by terrorists. If they were caught by the police or by the border troops, they would just commit a minor misdemeanour, so the sanctions, the punishment was minimal. They go to Albania without any weapons, they train from two to seven days in Albania, they get weapons, and then with weapons they return to the territory of Kosovo and Metohija, even at the cost of fighting with our forces. There was one case when 800 men, armed men, members of the KLA, crossed the border after having been trained for a few days. They crossed the border armed.

Q. Thank you, General.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Again, I ask for the same thing, Mr. Robinson, that this report of General Delic, which is in tab 7, be admitted into evidence.

JUDGE ROBINSON: It is admitted, and we will adjourn now for 20 minutes.

--- Recess taken at 10.35 a.m.

--- On resuming at 10.58 a.m. ⁹³³²

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, please continue.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Robinson. First of all, may I tell you that I've clarified a matter during the break, what has to do with the index that needed correcting, as you said. Before you have in tab 2 a surrogate sheet, as it is called, and it does not say there that the meeting with the Albanian lobby is in 1998. It says Holbrooke in Junik in 1998, and then comma, and a meeting between Holbrooke and Clark and the Albanian lobby, but it does not say that that meeting is in 1998. It doesn't say so in the Serbian text either. Somebody must have added it, and it must have been a typo. I'm not saying it's intentional or anything.

Secondly, in relation to what Mr. Nice said, that his co-worker received information from Mr. Tomanovic stating that he needed my approval. I assume that he did not understand what his co-worker said. She asked Mr. Tomanovic yesterday, and I said that they can have anything that was already provided to the Registrar. The question was whether they could receive the materials related to Mr. Bulatovic, and his answer was, "By all means." And he asked whether they wanted it in electronic or paper form and that the answer was that it didn't matter, it could be in electronic form too.

So this is what I heard during the break from Mr. Tomanovic, so I want to set that clear.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Well, your break were well utilised. Let's proceed.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]. ⁹³³³

Q. General, in your report which is contained in tab 8 --

THE INTERPRETER: Could the speaker please be asked to speak into the microphone. The interpreters cannot hear him.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, you're being asked to speak into the microphone. The interpreters cannot hear you.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. General, in your report which is contained in tab 8, you wrote to the command of the Pristina Corps. We can see your signature here. I hope that you have found this report of yours.

A. Yes, I have found it.

JUDGE ROBINSON: We don't have a translation for this. It's fairly short. Let it be placed on the ELMO.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Just in the briefest possible terms, General, tell us what this report refers to.

A. Mr. Milosevic, this is a report that I wrote and signed. It pertains to the period from the 3rd of March until the 9th of March. Here it says that I particularly highlight the following, that on the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 6th, and 8th there were several protests in my zones by Albanians. Actual figures are referred to here in particular towns and elsewhere.

Q. All right, General. We don't have to dwell on that any longer. I'd just like to draw your attention to the second page, a sentence in the first line, where it says: "We are getting ready for war to clear -- clean up Suva Reka, and we are getting ready for Prizren too." ⁹³³⁴

A. Yes. Through radio surveillance, Krug-2, RUP 2/2K at 2150 hours.

Q. Thank you. We're not going to dwell on this any longer.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Again I ask for the same thing, Mr. Robinson; I tender this into evidence.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. This one will be marked for identification pending translation.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. On the 15th of March, you informed the commander of the Pristina Corps, the commander, because it says to the command of the Pristina Corps, to the commander personally. This is the document contained in tab 9. You say there that during the night between the 12th and the 13th --

A. Yes.

Q. -- a group of 20 to 25 terrorists was inserted from Albania.

A. Further on, it says that on the 13th, and the night between the 13th and the 14th, these groups were noticed at particular locations. This is the area around Djakovica. This is a group of 20 to 25 persons noticed as they were moving towards the village of Petrovac. They were wearing a combination of clothing, civilian clothes and uniform. What is characteristic is that during the night a group of seven terrorists barged into the yard of Tom Malici in the village of Doblibare by the white Drim River. He was forced to take his tractor and drive them to the village of Bec -- or, rather, to the village of Crmljane. The group had rucksacks and a big box. This Albanian, Tom Malici, made a ⁹³³⁵ statement. He is an Albanian of the Catholic faith. He thought that these people actually came from Albania, judging by the way they spoke. He took the group to Bec.

Q. Drove them on the tractor.

A. Yes. But then he ran out of fuel, but then they slapped him around and then allowed him to return home.

That same group during that night, around 1.00 -- or, rather another group of seven terrorists during the night of the 14th at about 1.00 arrived in the village of Petrovac or, rather, Ljug Bunar, and they found accommodation in the administration building of the former agricultural cooperative, where they took a brief respite. During the rest or, rather, after the rest, they continued to travel towards Bec village. In Bec village three or four groups joined up and a column with large rucksacks was noted in the village of Crmljane, moving towards Crmljane.

Q. General, this happens in the area of your responsibility and you inform the commander of the Pristina Corps about that, but you do not intervene.

A. Well, those were not our orders. The army was still in place, and after all, this would be a matter for the MUP to deal with. It would fall under the MUP. I was just informing the commander so that he would have daily information about this.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson, again I ask for the same thing; that the document from tab 9 be admitted into evidence.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, this is admitted. ⁹³³⁶

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. And what does the report contain, the one that you are sending to -- or, rather, on the 16th of March?

A. Yes. On the 16th of March, again --

Q. General, in order to use up as little time as possible, I would like to draw your attention to subparagraph A, where it says that fire was opened at Serb and Montenegrin houses in Bec and Crmljane.

A. Yes. It says here that during the night between the 12th and the 13th, fire was repeatedly opened on Serb and Montenegrin houses in the villages of Bec and Crmljane, while in Petrovac the other houses were attacked. Those were the only villages where Serbs still lived, however, there were no casualties among the locals.

Q. Towards the end of page 1 there is a reference to the 15th of March, and demonstrations are referred to.

A. Yes, on that day from 1100 to 1200 hours peaceful demonstrations were held by Siptars in Prizren, Suva Reka, and Orahovac.

Q. Tell me something else now: There were some slogans written in a foreign language, which loosely translated mean?

A. "Stop the Serbian terror."

Q. Yes. What kind of terror could this have been? You lived there and you knew what was going on, what kind of terror could this have been? Was there anything going on that could be called mistreatment or terror against the Albanians? This is the 16th of March, 1998.

A. These messages were obviously directed to someone else, because they were written in the English language. "Stop the Serbian terror" ⁹³³⁷ would be a translation of what it says.

It is characteristic that no one spoke to the protesters and that they were only filmed with a camera. The protesters were Siptars of the Muslim faith, whereas the Siptar Catholics were -- had a much lower presence; only 5 or 10 per cent.

Q. You say here, in the last line before moving on to subparagraph B, which deals with your observations from the border zones, it says: "This shows that the Siptars wished to show the world via the media that they are threatened by the Serbs in Kosovo and Metohija." So tell me, General, that was your own conclusion. Were they threatened by the Serbs in Kosovo and Metohija?

A. On the basis of what I said previously, it is obvious who was threatened in Kosovo and Metohija. All of this is part of their propaganda, this propaganda that was supposed to go somewhere else to find fertile ground, somewhere beyond the borders of our country.

Q. So that is what you wrote in mid-March 1998 in your report.

A. Yes.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson, could this please be admitted into evidence as well, what General Delic brought, this report.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Tab 11 includes a very short note of yours. It says, "Very urgent," and it says it's addressed to the command of the Pristina Corps, to the commander or Chief of Staff personally.

A. Yes. This is a telegram, a telegram which was urgently sent ⁹³³⁸ because the nature of the information contained was such that it required that the commander be notified immediately.

An informer was talked to on the 14th of March, 1998, and what was found out was that a group of 50 to 60 Albanians from Kosovo, mostly young men, crossed via Has into Albania. Has is this territory from Djakovica to Prizren along the border, this border area. That's Has. So they crossed into Albania and were stationed in the area of the town of Kruma in the Albanian part of Has.

So I'm informing the corps command because what was expected was that this group would return within the next few days to our territory, but with arms.

Q. Is this behaviour also within the context of what you explained earlier on, people going without weapons and then, after having been trained, returning with weapons to the territory of Kosovo and Metohija?

A. Yes. This is something that we knew a lot earlier as well and that were going on every day, practically.

JUDGE ROBINSON: General, may I ask you, if a group such as this one returned with arms and you were able to identify them, to locate them, what -- how would you deal with that? How would you deal with them?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The rules of the frontier service, border service, are well known. So the border is crossed and all citizens cross the border at designated border crossings, official designated border crossings. Anybody else -- anybody who crosses at other places would be committing an unlawful act and in violation of the law, so the rules of the border service provide that these people be apprehended or, ⁹³³⁹ rather, stopped; if they're armed, that they be disarmed; if they fail to comply, the order's given by the border authorities and open fire, then the border authorities have the right to respond in like kind, that is to say open fire themselves. That's all quite clear and defined, as it is in any other army, by the rules governing the border services or frontier services.

JUDGE ROBINSON: And did you ever have to have your forces open fire?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We were compelled to do so a number of times, yes. We were compelled to because the border authorities, here as you can see on this map, these red points are our border huts and usually they are manned by 30 men. At the time when the situation became more complicated, we upped the number of men and there were about 60 men in each of the huts. But you have to understand that this border belt is a mountainous area, high mountains all around. For example, the Mount Koritnik is about 2.333 metres above sea level. Pastrik is 1.988 metres above sea level. So it's difficult terrain to secure. And if you know that the people to secure the border have come from all over the territory of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, they're not well acquainted with the area and terrain. And on the other hand, we have people, Albanians, from the territory of Kosovo and Metohija or Albanians from Albania proper, coming in to sell weapons to Kosovo and Metohija, know this border belt area very well, and what happens is that the number of people coming in across the border is far greater than the number of men securing the border, the patrols there. And patrols number three to five men. Or if ⁹³⁴⁰ there are -- is an observation post, there are only three men, or if it's an ambush, then six to seven individuals. And at times there were several hundred people that came across a small group of border security guard, of only five or six of them.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you. What I'm really trying to find out is what was the most usual way in which your forces would deal with the -- with KLA, with the KLA.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The usual way, and this holds true and is similar to the rules of service and similar to the rules of the border service, means that any illegal crossings, persons illegally crossing, are called out to and ordered to stop, halt. And if they halt when this order is given, if they have weapons, then they are asked to put down their weapons. Then the next order is to raise their hands up above their heads, and the following order is that they should move away from their weapons so that the border police or the men at the border could approach them without any risk of having the people illegally crossing using the firearms.

Now, if the individual listens to the orders, they are then taken into custody, taken into the border hut, their particulars are taken, and then that person is handed over to the Ministry of the Interior. After that, via the Ministry of the Interior, a report is sent out to the local mixed committee for border incidents, dealing with border incidents, and what usually happens then is --

JUDGE ROBINSON: Apart from incidents on the border, what was the most usual way in which forces of the VJ or the MUP would deal with KLA? ^{9341 BLANK PAGE 9342}

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As far as the forces of the MUP are concerned, they have a quite different authorisation, different from the army. They are duty-bound - and usually this is what they did - as I was saying, they are duty-bound to caution the individuals and to disarm them, either most frequently using physical force but without the use of weapons. However, if the individuals who are violating the regulations possess -- are in possession of weapons and if they use those weapons, then, after issuing a caution, if they fail to desist and comply with the caution, the rules of service provide that weapons can be used against individuals that do that in order to defend the people in authority whose lives are at risk.

This is the same in the army, but during peacetime the army does not have any authorisation vis-a-vis civilians. But if a unit is attacked, and this did happen frequently from ambush, then there's no time. So there's no time to issue cautions. What you have to do if a unit is attacked, then the unit must open fire, and if the unit is fired at, it must respond with fire to neutralise the adversary, and if possible to arrest them, disarm them, capture them, and according to procedure in the military police units, to hand them over as civilians to the MUP.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. General, at the end of the document in tab 11, you wrote -- well, quite obviously you had gained this information from Albanians. You say the following: "Regardless of having received the information from a source who cannot be considered reliable," and in brackets it says an ⁹³⁴³ Albanian citizen, "we are sending you this information so that you can compare it to information received from other sources." Is that also customary procedure? So you're indicating that the source need not be reliable but that you're sending the information anyway for it to be compared with information received from other sources; is that right?

A. Yes, this is common practice with intelligence coming in. Intelligence is classified according to its reliability or, rather, the sources are qualified according to their reliability. All sources coming from the other side are considered unreliable sources, although that need not mean that the information received from an unreliable source is necessarily false. However, an analysis is always conducted and they are compared and tallied with other pieces of information to confirm their validity and correctness.

Q. Do you mean you check and verify the information?

A. Yes. An analysis is made of the intelligence received to check whether it is viable.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Now, the tab is the same, it is tab 11, and I'd like to tender it into evidence.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Now, what does your other brief report contain, the one found in tab 12? And I can see that it says "Strictly confidential" under the specific number.

A. This is a telegram, once again, which was sent as very urgent to ⁹³⁴⁴ the corps command, to the Chief of Staff personally, and it is also to do with the Djakovica area, the village of Brodosan near the white Drim River, and it says that in the forest around Siza creek stream, a group of 15 armed persons were spotted and it was thought that they would move in the same direction like the other groups, in the direction of Ljug Bunar village to Bec village to Netic village, that axis, where all these groups would congregate, and further on to Jablanica.

Q. You say that they would most likely take what route by night; is that right?

A. Yes.

Q. Thank you, General.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] So once again I'd like to tender that document into evidence, tab 12, please.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It is the report of General Delic. Mr. Robinson, my request is the same, to tender tab 12 in evidence, General Delic's document.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. In the next tab, tab 13, you also -- this is another report of yours. Is that your signature, General?

A. Yes. What's this one about? Just briefly, please.

A. Briefly, I am informing by way of telegram the corps command or, rather, the commander that upon information received in the -- on the Albanian side of the border, the Has area, that weapons and men from Susni ⁹³⁴⁵ [phoen] into our territory were being gathered and that the initial transfer is to take place from the 17th of March until the end of the month. And also this implies that a corps -- across Pastrik, Mount Pastrik, this infiltration was supposed to take place because that's the easiest route, and it's asking the corps commander to take measures urgently to stop that passage, because the border battalion men of the 55th, under whose area of responsibility this area came under, did not have the men or the means to do that. So my proposals are related to that.

Q. Yes. You say, would you compare these -- this information with your information -- "Please compare this information with your intelligence and give your consent for me to organise the closing of the border as of the 18h of March, 1998, using part of my forces with those of the 53rd and 56th Border Battalions."

A. Yes. And I give other proposals for other resources to be used as well.

Q. So these are reliable data, reliable information, intelligence; is that right, General?

A. Yes.

Q. Thank you.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] And now my same request, to tender tab 13 into evidence.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, it's admitted.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. General, a little longer report now, tab 14. We're not going to ⁹³⁴⁶ look through it all, in order to save time, but would you just focus your attention, please, on paragraphs 5 and 6 on page 1 and tell us what they refer to.

A. This is a characteristic observation. In the sectors of Ljumbarde village, Dasinovac, Donji Ratis and Gornji Ratis villages, once again the territory of the Decani municipality, and it is near Radonjic Lake. What is happening is that hay is frequently set on fire, as are sheds, during the night, and the villagers from that area, including Albanians, don't dare venture outside their houses at night even though their barns are burning for fear of being killed, and they see silhouettes of people moving about in the dark. And then I go on to say that it is very likely that these actions are being carried out by KLA members. Of the local Albanians, people are spreading news that their hay and barns are being burnt by Chetniks and Arkan's army, Arkan's men. The purpose of this is probably to sow the seeds of panic and the desire of revenge among their own people in order to encourage acts of terrorism and foster inter-ethnic hatred among the locals in these villages. On the other hand, local Serbs and Montenegrins in the villages of Djakovica municipality organise guards round the clock to protect themselves against terrorists.

Q. So this is a phenomenon that you talk about. You write about this situation in your report. Now, how far was that situation prevalent, that is to say that KLA members set fire to hay and barns for the reasons and purposes that you mention here?

A. This was later confirmed, especially on the one hand this was done -- things like this were done to ensure the homogenisation of Albanians ⁹³⁴⁷ because there were many of those who did not accept terrorist methods. So they wanted to pull them in and then to effect mobilisation in those villages. And on the other hand, as mention is made here of the Chetniks and Arkan's army, that's what is referred to, which is ludicrous, to say the least, but anyway, this created with the Albanian population a sense of fear and prompted them to revenge, the desire for revenge.

Q. Thank you, General.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Can you just -- what do you say all of this -- these documents go to show? What do they establish?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] These documents establish and go to show that there was a very organised manner in which there was an escalation of terrorist activity going on geared against on the one hand -- geared to mobilise forcibly, as you can see, because people were executed, their throats slit and so on, and then to make the international community -- to paint a picture for the international community contrary to the facts. And the facts about which these reports relate are contrary to the assertions and claims made by Mr. Nice as well with respect to the conduct of the army and the police dating back to that period, that is to say their -- the conduct of the Serb side from that time, so that these are very important and significant facts and important information testifying to the real situation, because the brigade commander informs his superiors about realistic facts and not assumptions of any kind.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Kay, you also said that these background incidents serve to show the state of mind of the accused at the time of the incidents in the indictment. ⁹³⁴⁸

MR. KAY: The case presented against the accused has been largely starting from that period of October 1998 but has reflected what has happened before. In relation to the background evidence that's being produced through this witness, it's clear that it's showing that the forces of the FRY were facing a determined and hostile force within the territory of the FRY.

Evidence has been called in the Prosecution case which shows that when the FRY forces withdrew after the Holbrooke-Milosevic agreement, that the KLA moved into those positions and set up to create breaches of that cease-fire. There's clear evidence through Maisonneuve, through General Naumann, through all the witnesses involving the KVM that that was what happened.

If the accused can demonstrate the level of adversary that they were facing before that agreement and then how that adversary became stronger when the FRY forces withdrew to their positions after the Holbrooke-Milosevic agreement, and the level of intensity of strength that they had as well of the activities that they were carrying out, all those matters, of course, go relevant -- are relevant to what took place after January 1999 when the counts on the indictment state the case against him. So in terms of the issues in the trial, there is certainly a reason for producing evidence that goes to these matters. Of course, as well, evidence that goes to matters that occurred after January 1999.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. Thank you. Mr. Milosevic.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The same request, that tab 14 be ⁹³⁴⁹ tendered into evidence, Mr. Robinson.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, it's admitted.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. General, now another report, once again from March, sent to the command of the Pristina Corps. Would you please briefly comment upon it.

A. Yes. Once again, this is a telegram sent to the commander of the Pristina Corps, or to the Chief of Staff, and the telegram lists two events which took place on the 25th and 26th of March, 1998. These events took place on the Malisevo-Pristina road. The buses were stopped, and the persons in KLA uniforms checked the identity of passengers. After the first several paragraphs, I provide my assessment and my information based on which the situation is becoming increasingly complex in addition to the existing problems in the part of the territory from Suva Reka to Orahovac to Malisevo and Stimlje, there are additional events.

Q. You're actually warning that the situation is escalating.

A. Yes. I'm saying that the Malisevo, Komorani and Crnoljevo area, which is populated exclusively by Albanians, is becoming a very good base for their forces. And I'm saying that the roads leading from Kosovo to Metohija have become unsafe for traffic.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The request is the same; to have the document under tab 15 admitted into evidence, Mr. Robinson.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, it's admitted.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] ⁹³⁵⁰

Q. Your document, once again signed by you, is a report discussing terrorist activities. It mentions that somebody was killed. Can you tell us, what is this about? Can we see that from one day to the next the situation is deteriorating?

A. Yes. That can be seen in this document. We list the dates and show how the situation is becoming more complex. In the beginning, the date of the 24th of March is mentioned, and the village of Dubrava where the MUP patrol was attacked, at which time one policeman was killed, Otovic [phoen], and another was seriously wounded. This was followed by an intervention by the MUP from Decani, Djakovica and Prizren. They blocked off this broader area and a clash erupted with a terrorist group numbering some 40 to 50 terrorists. This was the terrorist group of Ramush Haradinaj.

And here in the report I inform the command about the course of that operation. Two terrorists were killed. One was captured.

Q. So in that entire operation, two were killed and one was captured.

A. Yes. And one policeman was killed and one was gravely wounded. The event took place because in the village of Dubrava there was just one Serb household. The family -- the Stojanovic family lived there. The MUP from Mrzici [phoen] had an order from its superior command to visit that family daily and encourage them and provide support to them in order to discourage them from moving out of the area, and this patrol was ambushed.

Q. So the patrol was conducting its regular duties. They were travelling on the road. ⁹³⁵¹

A. Yes.

Q. And you write here that: "It was characteristic that there were foreign journalists in the sector where the operation was carried out, probably inside the houses of the terrorists, filming only when MUP members opened fire and took action and the population fleeing from the surrounding villages to the woods. They did not film the action, the activities of the terrorists."

A. Yes, that's right. That's what I wrote.

Q. You stated that some 400 men took part in this blockade after this person was killed.

A. Yes. Initially this was a small group. There were just four or five policemen, MUP policemen, and then the fire was opened. One of them was killed. They initially just asked for assistance. The assistance came in from Decani and then from Djakovica, and then several hours later a unit from the Prizren area arrived.

Q. All right. Now, in view of the outcome of this operation, can it be said that disproportionate force was used against the terrorists, because we could see that two of them were killed and one was captured and the others fled.

JUDGE ROBINSON: You cannot put the question in that way. Ask him about the force that was used.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. In view of the situation, General, and in view of your competency to assess it, tell us about the force that was used, the measures that ⁹³⁵² were applied.

A. On this occasion, the police acted in the same way that it would do otherwise or in the same way as police anywhere else would do. It had to provide assistance to the patrol which had been attacked. It had to conduct certain measures in order to disarm the terrorists. The terrorists broke into several smaller groups and managed to break through towards Jablanica. So this action of police was completely lawful and regular.

Q. You're mentioning the fleeing of civilians. What prompted the civilians to flee?

A. Most likely there was fear among the residents, because in those villages the terrorists have had their good bases and felt at home there, and they felt that they could take refuge there.

JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Delic, when you saw what you considered to be manipulation of foreign journalists, what did you do about it?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I was the commander of the army brigade. I had no competencies over the journalists or civilians. All I could do was precisely what I did; I informed my superior command. Any other action taken by me in relation to these persons would have been unlawful. Any contact with civilians, any contact with civilians is outside of the competencies of the army. This is something that the police is authorised to do. The police can check identities, the police can issue warnings and so on. The army doesn't do that.

JUDGE BONOMY: I wasn't envisaging conduct of that kind, I have to say, and it's interesting that that should be your reaction. ⁹³⁵³ What, then, do you understand the government did to try to correct the picture that you say was going to be created by the manipulation of journalists?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is a question that ought to be put to the government. These manipulations --

JUDGE BONOMY: We may get to ask that question of someone who would be in such a position, but you have no idea what steps were taken to correct what you say was manipulation of what are described as foreign journalists?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In order to correct that impression, I know that on a number of occasions there were reports filmed either at the border or in the territory of Kosovo and Metohija that could not be sent to the international media because it was contrary to the general impression spread throughout Europe about what was going on in Kosovo and Metohija. It was contrary to somebody's interests, and we were fully aware of that.

JUDGE BONOMY: Is your attitude, or your opinion, rather, that journalists in general are easily manipulated?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Once again, let me repeat that I'm not the proper person to comment upon the media and the journalists and so on. There are different types of journalists, and all of them work for money, are paid for their work. There are those who hunt exclusive news or scoops throughout the world, and then there are those who work on orders of a certain political orientation.

JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you. ^{9354 BLANK PAGE 9355}

JUDGE ROBINSON: Continue, Mr. Milosevic.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. In the second part of this report, after the description of the events, after the observations about the conduct of foreign journalists, you in item 3 speak about the current situation in the area of responsibility of the brigade and then go on to say how the situation has a negative effect on the morale of the Serbian Montenegrin population, which is shown in the following. So what was the effect?

A. "The effect of this general situation and general atmosphere, the effect of these attacks, was that some Serbian residents who had already ensured that they had accommodation in Serbia moved out their families, first of all children, to Serbia, and some of them were looking for employment in Serbia. Families who had not found a place to stay are thinking of selling property or leaving the territory. This is especially evident in villages where there are few Serbian houses that are frequent terrorist targets.

"Further escalation and sustaining these tensions may lead to a mass exodus of Serbs and Montenegrins from the area, and we already know that only a small percentage of them remain there..."

Q. Thank you, General.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] My request is the same, Mr. Robinson; namely, to have the document in tab 16 admitted into evidence.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, it's admitted.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] ⁹³⁵⁶

Q. Then in tab 17 we have a dispatch. In this document we can see that this is the command of the 549th Motorised Brigade, and then it says that this is the daily report on the 18th of April, 1998, and an extract only.

What does this pertain to?

A. This is the dispatch of the security organs daily report on the 18th of April, 1998, and only the segment which discusses terrorism. It discusses the activities of Siptar extremists in the territory of Djakovica. Then it goes on to say that: "The arming of Siptars continues. Nearly all able-bodied men are armed with automatic and semi-automatic weapons and ample ammunition supplies. The distribution of weapons in villages is mainly done by Siptar teachers through mosques. An operation to forcibly arm Catholic Siptars is currently under way. They are united. They have become homogenous. They have become homogenous, and the atmosphere which prevails is to use all means, including armed conflict, to achieve the goals of the Siptars." And then: "On the 26th of April, all Siptars employed in public institutions will leave their jobs. The goal is to create chaos, especially in hospitals where they account for over 90 per cent of the staff."

And then further on, it says that: "In the village of Morina (Djakovica municipality) the person in charge of organisation is Sadik Haziri, director of the farming cooperative..."

Q. You are saying that at that time, April 1998, 90 per cent of the hospital staff were Albanians. Then you mention the director of the ⁹³⁵⁷ farming cooperative, also an Albanian, who was in charge of organisation. Then this document discusses the training of the terrorists and a person who had come from Germany. In parenthesis it says "expelled," or "deported."

A. Yes. Certain individuals who were the organisers are mentioned here. These are the people who were training terrorists in villages.

Q. Yes, and then further on it says that in the village of Dubrava, the main organiser of training is the person who had spent ten months in Albania, training there.

A. Yes.

Q. All right, General. Since this is the first time that we have come to the point where we need to verify the authenticity, please tell us, what does it say here at the bottom? What does this mean where it says the accuracy of the telegram excerpt is certified and verified and so on? Is this something that verifies the authenticity of the document?

A. Yes. It says here that the document was certified and verified by Colonel Velisav Markovic, who is from the security administration of the General Staff of the army of Yugoslavia. At that time, he served within that administration. He was the one who produced all of these excerpts, this one and the subsequent ones, and it is certified here that all of these documents are authentic. It is certified by the security administration.

Q. This dispatch came from the field?

A. No, no. This came from the corps.

Q. Yes, but it pertains to the area of responsibility of your ⁹³⁵⁸ brigade.

A. Yes, that's right.

Q. Thank you.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] My request once again is the same; to have the document from tab 17 admitted into evidence.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Nice.

MR. NICE: Unexplained is why we have to survive on the basis of a copy document, not the original document itself. And the Court will have in mind, if I can just find it, that the accused's explanation in his written filing yesterday was to the effect that documentation had been provided by the witness himself and by members of the VJ acting upon his request.

In the absence of good reason, it's hard to know why we should do [microphone not activated]. Sorry. The microphone was off.

JUDGE ROBINSON: You object to its admission on that basis.

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for Mr. Nice, please.

MR. NICE: I'm so sorry. It's unexplained to us why we should be proceeding on the basis of second-best material when better material would be available.

I'm going to be in a better position later on, incidentally, to explain to the Court the degree to which material produced now would have been covered by requests or by requests in combination with 54 bis, but it is going to take some time. But we've clearly got a careful selection of material, we haven't got all of the material, and now we're being asked to proceed on the basis of not of an original but of a copy for no explained ⁹³⁵⁹ reason. I think the best thing I can say is I reserve my position, probably, rather than object, because I don't want to take needless objections --

JUDGE KWON: What you're saying is that we have to have the original document of this?

MR. NICE: We don't always have to have it, but there normally has to be an explanation for why we proceed on a copy or certified copy if an original would prima facie be available. And there is no explanation here, so I reserve my position.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, we admit copies here. We'll admit this document.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you Mr. Robinson.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. General --

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Nice and Mr. Kay, it's still not clear to me, even if all of this is true, that the KLA was active from a year before, requiring action from the VJ and the MUP, how does that impact on the indictment? I think that probably the best answer is probably the state of mind. It helps to explain the state of mind of the accused.

MR. KAY: Yes, the scope and scale of a problem. If the problem is a small scale, it doesn't have -- so to speak, it doesn't attract many resources. If a problem is of a larger scale and a larger scope and is widespread, it is an explanation of why a level and scale of resources may be needed in a region. And the accused's state of mind will be based upon the state of affairs that he has to face. An indictment that says you ⁹³⁶⁰ mustn't do this, you must do that, without looking, without acknowledging -- When you read the indictment, it doesn't acknowledge the scale of the problem that had to be faced within the territories of the FRY at this time. It gives a completely different one-eyed account of events in the history, missing out these important aspects of the case. And when the accused is asked to concentrate on the indictment, that, of course, is only half the story because it contains only half the story. And for these reasons, out of necessity, he is faced with the task of including evidence.

JUDGE ROBINSON: The Prosecution's case is not that the KLA was not organised and active, as I understand it.

Mr. Nice, do you deny that all these incidents took place prior to 1999 January?

MR. NICE: I can't deal with all these incidents in detail, and I might have been able to had I had material in advance and it had been served in the form of a report. Of course this office of the Prosecution prosecutes KLA people for what happened in 1998. It's well known. And it's of course not challenged that there was activity of a certain kind characterised as unlawful or arguably in the format of these documents. I have to confess to being to a large degree mystified by the amount of time being devoted to what would seem to me basically to be background. It may have some limited value, it's up to the accused how much time he spends on it. So far as I'm concerned, how this can affect the legality or otherwise of the involvement of the army at a later stage and at the stage of the indictment is an entirely different question. ⁹³⁶¹

JUDGE ROBINSON: But the accused asked a question which I think was quite relevant in relation to one of the documents earlier. It had to do with the proportionality or disproportionality of the force used, because if he -- his case in relation to, say, Racak is that there was a conflict between the KLA and the Serb forces and KLA activists died, his forces, or the Serb forces, did not use force that was disproportionate. So if he can show that the KLA -- sorry, that the Serb forces have a -- a history and a culture of acting properly and not using disproportionate force, that -- that makes his case in relation to Racak more credible. If his view of the event is accepted.

MR. NICE: A well oiled moderate military machine, always acting appropriately and on one occasion caught unawares, yes, I suppose it might have some relevance, and indeed I look forward to hearing the evidence about the military's involvement in Racak but its significance -- its value, it may be thought, is going to be limited if not tangential, but that's as far as I can go on it at the moment.

JUDGE BONOMY: My -- I'm equally concerned that this doesn't seem to have much direct relevance to the indictment. Perhaps events closer to the end of the year might. The situation was plainly quite different at that stage. But I have another concern, and that is that all of this could have been done quite differently, that this is plainly material that the witness could have written a report or a statement about, identifying the various passages in these documents, and I'm horrified to see that we get to number 275 before we get to the start of the indictment period. So at this rate of progress, time is going to be exhausted on peripheral ⁹³⁶² issues when a very full presentation could have been made in a quite different way.

MR. KAY: I wasn't asked to comment on speed.

JUDGE BONOMY: No, no. We've got --

MR. KAY: Yes.

JUDGE BONOMY: -- from today until next Wednesday before we sit again when perhaps something could be done about that.

MR. KAY: Yes.

JUDGE BONOMY: Otherwise, this witness is going to be here for an eternity.

MR. KAY: Yes. Issues I'm certainly able to comment on. Speed is a different matter, length of time.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Just to say a few words in relation to this. First of all, as far as testimony is concerned, any kind of written reports exclude the public. I know that the answer can be that reports are accessible, they are accessible on the Internet, but that is not public by definition. There is --

JUDGE BONOMY: [Previous translation continues] ... the public. We are here to try to deal with events in a court of law. It's completely different -- you obviously have a completely different attitude from the one that a judicial system ought properly to take to the administration of justice in a criminal -- in relation to criminal allegations.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, if that's the way it is, Mr. Bonomy, then I don't understand why you allowed Mr. Nice to make a public show, a show for the public, for the benefit of the public on ⁹³⁶³ account of footage from Srebrenica that Serbia has nothing to do with just because the tenth anniversary of Srebrenica is coming up, and you made it impossible for me to re-examine General Stevanovic about that precisely. So let's leave that aside.

I think that what General Delic is testifying about has nothing to do with a show.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, you were not prevented from re-examining. I terminated the re-examination without prejudice to your submitting a motion setting out why you should be allowed to continue the re-examination. I have received no such motion. It is still open to you to submit a motion. In relation to that, the associates can help you. Mr. Kay and Ms. Higgins can also help you.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson, you stopped me even from showing a film during the re-examination that I got from the office of Mr. Nice a few days before that, and it has to do with Srebrenica. It was my intention to display the report of the Secretary-General of the UN as well.

JUDGE ROBINSON: I've stopped you. I have stopped you, Mr. Milosevic. I'm not going to rehearse. I'm not going to go over that ground again. In relation to the termination of your re-examination of Mr. Stevanovic, I made it clear that it is open to you to put in a motion explaining how you were dealt with unfairly. If you do that, it will receive very careful consideration.

MR. NICE: Can I press the Chamber to log in its mind, or even elsewhere, the specific and defiant rejection by the accused of the ⁹³⁶⁴ suggestion, this time coming from His Honour Judge Bonomy, about the use of written evidence, something we've pressed for from the beginning of the accused's case and something that we effected in our case. Can I ask the Chamber to log that as the high point -- not the high point, but the clearest explanation of his complete defiance of the Court Rules and to have it in mind when he asks for an extension of time. I could not agree more with the observation of His Honour Judge Bonomy and was at some stage going to say myself had this material been served in advance and in a timely way, I would have been in a position to investigate it and to take a position on it, possibly to admit it all or to challenge none of it without necessarily admitting it. As it is, I shall probably have to ask some questions about some of it.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Milosevic, continue.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Robinson. I have no intention of turning Mr. Nice into a model of conduct. I told you at the very outset when answering your question as to what this witness would testify about, in Mr. Nice's entire document there is constant reference to a pattern, a pattern of behaviour, and everybody knows by now that in each and every paragraph it says the forces of the FRY and Serbia surrounded a particular place, shelled it, after that entered it, separated the men from the women, executed the men, and so on and so forth.

So since you have not heard many generals, this is a general who commanded a big unit in a big territory. He had 14.000 troops under his command. You can see how the army reacted over a longer span of time that ⁹³⁶⁵ I'm trying to deal with as quickly as possible in order to get to -- to the events that are directly linked to the allegations made by Mr. Nice. But Mr. Nice's allegations cannot be a framework of what I'm trying to present, especially because his pattern is totally upside down, the other way around. It is a total distortion, but you can see --

JUDGE ROBINSON: I have heard you. Continue.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could tab 17 please be admitted into evidence. That's the one that Mr. Nice reacted to.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. General, in tab 18, there is a working map of the commander of the 549th Motorised Brigade that you yourself drew. Could you please explain this working map.

You all have it in your tabs. Is it on the easel or should it be placed now?

A. This is the working map. It pertains to the period from the 22nd of April, 1998, at 1400 hours, until 1400 hours on the 10th of September, 1998.

Q. So let's just check the dates again. The 22nd of April to the 10th of September.

A. Yes. This is a map of the incidents in my zone. This is the map that was in my office, and it is my intelligence officer who marked things on it. Every day when a particular incident would occur, he would enter it in the map.

So incidents against civilians can be seen on the map, incidents ⁹³⁶⁶ against members of the MUP, and incidents against members of the military. The date of the particular incidents can be seen, and also the effects of the incident concerned.

Q. General, since we can see that the map is in colour, you said that there were three types of incidents; involving civilians, involving the MUP, involving the military.

A. The symbol here is for the MUP, and the colour is blue. There is a legend here.

As far as civilians are concerned, the markings are in yellow, and as far as the members of the military are concerned, they are marked in black.

THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction: Red.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] So these are the major incidents that occurred. There were several incidents, but if there were no consequences, if the intelligence officer did not believe that that particular incident would merit being on this map, then he would just inform me about it so it was not marked on the map. However, every incident that involved a particular consequence was marked on the map in my office.

JUDGE BONOMY: Does the map -- does the map also tell us what action was taken by the army?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This map is a map of incidents. I put it right. But as far as the military is concerned, we can see from the map where the army units are. This is the Prizren garrison. This is where my command is. That's marked too. Then also the border battalions ^{9367 BLANK PAGE 9368} are marked or, rather, the border posts. And then in Djakovica also, the place where my other motorised battalion is.

Later on, what you see marked in red, these little banners, here in the area of Radonjicko Jezero, in the month of April - we will get to that later - the corps command ordered that part of the units that we call forces on the ready from the Prizren and Djakovica garrisons go and take up particular areas. The second battalion acted against Babaj Boks, and then there is the region of Landovica. We will later move on to the actual assignments given to these units.

On this map, we only see their deployment, but what is of key importance is that this map depicts incidents in my zone during this period against civilians, against members of the Ministry of the Interior, and against members of the military.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. General, it was in realtime that this working map was marked. If I understood you correctly, all this information contained in the map was entered successively.

A. Day after day. As something happened, it was entered in the map.

Q. Thank you, General.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson, I would like to have this map admitted into evidence, the witness's working map.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, it's admitted.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. General, can you saying something about the border incident at the Morina border post? There is an official report here in tab 19. Mirko ⁹³⁶⁹ Miletic, staff sergeant, is the person who signed it.

A. This is a border incident at Morina, which is here. When a group of persons illegally crossing the border from Albania entered the territory of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, when our border organs noticed them, they stopped them in accordance with the rules; however, they did not carry out this order. They fired at our organs, and then withdrew to the territory of Albania, leaving behind the weapons and equipment they were carrying.

This is an Official Note compiled by the crime technician from my unit, Staff Sergeant Mirko Miletic from the military police company from my unit.

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for the accused, please. Could he please speak into the microphone. Microphone, please.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Microphone for Mr. Milosevic.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. General, what I was saying is this: A certain amount -- a while ago Mr. Robinson asked the question of how the army reacted in situations when there are illegal border crossings that take place, and you gave us a general explanation. Is this one example, a case in point of an event that took place and that the -- your response can relate to?

A. Yes. This is a concrete event from which we can see the reactions of the authorities, and it says here that there were no persons who were injured or wounded because the people crossing the border crossing withdrew while shooting to the territory of Albania. They just left the equipment and weapons that they had with them behind. And then we have a ⁹³⁷⁰ list of all the weapons that were found in the field.

Q. So they shot at the army, they threw away their equipment, and fled, and there were no adverse consequences on either side.

A. That's right.

JUDGE ROBINSON: We will take the break. The Chamber will have under consideration any measures that could be properly used to shorten this presentation, Mr. Milosevic. This is a matter that we'll be considering.

I'm still troubled by the questions of relevance. I'm not saying it is entirely irrelevant, but I'm not sure that Mr. Kay has isolated the precise manner of its relevance. To speak of a pattern I don't think is sufficient.

JUDGE BONOMY: General, will we at some stage in this review of documents come to any which disclose action by the army which resulted in casualties among KLA terrorists before January 1999?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Of course there will be events of that kind, too, as envisaged. There were a number of events, and I saw in these documents that there are a certain number of such events as you have described.

JUDGE ROBINSON: I was just saying I think we had one earlier where two Albanians were killed.

We'll break now for 20 minutes.

--- Recess taken at 12.18 p.m.

--- On resuming at 12.43 p.m.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson. ⁹³⁷¹

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Milosevic.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson, as we broke for the break, I'd just like to add some more arguments. The point isn't in what Mr. Kay said, that it was a state of consciousness and not only the pattern either, but you should bear in mind that each of these reports, and we can see from day-to-day, contains the words terrorism.

THE INTERPRETER: State of mind, Mr. Kay was talking about, interpreter's correction.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The word terrorism and how terrorism was qualified didn't come from top to bottom, downwards, it came from the bottom, from the terrain, from the field, as an expression of realistic facts, which topples Mr. Nice's basic thesis about a joint criminal enterprise which was thought out in advance. On the contrary, we see that these are events to

-- which had to be reacted to because they were events of killings of people throughout Kosovo and Metohija.

Secondly, if you look at what the army did carefully, and you can do that on the basis of the information we have here, you can see that on a daily basis, from one day to the next, the answer is provided as to what actually happened, why the army was located where it was at times, whether it was there to instil fear in the citizens and persecute them, or was it there to confront terrorism and tackle terrorism? And that is very easily seen on the basis of these documents and reports. And all the accusations put forward by Mr. Nice I will not -- anyway, I won't be able to prove that the army did not do something but I can prove what the army did, what ⁹³⁷² its conduct was, what its activities were, and all that was documented, and then you will be able to see that it didn't do what Mr. Nice claims it did.

But of course the evidence and documents General Delic has also indicate that at times acts were not in conformity with the rules of procedure but steps were taken to deal with the issue, and the need to make things public, we're not dealing with a show of any kind that's being put on here, what we're dealing with here is if we're dealing with justice and justice must be shown and seen to be done and not justice through some sort of materials -- executed through materials that nobody sees. So there are a series of elements that I -- and more arguments that I could present to back up why I think the presentation should be done in precisely the way we're doing it.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you, Mr. Milosevic.

JUDGE BONOMY: Well, that really needs to be answered, in my view. The last point needs to be answered. Because as you will know from your own domestic legal system in which the vast majority of material is presented in writing, allowing justice to be seen to be done has nothing to do with guaranteeing that every word that is uttered has to be -- or every word that is expressed has to be uttered orally.

JUDGE ROBINSON: You may proceed, Mr. Milosevic.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Robinson. I can't remember whether I asked for tab 19 to be admitted into evidence. If not, then I should like to request that so now.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] ⁹³⁷³

Q. Just briefly --

JUDGE ROBINSON: That one was -- is not translated, so it's marked for identification pending translation.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Tab 20, General. Does that refer to the same event with a complete description of the event, the measures taken, and so on?

A. Yes. The first was an Official Note, the second was an extraordinary report sent to the corps command, but it relates to the same event, yes.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I hope that this document has been translated and that it can be tendered into evidence, Mr. Robinson.

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, Your Honour, please.

JUDGE ROBINSON: It's not translated, so it's marked for identification pending translation.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. General, you have brought with you video footage of an incident that took place at the Morina border point on the 16th of April, 1998; 19th of April, 1998; and the 24th -- 23rd of April, 1998, at Kosare. Can we see that footage, please.

It's tab 21.

[Videotape played]

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think it starts with the third film, not the first film. ⁹³⁷⁴

JUDGE KWON: We saw this, yes.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] That's not that tab. This is tab 2. Would the technical booth please play tab 21, the video in tab 21 with the three excerpts.

JUDGE KWON: How about number 5? Morina, yes.

[Videotape played]

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, there's no translation, so we're not understanding what is being said.

THE INTERPRETER: The booths have not been provided with a transcript of the footage.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I thought the footage would be showing the incidents at Morina border crossing point and at the Kosare point.

THE WITNESS: We'll see that in continuation of the film in a few seconds' time, I believe.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Let us return to the video, then.

[Videotape played]

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] There are two more pieces of tape relating to the border incidents, but they confirm what the general explained, that is to say they threw away their weapons and equipment, fled back to Albania.

[Videotape played]

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] This is repetition of what we've already seen, in actual fact. May we move forward in the tape.

MR. NICE: It's very difficult for us to derive a great deal of ⁹³⁷⁵ value, if any, from this material unless we have either a transcript of what you're -- unless the booths are able to help us, as I expect they can't, with translation or interpretation.

JUDGE KWON: I wonder whether interpreters could interpret as far as they could.

THE INTERPRETER: Your Honour, we'll do our best, but the tape is very fast and difficult to follow.

JUDGE KWON: Yes. Thank you. Then could we repeat the previous one.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] This is the second clip that we're going to see now.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] And this -- on the 19th of April, 1998, at 0125 hours, our border authorities opened fire on a group of illegal persons trying to cross who were in the region of C4/5 at the Morina border point tried to enter territory of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. The illegal passage after the people who crossed illegally after opening fire, threw down part of their weapons and equipment that they tried to break -- bring in, and on the spot our authorities found three automatic rifles, two semi-automatic rifles, 16 bombs, 338 bullets, seven of 7.62 millimetres, seven rounds for an automatic rifle, three sets, combat sets produced by Sweden, et cetera.

JUDGE ROBINSON: That's it, Mr. Milosevic?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May we see all three incidents? There are three excerpts, three DVD tapes. This is the first. We need the second and the third. To save time, we're going to ask the general to ⁹³⁷⁶ comment on the footage together with all three or, rather, his comments on all three, because they take place in a short space of time.

[Videotape played]

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] On the 23rd of April --

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, the general cannot comment at the same time the interpreters are trying to translate. So it's one or the other, but let's have the interpretation.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I wanted us to view all three footage on all the three border incidents and then the general can give comments on all three to save time.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Let's proceed, and the interpreters will try to interpret.

[Videotape played]

JUDGE KWON: Should be previous one.

THE INTERPRETER: "[Voiceover] D 2/4, we came upon an ambush. They came upon an ambush. When asked to halt, when told to halt, they did not do that. They opened fire and there was energetic fire in response. They threw away all the things they were carrying with -- on them and started to flee in panic.

"One person remains dead on the spot."

JUDGE KWON: [Previous translation continues]... video. I don't think this is the video the accused wishes to play right now. It should be dated 23rd of April. Number 7, I would say, yes.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] That's quite correct, Mr. Kwon, yes.

[Videotape played] ⁹³⁷⁷

THE INTERPRETER: "[Voiceover] On the 23rd of April, 1998 at 0545 hours at the region of Kosare border crossing, the border patrol with two ambushes came upon a group of 150 - 200 armed persons who had crossed the border illegally from Albania into our territory. Our border authorities opened fire and on that occasion, killed 19 persons, and two persons were captured. The following people were captured: Gashire Mustafa Gazmin [phoen], Professor of English, born on the 28th of March, 1970 in the village of Eric, Djakovica municipality; and the other man was Metaj Sherif Iber [phoen]. He was an agricultural technician born on the 13th of December, 1961, in the village of Eric, Djakovica municipality."

JUDGE ROBINSON: General --

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] And there is one more excerpt.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. I see. One more excerpt, yes. That would make it the third?

A. No, the fourth. The fourth piece of footage.

Q. Does it come immediately after this one?

A. Yes. It is the border point called Liken, as opposed to Likan.

JUDGE KWON: Who is leading the evidence? Your index clearly says three video clips.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Here in this tab, tab 21, we have three DVDs which relate to the incidents at the Morina and Kosare border posts, the first on the 16th of April, 1998, on the 19th of April, 1998, and at Kosare on the 23rd of April, 1998. Those are the three incidents and the three DVDs that were supposed to be shown. We've seen two of those. ⁹³⁷⁸

JUDGE KWON: No, three of them. We've seen three of them.

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

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Now, General, just briefly, could you give us your comments? This is in your area of responsibility in your unit; is that right?

A. Yes. This was the 53rd Border Battalion based in Djakovica and directly attached to the Pristina Corps. It was responsible to me in the disciplinary sense because it was based in the same barracks. The on-site investigation was conducted by the company from my brigade, because my company had territorial jurisdiction over the entire territory of Kosovo and Metohija.

What could we see based on these clips? We could see that this was the prevalent way in which the weapons were brought into the territory of Kosovo and Metohija. In the first clip, we were able to see how a small group of people attempted to bring in weapons carried by 12 horses. They came upon an ambush set by border patrol. They did not stop when told by the patrol but, rather, opened fire. You were able to see the dead horses, and the group managed to drop the weapons and equipment and return to the territory of Albania. We were able to see dozens of automatic and semi-automatic rifles dropped on the spot. In the second clip, the situation was very similar, except that the quantity of weapons was smaller. There were only three automatic and semi-automatic rifles, whereas in the third case a large group of 150 armed persons came, and out of those 150, 19 were killed in the clash with the members of the border patrol. ⁹³⁷⁹

JUDGE ROBINSON: What happened to the remaining number?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As for the remaining persons, since this was a large group, some of them managed to bypass the ambush and enter the territory of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, whereas the other part returned to Albania. Through the --

JUDGE ROBINSON: [Previous translation continues]... prisoners. You took two, two prisoners?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In one of these cases, two persons were captured. One of them was a teacher of English from the village of Eric. The village of Eric can be seen here, right here on the village -- on the road Djakovica-Decani.

JUDGE ROBINSON: [Previous translation continues] ... subsequent to the arrest?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] After the arrest and identification, which must be conducted, these persons were turned over to the MUP organs, and then criminal proceedings were instituted against them. Most likely, I'm not familiar with this, but it is probable that they were convicted as persons who crossed the border illegally and opened fire on the border patrol.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Milosevic.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. General, how large was the unit of the army of Yugoslavia that this large group came upon, this large group numbering 150 to 200 persons who had come from Albania?

A. That was an ambush. Regular ambush is normally set by six ^{9380 BLANK PAGE 9381} soldiers and one non-commissioned officer.

Q. So what was the ratio in that clash?

A. The terrorist -- terrorists greatly outnumbered the border patrol in that one case, whereas in the other case the balance was rather appropriate.

Q. General, in these incidents, did the border patrol act in accordance with the rules of service or could you tell us something different?

A. In all cases, on-site investigation was conducted, and whenever possible the Albanian side was always invited. Local mixed commission number 4 is in charge of this area. This local commission, mixed commission, is from the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, and a similar commission exists in the Republic of Albania.

In several cases they came to the spot and conducted an investigation. However, I know that there was one case where a fire was opened from the territory of Albania and members of the commission were unable to conduct an investigation and had to leave the area due to the risk that they themselves were exposed to.

JUDGE BONOMY: Do we have the reports of the on-site investigations in these three cases?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We have report -- a report for one of these cases. However, reports do exist. I have seen the reports produced by my company. There are several hundreds of them.

JUDGE BONOMY: Which number is this one, the one that you say is here? ⁹³⁸²

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Tab 19 and 20. Tab 19 and 20.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. 19 and 20 are an Official Note and an interim report related to the border incident at the Morina border post.

A. And there are also criminal reports and various other kinds of documents which are typically produced in such situations.

Q. You mentioned the mixed Yugoslav-Albanian border commission. Was it notified and invited to come to the spot in all cases where there was a border incident?

A. Yes, in all cases. In 1997 and in the earlier period, the typical procedure was to have both commissions come to the site. However, in 1998, these commissions were able to meet only several times because in most cases they were exposed to great risk.

JUDGE BONOMY: Did they come to deal with these three cases that you've just shown us?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In the report, you can see that yourself, because the documents refer only to the incident of the 19th, and it is stated here that -- let me just take a look at this.

JUDGE BONOMY: I'll be able to see it for myself when it's translated, but I need your assistance at the moment because it's not translated.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. It says here that the Yugoslav side, local mixed commission number 4, informed the command of the 53rd Border Battalion of Djakovica that it was unable to conduct on-site investigation as it was unsafe, and they were unable to contact the ⁹³⁸³ Albanian side and their commission. As a result of that, only one member of our local mixed commission, Major Sorak Goran [phoen], as a member, went to inspect the site.

JUDGE BONOMY: I understood an earlier answer to be that these meetings took place whenever it was notified and invited to come to the spot in all cases where there was a border incident, but here's an example of the Albanian side not being contacted. Do you know the position in relation to the one where 19 people were killed?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As far as I'm able to see, we do not have -- just a minute. No, we don't have the report in that case. Therefore, I can't claim with certainty that the local mixed commissions met in that case. However, an on-site investigation was definitely conducted.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. And the clip that we saw, was that filmed during the on-site investigation?

A. Yes. All on-site investigations are recorded by a still camera and a video camera.

Q. Which organ conducts an on-site investigation when it comes to border incidents, crossing of border by armed groups? Which organ is in charge of that type of investigation?

A. An investigative judge from Nis is competent in such cases. That judge comes when there is grave violations, similar to this one, and the judge is assisted by crime technicians. In this case, crime technicians were members of my company. ⁹³⁸⁴

JUDGE BONOMY: I understood you to say a short while ago that it came within the jurisdiction of your brigade to carry out the on-site investigation, but are you saying that in each of these cases an investigative judge came and dealt with the investigation?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. It is stated here in all of these Official Notes that an investigative judge was informed. And depending on the consequences and whether there were any consequences in the incident, if there were perhaps casualties that were killed, and providing that no fire was opened and that it was safe enough, then an investigative judge would come to the site. If the judge was unable to come, then he or she would authorise crime technicians from my brigade to come and conduct an on-site investigation.

JUDGE BONOMY: In relation to the 19 who were killed, is that what happened, that it was simply your crime technicians who carried out the investigation?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As far as I can remember, my technicians merely assisted the investigative judge. They made photographs and video footage.

JUDGE BONOMY: Who was the judge?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The investigative judge from the military court in Nis. Whoever was on duty there. Colonel Miladinovic from Nis was the president of the court who assigned investigative judges. There were a number of judges who came, but I can't remember their names now. I would normally only meet them when they came to me to ask for security officers from the military police to escort them to the site. ⁹³⁸⁵

JUDGE ROBINSON: General, if there was a different version of these incidents, if, for example, one of the survivors reported that his group was unarmed and your forces opened fire at him, where would we find a statement from -- from one of the survivors to that effect?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] All persons crossing border illegally and caught at the border would certainly be interviewed there. I think that the Prosecutor's office has a large number of statements given by Albanians who crossed the border illegally, and I believe that back in 2002 the Prosecutor's office received that documentation. There are also videotapes recorded during such interviews with persons who crossed the border illegally.

JUDGE ROBINSON: [Previous translation continues] ... of the survivors were tried, was subjected to a trial, that would have been his defence. So we would find it in the court records.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Certainly. All such cases were prosecuted.

I remember that in another case, it probably was November and the OSCE mission notified of this, a person called Saban Zimeci [phoen] crossed the border illegally. He was prosecuted, and the members of the Verification Mission asked to be allowed to go to the site where he had been -- he had been caught with weapons, and to be allowed to talk to him. So there probably must be a trace in the OSCE documentation. I know that a criminal complaint was filed against him, I know that he was prosecuted or tried in Nis, and that later on, sometime in 2001, he was acquitted. ⁹³⁸⁶

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. Mr. Milosevic.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. General, is it fully clear that a group of at least 150 armed persons crossed the border and that it exchanged fire with our border patrol?

A. Yes. During that period of time, it was quite typical for all groups to be armed.

Q. All right. So they were armed. They crossed the border illegally, and they fired at border patrols. Is that what was typical?

A. Yes, that's right, that was typical. In the earlier years, in 1995 and 1996, it was mostly cigarettes that were carried across the border, and normally there was no fire activity on either side, and smugglers would normally flee back to the territory of Albania. But once they started smuggling weapons, then fire would normally always be opened.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson, I hereby request that the video clips from tab 21 be admitted into evidence.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, they're admitted.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. General, please tell us in greater detail but as concise as possible something about the order that you drafted on the 22nd of April, 1998, which can be found in tab 22.

A. Yes, that's right. This is an order that was classified as strictly confidential. It was written pursuant to the order of the corps command, because there was an order of the corps, and this was the order for deployment of standby forces of the 549th Motorised Brigade. My ⁹³⁸⁷ decision can be seen on the map whereas this is the text version of the order.

In brief terms, let me say that paragraph 1 discusses the situation in the territories, says that there was an escalation of terrorist activities, and goes on to say that in Djakovica and Decani there were village patrols spotted, that there were movements of large groups of terrorists, and that there were engineering works conducted in the villages of Skvijane, Stubla, Popovac, Smonica, Glodjane, and Gramocelj. Skvijane, Stubla, and Popovac are located to the west of Djakovica, on the road between Djakovica and Ponosevac. Glodjane is located to the north-east of the Radonjic Lake.

On the territory of the municipalities of Prizren, Orahovac, Suva Reka, Djakovica, Decani and Pec, that is where terrorist forces were established, probably battalion strength, of about 500 terrorists. What is under way is the arming of population from Djakovacki and Prizrenski Has, that is to say between the river Drim and the Albanian border. The objective of the action carried out by terrorists is to gain control of as much of Kosovo and Metohija territory as possible by carrying out mobilisation and arming of a large number of the Siptar population. With help from some Western countries and the Republic of Albania, they want to start an armed rebellion, seize power, and realise the plan of creating a Republic of Kosovo.

Now, the tasks that I got from the command of the corps, that is in paragraph 2. To step up the security of my own military facilities and deploy part of combat group 1 and combat group 2 for intervention on the ⁹³⁸⁸ border, to prevent the infiltration of sabotage and terrorist groups, and the transfer of arms, ammunition, and military equipment from the territory of the Republic of Albania and Macedonia to Kosovo and Metohija. With the rest of my troops, I should protect my own military facilities, barracks and the area itself.

Now, what does this actually mean? Further on in the next paragraphs we see what the neighbours are and -- what the adjacent units are, rather, and what my decision is as commander of brigade ultimately. That is in 4.1.

Q. General, let us just link paragraph 4 to the assignment that you gave at the very outset in paragraph 2. That is to say that it is written here to engage for intervention in areas that are under danger and prevent the infiltration of sabotage and terrorist groups and the transfer of arms, ammunition, and other military equipment from the Republic of Albania and Macedonia to Kosovo and Metohija. Deploy the remaining forces and protect military facilities, troops and materiel. So that's it, to prevent the infiltration of sabotage and terrorist groups?

A. This is the task I got from my superior command. And as brigade commander, I do not have the right to change it. I realise the task, I carry it out through my own decision, which is contained here in paragraph 4. I give assignments to my own units and that is contained here.

Q. In paragraph 4, you again refer to sabotage anti-terrorist groups, and the task that you got.

A. Yes. Then forces on the ready is -- or, rather, standby forces is the term used here. They are in a state of combat readiness for six ⁹³⁸⁹ hours. So when a signal is given, for example the alert, combat alert, then they should be ready to enter combat. They get into full combat readiness ultimately. Combat group 1, which is in the Prizren garrison, it says here what its composition is; one motorised company, a mortar company, then 9 K11 platoon, and then a logistics platoon and a pioneer squad. They take the general area of Landovica. So you can see that that is the command of that battalion.

From Djakovica, from my other battalion, combat group number 2 gets to the area of Babaj Boks, and then we see its composition there too. These arrows show their tasks. In the area where they are, both are outside inhabited areas.

Where combat group 1 is, it takes my wartime combat post, which is in the immediate vicinity of Landovica and of the vineyards of the agricultural cooperative from Prizren. Babaj Boks is to the north-west of the village of Babaj Boks towards the Albanian border. These arrows show the direction where these combat groups would intervene if necessary, and that is presented here. So if necessary, they would protect their own facilities in the barracks. If necessary, they would render assistance to the border battalion or, rather, the border posts if there are larger groups that come there or if there are incidents as weapons are brought in.

Q. The red dots are border posts; right?

A. Yes. And their names are given here too. As for combat group 1, we can see that it intervenes in the area of Suva Reka because my two warehouses are there as well, in Djinovce and ⁹³⁹⁰ in the village of Ljubizda. And if my warehouses are under threat, then their task is to intervene in that direction.

Q. Thank you, General.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson, my request remains the same; that this document, along with the map, be admitted into evidence. This is the document contained in tab 22. This is what General Delic dealt with now, the order for deployment of standby forces, and it comes with the map that he just explained.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. General, are you familiar with the Official Note that is in tab 23? 25/03, confidential number, and the date is the 24th of April, 1998. What does this pertain to, this Official Note?

A. It pertains to what Judge Bonomy asked me just now. It has to do with those individuals that he asked about, the 19 persons that he asked about.

It says here that when they came to the site, the investigating judge of the military court in Nis and the crime technician, when they arrived they found 19 corpses and two illegal persons who were crossing the border who were taken prisoner, as well as a large quantity of different weapons, ammunition 7.62 millimetres for automatic rifles, and hand grenades and --

THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter did not manage to translate the entire text because the witness went on speaking. It's the text to the ⁹³⁹¹ end.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. In tab 24, we have yet another Official Note that pertains to the same date. Is that the same?

A. No.

Q. All right. We're now going to move on to the next one. So this tab 23 pertains to this incident that was at the Kosare border post where these 19 --

A. The film we saw.

Q. The film that was played here.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] So this Official Note, Mr. Robinson, I would like to have it admitted into evidence as well, tab 23.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, admitted. Well, it's marked for identification pending translation.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. In tab 24, you have an Official Note which has to do with the area of Gorozup, the Prizren garrison.

A. It is the 55th Battalion, on Mount Pastrik.

Q. Could you just help me with something, General. In the next tab, 25, again there is reference to the Gorozup border post. Is this the same incident or are they two separate incidents?

A. It is the same incident. However, this was the largest quantity of weapons and ammunition that was seen at the border in one single day. However, the Gorozup area is in Mount Pastrik. 1.988 metres is the ⁹³⁹² altitude. I remember very well that on that day it was foggy, and when they told me that there was an incident on the border and fire was exchanged, they told me that they seized -- or, rather, that these persons who were crossing the border illegally, that after opening fire, they withdrew to the territory of Albania. I was informed about this small quantity that was presented here; a hand grenade, et cetera, et cetera, or, rather, 80 hand grenades, and so on and so forth. And the following day --

Q. In this tab 24, it says that on the 22nd of April, 1998, around 1950 hours, et cetera, et cetera, and then there is reference to the 26th in the next Official Note, the 26th of April, but the place is the same. Is that what this information shows, General?

A. I remember that this was an enormous quantity of ammunition and different weapons, and that I personally, on orders from the corps commander, was there on the top of Mount Pastrik. Two helicopters had to come three times. There was about six tons of equipment there, different kinds of military equipment.

JUDGE KWON: General, did you say that tab 24 and 25 refer to the same event?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Tab 24 pertains to the 22nd of April, whereas tab 25 refers to the 26th of April.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. But the place is the same.

A. The place is the same. I thought, because on the previous day, that is to say it says here on the 26th, that practically in the fog the ^{9393 BLANK PAGE 9394} border organs from Gorozup met with the persons who were illegally crossing the border, that they opened fire, and that they simply fled to the territory of Albania. However, since this was a border patrol consisting of five people only, they did not pursue, because of the inclement weather, the illegal group, but they only reported about that. The following day, a bigger patrol of border guards came to the area and found a vast quantity of weapons. After that, when the corps command received this report, I was ordered to go there myself. I see that in tab 22 there is reference to that --

THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction: In tab 25 there is reference to that equipment.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. It also says here that we were not in a position to count all the weapons that were found on site because there were so many of them and because we had to transport them by helicopter to Nis, so that information cannot be very precise, and after the terrain was searched, then more equipment was found, and that will be documented. Were there casualties there as well? I cannot see all of this.

A. No, there were no wounded or killed persons there. It is characteristic that our estimates were that there were so many quantity -- so many weapons that were scattered in this large area of about one and a half kilometres, and about 100 horses were required to transport all this equipment from there or, rather, to there, because we saw that it was brought in on horseback. We saw the hooves.

Q. So large quantities of weapons were found but on neither side were ⁹³⁹⁵ there --

A. Any casualties. No one was killed.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right, Mr. Robinson, again my request is the same; tabs 24 and 25 that pertain to the border incident at Gorozup when this large quantity of weapons was seized, be admitted into evidence.

JUDGE ROBINSON: 24 marked for identification pending translation, and 25 admitted.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Did I understand this correctly, that you do have a translation of 25?

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. Yes, we have a translation.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Oh, I see. Oh, I see. Thank you.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. General Pavkovic is referred to in tab 26, the commander of the Pristina Corps, General Pavkovic, as far as I can see here on the 9th of May, 1998.

A. Yes. This is an order issued to members of the corps. All military motor vehicles and civilian vehicles transporting members of the corps along the Pristina-Klina up here, Klina-Pec, Pristina-Klina-Djakovica are prohibited from moving along these roads because of the terrorist gangs operating along those roads and in order to take security measures to protect the lives of the members of the corps. And in the second part it says because there are these five roads between Kosovo and Metohija, these two were unsafe, so there is a reference which roads could be used and that were still safe at that time. ⁹³⁹⁶ This is the kind of orders that arrived from the corps every day. And of course, during transport, we are told to abide by all security measures that were contained in the previous orders. That is to say that if a vehicle leaves Prizren going to Pristina, that the operations duty officer has to call the operations duty officer in Pristina to tell him that at such-and-such a time a vehicle set out to Pristina, and then when that vehicle reaches the Dulje pass, that is the last place where there can be radio communication with Prizren, then he's supposed to call the duty operations officer in Pristina to say that he reached the pass of Dulje, and then when he gets to the area of Stimlje, he has to report to the operations centre in Pristina, that is to say the operations centre of the Pristina Corps, that he crossed the -- the canyon or river of Semuljeva [phoen] and that the operations centre from Pristina should inform us that our vehicle safely passed along this road and arrived in Pristina. That was usual procedure for every vehicle.

Q. Why such measures of caution? Why such measures of safety and security that are referred to there?

A. Well, that's what had to be done because of possible attack on the vehicles. And should the vehicle not appear, we know how much time would be needed for it to pass that unsafe road, for us to intervene. If it didn't turn up, then we could go and search for it.

Q. Thank you, General.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I assume that this has been translated, and I'd like to tender it into evidence, tab 26.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. ⁹³⁹⁷

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I suggest that we move on and I'd like to tender tab 27 because it refers to the same sort of incidents.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Along different roads.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, along different roads.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] So I'd like to tender that into evidence, the corps commander for Bedza [phoen]...

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Very well. Now, what about the information by the Chief of Staff of the corps, Colonel Lazarevic, the next document, to be found in tab 28, General? What's that about?

A. Here it says that one road which was closed, that is to say the road from Djakovica, Ponosevac, Junik, and Decani, the second road, because there is a direct road from Djakovica to Decani, but this is an asphalt road once again going across Ponosevac, Junik, and Decani, and for the army it was particularly important because it was along that route that the border patrols were -- received their supplies, and it had been closed off the previous days. And here the chief of staff of the corps is in fact informing us commanders that on the 23rd of May the road was deblocked, the Djakovica, Ponosevac, and Morina border post was deblocked. And it stipulates which units took part and were engaged in lifting the blockade there.

Q. All right. Fine. Has that been translated?

A. It also says that five terrorists were captured.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, there is another hearing here this afternoon, so we can't trespass. We have to break now. Mr. Nice, you ⁹³⁹⁸ have a --

MR. NICE: Very short point. We've been going a day and a half. The estimate was 12 hours or -- 12 hours, which is three sitting days. We've now done one-twentieth part, by number, of the accused's exhibits. Would the accused be good enough to help us with any revised estimate of how long he's expecting this part of his evidence to take? It does affect our preparation. If he's going to be the 20 days in chief that it would appear will be taken if we proceed at this speed, we ought to know.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, that's a reasonable request. What is the estimate now?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, I'll do my best to use the time as rationally as possible but we'll be able to see that when I move on to exhibits having to do with the relationship between the army and the Kosovo Verification Mission, and there are a lot of documents about that. So I'll ask the witness to go through all the documents collectively, all together, and just to point out some characteristic features without dwelling on all the documents individually. But all of them testify to the continuity in this relationship.

JUDGE ROBINSON: [Previous translation continues] ... absolutely clear that although the Chamber did not restrict the Prosecution in its examination-in-chief, the Chamber retains the discretion to control the proceedings, and if we take the view that you are not utilising the time properly, we'll set a specific limit for the examination-in-chief. We will adjourn until Wednesday of next week.

--- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.44 p.m., ⁹³⁹⁹ to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 29th day

of June, 2005, at 9.00 a.m.