41948
Thursday, 7 July 2005
[Open session]
[The accused entered court]
[The witness entered court]
--- Upon commencing at 9.07 a.m.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, please continue.
WITNESS: BOZIDAR DELIC [Resumed]
[Witness answered through interpreter] Examined by Mr. Milosevic: [Continued]
Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, General. Yesterday, we went through a number of documents in an accelerated manner. I assume that we can continue the same way in this stage too.
What is the content of the order on the engagement of forces in destroying Siptar terrorist groups in the broader area of Tusus that you adopted on the 14th of May 1999, and which is contained in tab 562?
A. This is an order, a classical one, if I can put it that way. Excuse me, could the map please be placed on the ELMO? Excuse me?
Q. The map that is contained in document 563 should be placed on the easel, the one that pertains to this particular engagement of forces. So the order is in document 562, and the map is in 563. Is that right, General?
A. That's right, Mr. Milosevic. In paragraph 1 of this order, in the first three lines we can practically see the reason for engaging the forces. "From the beginning of aggressor NATO aviation's aggression against our country a group of Siptar terrorists are constantly operating 41949 from the Tusus sector locates around 15 to 20 terrorists, as printed. The Siptar terrorist group headquarters in Tusus is intensively carrying out a forceful mobilisation of the Siptar population from the neighbouring villages."
THE INTERPRETER: Could the speakers please be asked to slow down.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic and the general, you just heard the interpreters asking you to slow down.
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is the town of Prizren. Tusus is a suburb, basically, of Prizren.
From the beginning of the aggression up to that particular day on this road that leads from the village of Hoca Zagradska via the village of Leskovac to Prizren, about ten members of my unit got killed, as well as MUP members. These were columns that were bringing supplies, and all these attacks were carried out by this group of terrorists. And in order to neutralise this group of terrorists, this combat action was carried out and the order pertains to that combat action.
Q. Let us just clarify this. Your supplies columns are moving there in the vicinity of Prizren. Ten men got killed in these attacks and you are now intervening vis-a-vis the group that did that. That is the content of this order.
A. Yes.
Q. I would like to draw your attention to 8.5 of your order. You say: "In all situations, consistently honour the provisions of international law of war." That is, after all, contained in every one of your orders. 41950
A. In every one of my orders, yes.
Q. All right. You've explained the map. In document 564, in accordance with the same procedure that was seen in other situations whenever the army was engaged, you wrote an analysis?
A. Yes, this is a detailed analysis of this particular action.
Q. In this analysis we see what your estimate is; namely, that four persons were killed.
A. We assume that they got two more out. Our forces had three men killed and two wounded, whereas the MUP had two policemen killed and one wounded.
Q. Yes. That is written here at the beginning of the last third of this analysis. That is the entirety of this particular engagement in this stage.
Now, General, if you agree, if there is no special reason for us to dwell on these tabs, in the meantime I wanted us to look at tab 574.
A. Mr. Milosevic, I would just like to read one sentence from tab 566.
Q. Please go ahead.
A. This is an intelligence information that is sent from the brigade to the 2nd Motorised Battalion in Djakovica. "On the basis of information collected by intelligence and reconnaissance organs in the border zone ... "A movement of the Albanian army forward defence line and the allied forces on the border was carried out along the axis from the Republic of Albania to Kosovo and Metohija, with populated places as support points, between three and five kilometres in depth;. 41951 "In the sector of the Kosare border post, they committed aggression against the FRY territory ..." and I'm asking for particular vigilance because the aggression may start any day. That is what I wish to say about this particular tab.
Q. Very well, General. Then there was a massive attack on our territory that you managed to repel successfully. That's what you talked about yesterday?
MR. NICE: I can't actually find that quotation. I saw part of it but the bit about every day I couldn't find, or I missed it.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Can you point us to the particular section, Mr. Milosevic or the witness?
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It's a very short document, 566, the one that was just quoted by General Delic now. At the very beginning, in line four of the text, it says: "A movement of the Albanian army and allied forces on the border was carried out along the axis from the Republic of Albania to Kosovo and Metohija, with populated places as support points, between three and five kilometres in depth." And then: "In the sector of the Kosare border post, they committed aggression against the FRY territory."
MR. NICE: It may be at line 4.12 that what sounded like quotation was a change from recitation to narration by the witness, but that's the problem with going at this sort of speed on passages that he's reading from.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, please continue.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Robinson. 41952
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. Let us just briefly deal with document 574. If you have something that is exceptionally important in these documents that we are skipping, please draw my attention to that, General.
So document 574. What does it pertain to? Have you found it?
A. Yes, Mr. Milosevic. That is a document or, rather, an order in view of what was obtained in the previous document, this is an order consisting of eight paragraphs to subordinate units to carry out all preparations for organising battle, combat action, and every other tactical operation, to set up firing systems and coordinate them with the barrier systems, and ensure and facilitate effective attacks on enemy forces in the foreground at the combat support position in front of the forward line as well as in-depth defence during combat. Also ensure that each individual knows his place and that of his unit in the combat disposition of a higher-ranking unit of the last detail, et cetera. That is the essence of this document.
Q. In all possible aspects it has to do with the defence of the territory of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.
A. Yes.
Q. Now, let us look at document 580. This is a warning that has to do with crime control in units, and I just wish to quote part of it. The third subparagraph in terms of what individuals do, as you say. That is: "Violent behaviour manifested so far in threats with weapons, random shooting at residential buildings, physical and sexual abuse, harassment." And then you give an example, too. 41953 So you constantly bear in mind what is going on in practice, and you caution that measures should be taken in order to eradicate this by all means. Is that the essence of this order of yours?
A. That is the essence, because orders are received from superior commands and then one draws on all this experience preventing such things from happening in one's own unit.
Q. That's precisely what I wanted to say. You indicate the example of another brigade, and you inform your own unit about this. So although such a thing did not happen in your unit, you're telling them that that kind of thing should not happen, should not be repeated or, rather, not repeated but never happen.
A. That's right.
Q. Very well, General. Now, in document 589 there's a criminal report regarding terrorism, and here we have an individual example of a KLA member who claims that he fled from the KLA and was captured bearing arms, with weapons on him, and how he has treated. Was he treated in the proper manner as prescribed?
A. Mr. Milosevic, you said 589 tab, I believe.
Q. Yes. No, I apologise. No. I meant 583.
A. Yes, I remember this particular case. It took place on the 22nd of May. It is indeed a criminal report against an individual, and that individual was linked up to the operations of the 17th of May and the events that took place there. And in the close vicinity of the unit, in the town itself where the logistics unit was located, he appeared armed, wearing a black uniform. And when the person encountered the security 41954 forces, it was night-time, they threw away their rifle. They were arrested, and the person was treated pursuant to the rules.
Q. So this was an individual member of the KLA that was found wearing a black uniform, an automatic rifle, and everything else that it says here. You have his statement, you have the statement of your men from your unit, and we can see that this took place on the 22nd of May - that is the date of the document - that is to say, two months after the start of the NATO aggression. And this is an individual case. Is this, then, an example of conduct and proceedings with an arrested member of the KLA?
A. Yes. Proceedings were taken. He was taken to a military court, put before a military court.
Q. Thank you, General. Now, if I omit something that you consider to be very important, please stop me, but I'm doing my best to use my time as best as possible. And I'd now like to ask you to take a look at the following document, which is tab 589. Let's see what that one's about.
A. This is once again a military recruit and a criminal report against him. It is a person from my unit based in Djakovica.
Q. All right. Fine. Now, here we can see, among other things -- we're not going to go through this particular criminal report and what happened because it's a document that everybody can read, all of us can read through it, but I would just like to point out that we can see here that the citizens who were mistreated and abused reported the incident to the military police.
A. Yes. 41955
Q. And the military police intervened. The perpetrator was arrested, a criminal report was filed, and medical assistance given to the injured parties.
A. All the reports were collected, from the Official Note of MUP, the Official Note by the security organs, the statements of all persons involved, and a photo documentation about the event, and this person was court-martialed forthwith.
Q. Thank you. Now, you also drew up a piece of information which is, in fact, the next document, about some crimes and negative events, and the date of that is the 27th of May.
A. Yes.
Q. It is to be found in tab 590.
A. Yes. And in that piece of information we focus on the previous case in particular, the one we discussed a moment ago, that is to say the particular individual we discussed. And this was information sent out to all units, all the forces, so that all the members of the brigade could become acquainted with the case.
The report briefly goes through what happened. Their attention is drawn to the fact that this was the perpetration of a crime under Article 3 of the Criminal Code of Serbia, that it was perpetrated in a demeaning manner and a brutal manner and that the sentence for crimes of that kind ranges between 3 and 15 [Realtime transcript read in error "4"] years in prison for the perpetrator, and for anybody else present and involved in aiding and abetting, they too will be held responsible and they will suffer the same sentence as in the previous case. 41956
Q. And here it is noted that these persons were arrested by the military police and handed over to the military court in Pristina; is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. And at the end of this report, all the commanders and leaders are required energetically to stop such acts from taking place. So you have a concrete event and you are informing all the members, all the men, that is to say several thousand men, members of your brigade, your forces, and at that time, at the time of you doing so, the perpetrators had already been arrested. Is that what we can learn from this document, deduce and conclude?
A. Yes, that is the substance of the document.
Q. Thank you.
JUDGE BONOMY: General, what was the range of possible sentences that you gave?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The lowest sentence was 3 years -- 3 to 15 years.
JUDGE BONOMY: I thought so. The transcript says 3 to 4 years.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The general did say that in the report the sentence provided for by law range between 3 and 15 years.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. General, in the intelligence report by Colonel Vladimir Stojiljkovic, dated the 4th of June, mention is made among other things that at a border crossing there were cases that took -- there were events that took place -- 41957
JUDGE ROBINSON: Tab number, Mr. Milosevic.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It's tab 595.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. Just briefly, please, General, would you tell us what that was about, what was happening.
A. The date was the 4th of June, and that was already the time when the greatest ground offensive was under way, and its name was Arrow from -- coming from Albanian territory into the territory of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. And in that offensive we had taking part on the one side the terrorist forces, the forces of the Republic of Albania, and the NATO forces on the one side; and on the other side you had our own army, and this is intelligence, an intelligence report where the Chief of Staff, through his organs, defined and set out the four basic axes of attack via Pastrik -- Mount Pastrik. Otherwise, the operation was launched on the 27th of May.
Q. Thank you, General.
JUDGE BONOMY: General, do you claim that at any stage NATO forces actually entered the territory of Yugoslavia from the ground?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] NATO forces supported and reinforced, both from the ground and especially from the air, the forces of the terrorists who were attacking and who entered the territory.
JUDGE BONOMY: Could you answer my question. Do you say that the NATO forces at any stage entered the territory of Yugoslavia?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] They did not enter directly. NATO forces did not enter directly. The terrorist forces did enter, and they 41958 were supported and reinforced by NATO forces.
JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.
JUDGE KWON: General Delic, could you locate the location of Mount Pastrik on that map, please.
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is Pastrik. Mount Pastrik is here, to the west of Prizren. This is the valley of the Drim River. Here we have Vrbnik lake, and this is Pastrik mountain. This is the peak. It is 1.998 metres above sea level. And this ranged from the top, from the watchtower of Lika to Vrbnik lake. And that was the front. It ranged a distance of ten kilometres, and that's where the Operation Arrow started from Albania. The object was to reach the valley as soon as possible, the Beli Drim River valley, and to take control of Prizren as soon as possible. And the BBC, CNN reported on this constantly. There were constant news reports. And on the 30th or 31st of May, even, they informed the public that the forces had already reached the Drim valley, Drim River valley, and that on that day our army suffered 700 casualties. That is to say, they destroyed a battalion of 700 men.
JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. In connection to Mr. Bonomy's question as to whether the NATO forces actually entered the territory, the forces that were attacking the border were part of the overall forces which were supported by NATO, and they were the forces of the Republic of Albania, were they not?
MR. NICE: [Previous translation continues] ...
JUDGE BONOMY: Indeed. It's so hopeless to approach the 41959 examination of a witness in chief in this way.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. Whose planes were the B52 fighters who bombed all your positions simultaneously? Whose planes were they?
A. They were US planes, B52s, and they took off from Great Britain.
Q. This activity, the bombing of your positions at the same time as this attack was being launched, was that a unified activity that was being carried out on our territory?
A. From the viewpoint of the deployment of strategic aviation, of a strategic air force, that is to say strategic planes were used to target tactical targets, and there was blanket bombing, as it's called, that is to say 20 -- carpet bombing. Twenty times between the 27th of May to the 8 was carpet bombing took place on the part of strategic B52 bombers. They bombed 25 times.
Q. And was this this united attack on our territory, including the ground aggression that was going on at the same time?
A. Yes, absolutely. This was direct support and reinforcement to terrorist forces.
Q. And of course to the forces of the Republic of Albania?
A. Yes, the forces of the Republic of Albania who used their own artillery, their own tanks, and everything else they had at their disposal - artillery divisions - to act against our forces.
JUDGE BONOMY: Two points, General, just -- as you will appreciate -- thank you for that further information, but as you will appreciate, my question was a very simple question about who actually penetrated on the 41960 ground, and now we've had clarification of certain other aspects which doesn't add to the answer you've already given.
The other matter I want to ask you is this: You referred to news reports of 700 casualties. Are you saying these are inaccurate news reports?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. The figure is incorrect. It is true that in one day, on one day from my unit 125 people were out of combat. Of that number, ten were killed and 115 wounded, but they were placed out of action, they were not able to take part in the fighting any more. But together with the bombing of these positions and in all that together, I think 28 people were killed. So the information, the piece of news that 700 people were killed is not correct, in a single day. That was not the right figure.
JUDGE BONOMY: And I think you were also saying that the report was inaccurate in relation to the amount of progress that the forces had made. That's the invading forces.
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's right, yes.
JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. And our radio television, Radio-Television Serbia, that is, filmed the spot, the watchtower at Gorozur, and showed the whole world that that piece of information put out by CNN was completely incorrect.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. All right. That was a surprise because CNN -- that was a surprise, I suppose, because CNN is well known for its correct 41961 BLANK PAGE 41962 information, is it not?
General --
JUDGE BONOMY: Is that a question or a comment? Because if it's a question, we have haven't got the answer yet.
Do you have an answer to that question, General?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I think that Mr. Jamie Shea, as the "portparole" of NATO, celebrated the NATO pact during the aggression against our country and the whole world was able to hear his reports, which were full of lies.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. General, you've now described the situation. We have a ground operation going on, strategic planes bombing our forces in the area in depth, away from the border into Yugoslavia, and now in document 607, for example, your organs of the military police, your -- of your Prizren garrison, were filing a criminal report, and we see the date there. It is the 5th of June, that is to say the period of time when the worst attacks were being launched precisely against your units, and in your unit -- yet in your unit a criminal report was being filed on that particular date, the 5th of June, against a perpetrator who was killing and wounding an enemy contrary to the Criminal Code and Article 146 of that Criminal Code.
A. Yes, that's right.
Q. So this was a member of your unit involved.
A. Yes.
Q. Do you happen to know, in view of the fact that you are a teacher, a professor and a military man yourself, that this level of efficiency for 41963 organs when they are engaged in high level operations, very difficult operations, were they efficient in filing that criminal report?
A. Yes, they were, because the -- in these very difficult times it was their duty not to allow any unlawful acts from being committed. No defeatism, no panic. And so in this particular case, they were very efficient in taking steps to stop the perpetrators, and in this case it was one of their members. So they arrested one of their own men.
Q. They arrested a member of the military police who had killed an Albanian; is that right?
A. Yes.
JUDGE BONOMY: What happened to him, General?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, it says here in this criminal report. Now, as far as the soldier is concerned, the soldier was arrested straight away.
JUDGE BONOMY: Yes, it's him -- it's what happened to the soldier is what I would like to know.
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The soldier was taken into custody and court-martialed straight away, sent to the military court in Pristina.
JUDGE BONOMY: But what happened at the military court?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In the following tabs, you will find that. We can see -- actually, it's in tab 626.
JUDGE BONOMY: Just tell me.
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In tab 626, as I said, we find that the proceedings were undertaken. The court undertook the appropriate proceedings, but I have to find this particular individual now in the 41964 files. Slavoljub Topalovic was his name, soldier. The case was handed over to the municipal public prosecutor in Prizren.
JUDGE BONOMY: And what happened there?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know. It was a civil court.
JUDGE BONOMY: This is one of a number of occasions we've run into this difficulty, that we get so far in the -- in the account of what happened in relation to something, and then we end up up a close, as we say, up a side street that leads to a dead end. Anyway, if you don't have the information, we'll no doubt hear from someone else.
JUDGE ROBINSON: That accords with the view expressed by Mr. Milosevic, that the responsibility under Article 7(3) ends with arrest, and that is certainly not the case. The question of punishment also arises, which means that the trial is important, what happened at the trial is significant. But consistently you don't provide information beyond arrest.
Proceed, Mr. Milosevic.
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If we look at this tab, it shows also the sentences meted out to the members of my unit.
THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson, if it is necessary to follow through all the cases that were processed further up the line, it's possible, but I thought it would be rational for me to deal with that. The constitution of Yugoslavia and the constitution of Serbia very clearly stipulate, as in every democratic country, a distribution of power between executive, legislative, and judiciary authorities, and the executive 41965 authorities have finished their job when they refer a case to the judiciary.
I am not saying by any means that the judiciary did not perform their functions. I'm certain they did, and people who committed crimes were convicted. And we can also get hold of that information as well.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. Never mind what the constitutional position is in your country. Criminal responsibility under Article 7(3) relates both to the prevention and punishment of crime, which means that the trial is also important. Proceed.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I personally am not aware of a single case where somebody who perpetrated a crime and was convicted would have been released or acquitted. But we will look into that.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, you're not giving evidence.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. Let us just have a look here. There are a couple of additional things that relate to -- could you please look at the document under 616. My copy is very poor.
What is this all about?
A. This is an intelligence report under tab 616, saying that the activities of Siptar terrorist forces are being intensified, as well as the activities of the NATO aviation, so that from 6.00 to -- 6.00 a.m. [as interpreted] to 8.00 p.m., aviation acted against Planeja village, Sinaj, and towards the top of the mountain Pastrik, with frequent use of cluster bombs. 41966
Q. This is an intelligence report that in fact corroborates what you just said about the ground invasion and the use of strategic aviation against our forces at the time.
A. Yes. And those three villages that I mentioned were completely destroyed.
Q. But I understood that the carpet bombing covered the entire area of these villages where our forces were located.
A. Carpet bombing implies that an entire territory is constantly bombed with aircraft acting in pairs, and each plane carries around 50 225-kilo bombs.
Q. Thank you, General. Could we now look at another document, which is an excerpt from an annual intelligence report on electronic surveillance and counter-electronic operations for 1999. It's under tab 618.
Could you please point out the highlights, the most important points made in this document. Have you found it?
A. Yes, I have. For instance, on page 43 [as interpreted], the beginning of that page, this is actually a report received by Siptar terrorist forces via radio, namely an order that on the 3rd of March, beginning with 8.00 a.m., they should be in the highest level of combat readiness, take up their positions, and be in constant mutual contact. At 2300 hours, the Siptar terrorist forces located in this area --
MR. NICE: My mistake, no doubt -- oh, yes, I've found it now. Top of the page 3. There's a reference to page 43.
JUDGE BONOMY: You previously took objection to a similar 41967 document, Mr. Nice.
MR. NICE: Your Honour, I have taken objection to this sort of document. I'm not sure what the ruling was --
JUDGE BONOMY: The reason I'm interested in is that it was a majority ruling at the time.
MR. NICE: Your Honour, I take the same objection, of course, to documents of this kind because the raw material won't be made available to us, unless the witness has brought it with him, and I'm unable, therefore, to deal with it at all.
JUDGE BONOMY: It also doesn't indicate exactly what it is. It's an incomplete document and one which the -- it's not clear that the general has direct knowledge of, or one which contains material of which he has direct knowledge.
MR. NICE: Your Honour, I certainly repeat my objection, and I'll take the matter further in cross-examination, if I have time.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Continue, Mr. Milosevic.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. So, General, you read from their report on electronic surveillance and listening in to enemy communications.
A. Yes. It was the 52nd Company for electronic surveillance of the Pristina Corps.
Q. Can we find something here that was not directly overheard during their work of listening in to enemy communications?
A. No. No. This is an annual report, the report for 1999. Last year we discussed another annual report for 1998, and from that report we 41968 received this extract that relates to terrorism.
Q. Very well. So this is the beginning of March, dealing with terrorist activities.
Look at the entry for the 14th of May: "By intercepting Siptar terrorist radio communications for the Pastrik operation zone at 0200 hours on 14 May, 1999, we found out --"
THE INTERPRETER: Could the speaker please slow down.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. "... we found out that NATO aviation dropped cluster bombs along the axis of Dulje village --"
JUDGE ROBINSON: The interpreters are asking you to slow down.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I will slow down.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. "-- Blace village - Budakovo village - and Jezerske mountain, which resulted in a large number of dead and wounded refugees and Siptar terrorist forces members."
A. Yes. This is information received through interception.
Q. So we see from these intercepts that they were discussing their own casualties resulting from NATO bombing.
A. Yes. It happened on the 14th of May. I mentioned it yesterday. In the night of the 13th, the heaviest bombing of Prizren happened, the heaviest for the entire war, and they were reporting their own losses.
JUDGE BONOMY: General, can I take it that for that information the fact that for that information you refer to this document means that it wasn't intelligence which you reported on in any other form or 41969 incorporated into any order that you issued or analysis that you provided. This is, as far as your documents are concerned, the only source of this information?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There are many sources of intelligence. This is only one of them. It's not my unit but part of this unit located --
JUDGE BONOMY: I haven't expressed that very well. This piece of intelligence here doesn't appear in any of the other documents you've referred us to. Does that mean that this intercepted information - and I confine the point to this piece of intercepted information - was something that you did not actually make use of at the time? It's not in any of your analyses or any of your orders.
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There was no need to. I used this information directly on the ground. If we take, for instance, this last specific information of the 14th of May, I had that information already. The bombing of the refugee column near Korisa happened around 8.00 p.m., twenty-five past eight. I had that information within minutes. And this report from this agency arrived only on the next day, so it was not relevant at the time, this specific piece of information, I mean. This is a unit of the superior command, so in my reports towards the superior command, there was no need for me to report to them what their own unit was doing and what kind of information it gave me.
JUDGE BONOMY: Well, indeed. That makes me wonder why on earth we're looking at this rather than your own personal experience of what actually happened on the ground, which is really what I'm interested in. 41970 What was the immediate source of your knowledge of the bombing of the refugee group?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, we dealt with it in detail yesterday, and we even watched video footage filmed by Radio-Television Serbia. So what we discussed yesterday and what we saw on the film, that same subject is discussed by terrorists via radio. It's the same event.
JUDGE BONOMY: But what I'm trying to understand is what was the first information you got that there had been -- that a group of refugees had been bombed? Who reported that to you?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I received a report, of course, by my operations duty officer. I personally heard the sound of bombing, but I didn't know which area was being bombed, and my operations duty officer told me that it was the area of Korisa village. Because throughout the territory we had our units, but at that moment I didn't know that there were refugees there as well. I thought they were bombing an empty space because there were no units of mine there. And it was only around 3.00, 3.00 a.m., when the wounded started coming into the hospital, that I found out that there were casualties there, people killed, that the column of people on their way home had been hit. That's when I ordered my medical corps to be sent there to give assistance to these people. And my military hospital worked to take care of these wounded all the time.
JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. On the 28th of May we see another intercept. It says: "By intercepting Siptar terrorist radio communications we found out that they 41971 were setting up obstacles wherever they could and blew up roads used by our forces. The rest of their communications consisted of an exchange of short encoded notifications and open information related to the movement of our forces. We found out that from the Brestovac village - Samodreza village - Studencane line they control the movement of our forces along the Prizren-Orahovac and Prizren-Suva Reka axes, and that they are gathering their forces in the above-mentioned belt. "We found out that in the Kosare sector the Siptar terrorist forces have a lot of men wounded and killed and that they have been instructed to keep a low profile in the forthcoming period and not to carry out any attacks until they notice the movement of our forces." Now, what we see from these intercepts caught by this electronic surveillance company, does that coincide with the information you collected on the ground? That's my -- one question. And second, the information and reports you got from this company on a daily basis, in succession, although this was a company of your superior command, was it one of the sources of intelligence that you needed in order to make decisions on the ground?
JUDGE BONOMY: Well, can I make it clear that that is the most blatant of leading questions, and really the answer to it is devalued as a result. Putting the answer to the witness and then asking the question is a pointless exercise in examination-in-chief.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, you continue to violate the rule against leading questions. You'll have to proceed to another question.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right. I did not think it was a 41972 leading question if I was quoting what was written in the report and if I asked the witness whether that corresponds with --
JUDGE ROBINSON: When you formulate your questions in this double-barrelled manner, ending up with, "Was it one of the sources of intelligence that you needed in order to make decisions on the ground?" you are in effect telling the witness the answer. We have been through this many times.
Proceed to ask another question.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. General, let's just have a look at the conclusion, at the end, from this document that has to do with electronic surveillance. Look at the conclusion. Look at what it says here.
A. At the very end of all these reports, the company for electronic surveillance deals with the entire year, and it practically defines what the operation zones were that the terrorists mentioned, and they say here that it is six operation zones, that their division is not definite, and then that on the basis of their information they also have sub-zones. That by intercepting their communications, they practically identified 13 brigades of the KLA, that they assume they have a battalion system and their units are subdivided into companies and platoons. That is the conclusion.
Q. All right.
JUDGE BONOMY: When you say, General, they're dealing with the whole year, what do you mean by the "year"?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The war period of 1999. I misspoke. 41973 I misspoke saying the entire year. It's from the beginning of 1999 until the end of the war.
JUDGE BONOMY: Or is it until the 13th of June, which is the date immediately before the conclusion?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, our units stayed on all the way up to the 26th of June. Although they were relocated from the territory of Kosovo and Metohija, it was only on the 26th of June that demobilisation was carried out of personnel from these units.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. General, could you please look at the general schematic. You mentioned what the conclusion was of this report and how the forces were organised of the KLA. Next page this same company gives a general scheme of the organisation, the Dragobilje staff, and then the operations zones.
A. Yes.
Q. That can be seen on the ELMO.
A. Yes, that can be seen on the ELMO. This is a general scheme that was compiled by the 52nd Company in its analysis on the basis of its six-month work in 1999, what the operations zones are and what brigades are linked to which one of these zones.
Q. All right. An integral part of these -- this document is a survey of found officers and forces in 1999. What does this document speak of? That document is contained in tab 619.
A. It speaks of the command structure of the KLA, which was confirmed through radio surveillance and radio goniometry.
Q. With all their information? 41974
A. Yes.
Q. Including when they were selected, who got killed where and when, et cetera?
A. Yes, all the information required.
JUDGE BONOMY: When was that compiled, General?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Like the report for 1998. As I said, it was compiled in January 1999. This report was compiled after the end of 1999, that is to say in January 2000.
JUDGE BONOMY: Who compiled it?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It was compiled by the commander of the 52nd Company for electronic surveillance, together with his officers.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. General, since --
JUDGE BONOMY: Tab 619 is part of the report which we were looking at in 618?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes, an integral part.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. General, when you say "annual report," you explained that annual reports are compiled in January for the preceding year. In the meantime, until the annual report is compiled, all this intelligence, as it is received, is it made available to you and to other command structures that may find them useful?
A. Yes. They would be pointless if they would not be sent on to the units that they pertain to momentarily in order to be of assistance, so they were sent on to the units immediately. 41975 BLANK PAGE 41976
Q. So at the end of the year there is only a compilation that is made which was in realtime sent to the units at the time when the information and intelligence was gathered. Is that what you're saying?
A. Yes. This is an analysis that is compiled at the end of the year that pertains to the overall activity for the previous year.
Q. All right. Let us deal briefly with this cooperation between NATO and the KLA. Was there intensive cooperation between NATO and the KLA?
A. Yes, there was intensive cooperation, especially intensive --
MR. NICE: [Previous translation continues] ... not in any expectation that there will be any response to an order of the Court that the accused should apply his mind to the rulings it's been making for a year or so, but that was a monstrous leading question and therefore it brings an answer of no value.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Nonetheless, I'm interested in the question of cooperation between NATO and the KLA, so I'd like the question to be answered.
General, answer the question. Never mind the leading question by Mr. Milosevic.
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] During the war, there was incessant and two-way cooperation between the KLA and NATO. The KLA gave NATO intelligence as to the location of our forces. NATO used this information in preparing to bomb certain positions. On the other hand, NATO supported combat actions of the terrorist forces.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. General, when you say supported -- 41977
JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, is it any part of your case that any of the acts attributed to Serb forces, and therefore to you, as crimes in the indictment were committed in response to a combined attack by NATO and the KLA or NATO acting in concert with the KLA or the KLA acting in concert with NATO?
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Robinson. I hope that throughout the testimony of General Delic you were able to see each and every concrete situation; when there was movement of forces, when there was activity by our forces, and that in every concrete situation there -- this is actually a response to behaviour by the enemy, something the enemy did.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, we need to be -- to be more specific. We have an indictment with charges, and I'm asking whether it is part of your case that any of the crimes that the indictment alleges were committed by you through your forces were committed in response to the KLA acting in concert with -- with NATO.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I would not put it that way, whether something was committed in response. What is certain is that a large number of KLA members were killed in clashes with our forces. There's no doubt about that.
Since you're talking about the indictment, if you look at that, it's some kind of civilians that are referred to. Although they are on various lists and they're all men, but they are all claimed to be civilians. This is what they launched here through Mr. Nice, together with Mr. Nice; that our forces first shelled settlements, surrounded them, 41978 arrested, killed, which is a pure lie. You saw over a year and a half what it looked like -- what the movement of a big unit looked like.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, I didn't invite to you make a speech. It really is a question that has fundamental legal implications for the case, because if that is so, the nature of the conflict is changed. You have a group of states whom you say are acting with terrorist forces, and in my view, if you are responding to that attack, that implicates Article 51 of the United Nations Charter, and that's why -- that's the importance of that question, but proceed.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, I think that you put it right. It is self-defence, and that is the only thing that is allowed according to international law, use of force in self-defence. Our country fought against aggression.
JUDGE ROBINSON: [Previous translation continues] ... the facts substantiate that.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] And how, Mr. Robinson. Nobody can deny these facts.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. General, let's look at some documents since I asked you about cooperation between NATO and the KLA. In tab 620, you have a list of discovered targets of the 4 -- of the 549th Brigade, your brigade. There is a map of these targets here too.
A. The map was something that my intelligence officer was in charge of. This is a survey of targets of my units, and the Siptar terrorists submitted this to NATO. That's about 35 to 40 targets. 41979
JUDGE BONOMY: How did you get hold of it?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This was also received through radio intercepts when the observers of terrorists reported to their commands, which again had satellite telephones for communicating with NATO where different parts of my units were.
I think this has been translated and that you can see this. That's the way in which these people operated, those who were observing, in view of their military knowledge, and they were informing on where which part of my unit was. And as soon as I learned about this, I moved my forces elsewhere so that they would not be threatened or jeopardised.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. Of course. From a military point of view, establishing a target and hitting a target, is this part of one and the same activity or are these independent activities?
A. This is absolutely one and the same activity. In order to get to a target, there has to be information.
Q. General, when you use the word "support" of the NATO forces to the Siptar terrorists, are you referring to political support or are you talking about fire support, the use of air force, cruising missiles and so on and so forth? What are you referring to when you say "support"?
A. Yesterday and today I have primarily been speaking about this support that we call military support. That is to say fire support directly through means of combat.
JUDGE BONOMY: General, you distinguish between opportunism, that is the KLA taking advantage of the fact that there was NATO bombing, and 41980 coordination, the actual meeting or arrangement between NATO and KLA to act together.
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This arrangement was not made when the bombing started or during the course of the war. This arrangement was made considerably earlier. It is clear this is a Court of the United Nations. The aggression was not carried out with the permission of the United Nations. The UN was side-stepped by NATO.
JUDGE ROBINSON: General, that's not the question which Judge Bonomy asked. What he was seeking was whether -- seeking to find out whether you have specific evidence, more concrete evidence of coordination between NATO and the KLA, as distinct from mere speculation.
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's absolutely what I've been speaking about for the past two days. So there was a synchronised attack of terrorists somewhere in the territory, on the state border, and it was supported by NATO Air Force. Not only by B52s but also with A10 aircraft and other types of aircraft. There cannot be more tangible and specific cooperation than that.
JUDGE BONOMY: So what you're saying is, and it may be a perfectly reasonable proposition, I'm not being critical of it, I'm just trying to find out the facts that you're aware of, but what you're saying is that you draw the conclusion from the fact that these things happened simultaneously that they must have been deliberately coordinated. Now, I was really hoping that you would be able to be a bit more -- or to draw our attention to something more concrete as indicating direct agreement between them to act together. 41981
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] And there are certainly things like that as well, but really, I don't know. You were thousands of kilometres away from the spot.
For 78 days the bombing of my country went on. For 78 days there were synchronised attacks of NATO in concert with KLA operations.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Bonomy, you saw on the video footage as well that Clark, the commander of NATO at the time, is called by the Albanians a KLA veteran. They themselves give him this kind of tribute.
JUDGE BONOMY: So I emphasise, General, I understand the point you make entirely, but just so that we are clear about what the evidence -- there is no direct evidence that you're presenting to us of communications between NATO and the KLA in relation to coordinating their activities.
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Absolutely. Absolutely. We'll probably come across this in the next tabs.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. All right. Now we'll come across the next tabs, but you have been testifying here for a few days now. General, we saw video footage of oath-taking, where reference is made to unification with Albania, and on the same day a meeting between the man who was reading out the oath with Holbrooke and his team as far as back as 1998. Did we not see that here on the videotape?
A. I think it was the first and second video that we saw.
Q. So there is an alliance. Although before that they said it was a terrorist organisation, there is an alliance precisely with those who are 41982 proclaiming the secession of Kosovo and unification with Albania, at state level. Unprecedented. Do you think that that is evidence or not? General --
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson, I did not have the possibility of communicating with the general, however, apart from this tab 620 where we have a review of the targets and the map, I have received in the meantime a list of targets and information sent in to the 3rd Army during the war. So I would like the general to take a look at this now, this document which is very similar --
JUDGE ROBINSON: This is not included in the tabs, what you're seeking now to present?
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] In tab 620, we do have one list of targets. However, in the meantime, as I say, I received a document of lists of targets and other information of electronic surveillance which was sent in to the 3rd Army of the Pristina Corps for the period ranging from the 6th of April to the 15th of June, as they came across them, and the general explained to us that this was done as quickly as possible. The units were sent in this information as speedily as possible to be able to move from the points and positions at which they were located as targets. And this was done in collaboration with NATO and the KLA throughout.
The general can take a look at the document. It can be placed on the overhead projector.
In the meantime, as I say, I received this document, and I consider that it would be very beneficial for us to see it and to hear the 41983 general's comments. I can hand it over to you straight away. That's tab 620 now. All right. Fine. We can discuss those targets as well. Could you hand this document over to the general.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. Look at the title page, General, please, and the list itself, the structure.
MR. NICE: Nothing has been said about where this document came from, apart from the fact that the accused says he got it. Unless the document in some way identifies its origin.
JUDGE ROBINSON: I'll ask the general. General, tell us about the origin, the source of this document.
JUDGE KWON: Why don't we deal with 620 first and then let's come to that document later.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, Judge Kwon is suggesting we deal with 620 first, since that's in the tab, and we'll follow that procedure.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Certainly. Yes, indeed. I think that the proposal is a very good one.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. General, take a look at tab 620 now, please. You have it before you, you have it on the map, and you have a list there as well. Just take the targets one by one and tell us what this is about, because I can see you have the region, then you have the coordinates, then you have the units and the activity.
JUDGE KWON: Mr. Milosevic, deal with the provenance of the document first of all. 41984
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. General, would you please be so kind as to tell us the provenance of this document. Where does this survey of discovered targets of the 549th Motorised Brigade come from?
A. As this is my brigade, this is a review of my intelligence officer, and this is a map compiled by my intelligence officer; and what it says here on this list and the coordinates given, he introduced those onto the map and placed numbers by these points. They were targets which were pinpointed, discovered, and sent out to NATO to be bombed.
Q. Are they exact targets as they were discovered and sent out to NATO to be bombed?
A. In the first column, you have the region, the locations, the spots, and they are more or less accurate. Yes, it is accurate. My units were in those locations at that period of time.
Now, in the other column, the coordinates are also accurate and correct. Now, the third column, the person who identified the units very frequently did not do this in detail, or he wasn't precise enough. But, yes, it is correct and accurate that when this was reported the army was there, the forces -- our forces were there. And I also said that upon learning this, our units, the units who were at these locations, at these coordinates, were moved. We moved them to other locations. And it was our assessment that what was needed was from the time this information was learnt to NATO bombing, that a space of about three to four days elapsed. So we had three to four days during which to act, because I assume that NATO with their surveillance planes would check out the information they 41985 were given by the KLA. So as soon as we heard this information, that they had learnt of our -- where our -- where we were, we were able to move our units from the general area, and so we did not suffer any losses thanks to this system that we put in place.
Q. All right. Fine. May we now take a look at the document that I received in the meantime, this additional document. Could you explain it to us, General. Have you ever seen this document before, anything like it?
A. Yes, I have seen this document before. It -- I am aware and acquainted with the document. It is in fact a report after the war of all the information and intelligence that came into us during the war at the time we learnt of them. The source here is the 280th Centre of Electronic Surveillance. It is the electronic surveillance centre attached to the air force and anti-air defence. And so the source of this information is communication between NATO planes with their command posts in the air. So it is surveillance plane communication and the AVAX [phoen], which were the command posts in the air or communication between the aircraft themselves, or communication between combat planes and planes for electronic jamming.
Q. Let's look at the ELMO, and could you comment, point this out to us.
A. This comprises several thousand pieces of information. So during one single day, if you look at any of these pages, you will see that Prizren is mentioned, for instance.
Q. So this gives us the dates, the coordinates, and all the targets. 41986 Tell us, please, General, in your assessment in the area of Kosovo and Metohija, how many projectiles were launched, were used? What would you say, during these 78 days of bombing?
A. Well, the territory of Kosovo and Metohija, of course, is a large territory, but on my unit alone -- well, we looked at a tab where it says that on an average on a single day, about 100 projectiles were launched, on average.
JUDGE BONOMY: Is there a difference between this as being a record of advance information and noting the locations where the attacks actually took place, or is it a combination of both or what?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. This is information -- it says here "Report." So according to the locations, not all of them, NATO was active. Now, these reports came in to us. You can see that each of the reports has the exact time noted - the hour, the minute, and perhaps even the second, I don't know - so when that piece of information was received. And that piece of information, through the operative on duty, was immediately sent out to the unit concerned, to the unit that was in jeopardy. There was a computer programme set up according to which when these data are introduced about the coordinates, the computer programme would straight away tell you where the point to be bombed was, where the target on the territory was, and the operations duty officer would immediately inform the unit concerned, the unit in -- that was threatened, the region where the NATO bombing was going to take place.
JUDGE BONOMY: What is the information in the right-hand column?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The information in the right-hand 41987 column are remarks. It says "Remarks." First of all you have the time, then the latitude, et cetera, and then the remarks, longitude and latitude, and then where the actual target is located within those coordinates.
JUDGE BONOMY: Remarks include references to -- well, they appear to include references to types of aircraft. If you could look at one of them. There's a word "Pozicija."
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] "Pozicija," "position," B-52.
JUDGE BONOMY: What does that mean?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That means where that particular plane is located at that point in time. When communication has been established with the air command centre, for example, if it is a fighter bomber or a bomber, when it has established contact with AVAX, it was at that position.
JUDGE BONOMY: So that's information about what actually happened rather than advance information.
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. This is information which came in before something happened, because if you give information that a B-52 bomber was at such-and-such location in my area, that, for me, is a signal that I must tell my units and sound the alarm and that they should --
JUDGE BONOMY: Help me a little more. Mr. Prendergast, can you move the ELMO out a little and you see there -- just a little further. These figures which precede the reference to "Pozicija B-52," what are these figures?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] They are figures denoting the 41988 position. It is the geographic longitude and latitude at the point at which the plane is at the time it is reporting.
JUDGE BONOMY: [Previous translation continues]... or is it in the air or what?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's all on the territory of our country.
JUDGE BONOMY: So it's in the air.
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Of course in the air. An aircraft in the air. Hostile enemy aircraft in the air.
JUDGE BONOMY: So it does reflect what actually happened, rather than advance information, which is what I asked you.
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's what is happening at that point in time in the air, and the consequence of that, what comes next, is the actual bombing.
JUDGE KWON: Without translation, it's very difficult to follow, so I would ask the general to take, for example, two or three lines and explain it to us in full after the break.
JUDGE ROBINSON: We will do that after the break. We will adjourn for 20 minutes.
--- Recess taken at 10.34 a.m.
--- On resuming at 10.57 a.m.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Milosevic.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. To use our time as rationally as possible and to put things very clearly, in keeping with the suggestions made by Mr. Kwon we looked at tab 41989 BLANK PAGE 41990 620 first.
A. Yes.
Q. Now, this electronic surveillance that we keep coming up against, in layman's terms does that mean interception, listening in, tapping in?
A. Yes, that's it.
Q. So in tab 620, do we have what the KLA is reporting to NATO about your targets on the ground? Is that it?
A. Yes, that's quite clear. It's what they are reporting about my unit.
Q. All right. Fine. Now, I already asked you this question, but this reporting and bombing, is it part of one and the same operation?
A. It is the beginning and the end of one and the same operation.
Q. All right. Fine. Great. Now, you've provided us with a map about that. Now, as I've given you this long document, the big document with the times, the longitude and latitude, et cetera, I'd like to draw your attention to this: In tab 621, to all intents and purposes you have extracts from the document we've already provided. We didn't have the entire document at the time that I've handed over now, but tab 621 contains extracts, excerpts from that document.
A. Yes, I found it on the big document as well.
Q. All right, fine. Now, since the long document hasn't been translated and as 621 has been translated, I'm going to draw your attention to the following: Look at tab 621 first, please. We have the title page first, and then it says NATO aggression against the FRY, and all the air forces are listed; how many British, American, French, Danish, 41991 Turkish, Dutch, Spanish, German, Italian, et cetera, aircraft. And then we have what I provided you with, that excerpt, on the following page of tab 621. That is what that shows.
Now, take a look at, for example, number 1661, 1661 where are they issuing warnings. What does it say in the remarks?
A. It says: "KLA zone warned that in a circle of three nautical miles they should not --"
JUDGE KWON: Could you put the English version on the ELMO. That's the second page, 1661. Yes, that's it. Could we see the number. Yes. 1661. Time 2252, yes.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. Yes. Then you have the longitude and latitude. I don't want to read that out. The degrees, then we have the minutes, the hours, et cetera. Then it says: "KLA zone warned not to be active in the area of three nautical miles. It is no-fly zone." So they should take care not to target their own forces.
A. Yes. And on that same page, higher up, this is mentioned twice.
Q. Yes, 1648 and 1649. "KLA active at 3 nautical miles from the centre of this point." And then at 1650, "KLA active at 3 nautical miles around this point."
So what do these remarks actually mean?
A. They are warnings to planes up in the air that at 3 nautical miles from that point all around, that they should not be active because that's where the KLA is located.
Q. All right, fine. Now take a look at the following page. I just 41992 have the last three or, rather, three numbers, three digits printed out. The first digit is missing, or the first two digits is missing, but it is nine lines from the top. 1930 -- from the bottom. 1933, where we have the longitude and latitude, and it says: "E-8 warned E-2C to call back the men from the target because the KLA members are there. This region is in the south-eastern quadrant of A-38."
So, General, tell us, please, what does this data tell us and this evidence? What does it tell us?
A. This latest is an aircraft for electronic surveillance and they are warning that they're at the command centre to call back the planes back in that region so that they should not act against the terrorists.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Therefore, Mr. Robinson, what you say or, rather, the question you asked as to whether the army had perpetrated any crimes in order to react and respond to this, that that's not how it was. The army did not commit any crimes. That's the first point.
The army, throughout the presentation of General Delic, performed activities and went into action to repel an unlawful attack simultaneously by NATO and the KLA. It was a simultaneous, unlawful attack on the part of NATO and the KLA together, and all the activities and movements of the army were to repel this simultaneous attack by NATO and KLA forces. I hope that's clear now.
JUDGE ROBINSON: [Previous translation continues] ... repelling that attack the crimes in the indictment were committed? Is that your case? Because that is the only way that it becomes relevant. 41993
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It is my opinion that it is not the case that crimes were committed. Those who were killed were killed in combat activities. Of course, war in itself is a crime, especially an aggression is, but defence and self-defence cannot be a crime. It is not us who attacked any NATO member country. NATO attacked us on our territory in coordinated action with the unlawful forces of the terrorists in that territory. I believe this is fundamental to the legal definition of what happened. A state has a legitimate right to defend itself from aggression and from terrorism. What we have here are terrorist forces and the NATO acting in league. That is completely clear.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, there's really no charge against NATO, and the NATO attack only becomes relevant if you can relate it in some way to the acts that are charged in the indictment, and the evidence will have to substantiate that.
JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Milosevic, you've produced a document in a table form, a tabular form, with these remarks on the right-hand side, and the general's giving evidence about his understanding of these remarks, and as far as I'm concerned this material could be of some importance in relation to the point you're making about coordination or joint activity between NATO and the KLA, but as I've indicated before when you referred to the annual report of the surveillance information obtained, I find the form in which it's presented very unsatisfactory. There must be something better to substantiate these remarks which the witness is endeavouring to interpret for us. There must be the notes that were originally made from which this record has been compiled. There must be a better basis. And 41994 you yourself surely -- you yourself must appreciate that this sort of compilation, which is obviously open to interpretation, which relies on a summary being put together, is an unsatisfactory way of dealing with something as important as this.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Bonomy, this is not a compilation. This is an agglomerated, comprehensive report, an agglomeration of all reports that were made throughout the year in realtime and the conclusions drawn from them in realtime. So the annual report only gathers all the information in one place, all the intercepts that were made throughout the year through electronic surveillance.
JUDGE BONOMY: But some of the remarks are comments that are said to have been overheard and recorded, and you've just led some evidence about these, but there are other remarks here which could be anything. You know, if says "target 10.4 kilometres south-east of Prizren," that could be anything. It doesn't give us any real indication of the source of that information, and it certainly would be helpful to me if at some stage you were able to demonstrate what was behind some of the important remarks that are made in this document.
MR. KAY: Can I just raise a matter in relation to Judge Robinson's question to the accused, because there is an issue here which hasn't been raised by the accused this morning but it's something that I raised yesterday and on several previous occasions. He's charged with the crimes of forcible transfer and deportation, and all those events, as you'll see from the indictment, are on the 25th of March onwards, largely from that date onwards. The combined activities of the KLA and NATO 41995 delivering, as the general said in his area, 100 bombs a day, that activity leads to the force -- leads to the transfer, the migration, if you like, leads to the forcible transfer issue in this case. Is it migration? Is it forcible transfer? And the people leaving, uprising almost, if you like, from the state of Kosovo, from the -- not the state of Kosovo, from the Kosovo region, the territory, the migration of those people in relation to the response of the KLA and NATO is very important in relation to Defence issues in this trial.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you, Mr. Kay. So that's another -- that's another area in which the NATO attack is related to the charges.
MR. KAY: Yes. And consistently the accused has put that element in his case. He hasn't mentioned it today, but it is something that's been a material feature.
JUDGE ROBINSON: And we've had some evidence of that from witnesses? Through the general, I think.
MR. KAY: Yes. And from other witnesses. It's been a consistent thread.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you. Mr. Milosevic.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we now go on?
JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, please.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. General, here in tab 624 you gave a list of commanders -- sorry, a list of VJ members who were killed in the area of responsibility of the 549th Motorised Brigade in 1998 and 1999. 41996
A. Yes.
Q. On page 1, ending with number 31, is a list of our soldiers, members of the army, who were killed before the start of NATO aggression. Starting with number 32 until 230 are members of the VJ who were killed during the NATO aggression.
A. Yes.
Q. A certain number of soldiers or, rather, the overwhelming majority of soldiers were killed in combat with terrorist forces, and a number of them were killed as a result of NATO airstrikes. So these two causes of death, basically combat with terrorists and NATO airstrikes, account for the death of all these soldiers.
In view of this very large number, 200 soldiers killed during the aggression by the NATO alliance, most of them killed by Siptar terrorist forces, what would you say this evidence shows?
A. This evidence or, rather, this fact that 230 soldiers were killed in the zone of responsibility that covers primarily the territory of Kosovo and Metohija and the border belt with Albania, speaks to the intensity of the fighting with terrorist forces in 1998 and especially in 1999.
Q. Could the conclusion be drawn from this in any way that those people killed were killed by the army in various places?
JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, it is leading.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. General, did any of these soldiers get killed by civilians? 41997
A. Of course they couldn't have been killed by civilians. All of them were killed by terrorists or by bombs or NATO action.
Q. Thank you, General. At the same time in 625, you provide a list of MUP members of the Republic of Serbia who were killed in the zone of responsibility of the 549th Motorised Brigade.
A. Yes. These are policemen who were killed also in the same area.
Q. And a number -- up to number 29 are those killed before the NATO aggression, and after number 29 are those killed during the NATO aggression?
A. Yes, from 29 to 72.
Q. Did any of these policemen get killed by civilians or in combat with KLA?
A. They were killed either by mines laid by the KLA along roads and by NATO airstrikes, by the bombing. And in both categories you should add about three times more people who were wounded in the same way.
Q. All right, General. I think this suffices. I would now like to move on to 626, which you already referred to on an earlier occasion. What does this document contain? It is entitled "A survey of criminal proceedings initiated against perpetrators of criminal offences in the zone of the 549th Motorised Brigade in May 1998 to July 1999." Could you give us your briefest comment.
A. There is a total of 132 items. Most of these people are members of my units, but a certain number are terrorists, members of the KLA who were caught on the border, disarmed, and in 1998 were sent to the military court and in 1999 were sent to the war court. Under one of these columns 41998 you can see which -- with which crimes they were charged, and another column shows the verdicts, at least those that were known at the time of -- when this document was developed.
Q. Since Mr. Nice pointed out --
JUDGE ROBINSON: Is that in English? Where are the verdicts that are mentioned?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In fact, it says "Decision of the Court." The one but last column. One but last.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Decisions of the court are indicated in those cases where they were made by the time the document was created. In other cases the indication says that the case is ongoing or that the case was referred to the competent court for the relevant territory. For instance, under item 39 we have a soldier charged with murder, sentenced to five years in prison. Then in number -- under number 103 we have another case.
Mr. Nice says that officers were not prosecuted, but here under number 103 we have a major charged with war crime against civilian population, place of perpetration Prizren, sentenced to seven years in prison, and after appeal by the prosecutor, 14 years. Then three lines down there is a captain charged with war crime against civilian population, five years in prison, and that was changed to nine years after appeal by prosecutor.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. Now, General --
JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, before you continue, let me just 41999 find the section of the indictment that deals with Article 7(3). Perhaps Mr. Kay or Mr. Nice -- on page 6, yes.
Mr. Nice or Mr. Kay, are the acts or omissions of the subordinates referred to confined to the crimes that are charged in the indictment or are they referable to other crimes that were committed by those subordinates?
MR. KAY: Well, the way the indictment is framed, the indictment alleges specific counts against the accused, and this trial is based on those counts within the indictment. So the issues relating to those counts are those that are applied to the Article 7(3) issues, and that's what the Tribunal is specifically looking at in this case.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Because the evidence which the accused has been bringing in relation to this matter do not specifically relate to the counts, it appears to me.
MR. KAY: No. He's not been incident specific to the counts in the indictment, so what's being brought to the Court's attention are other incidents where there has been due process within the proceedings. One's got to remember this is 1999. The question was asked earlier as to, well, what happened further on? Well, of course, he was brought to this Tribunal in 2001, and the cases having been referred to a military court and on to a civilian court inevitably have a temporal factor involved, and one's got to consider that issue in relation to drawing any conclusions against this accused upon such -- such matters if cases are going through the appropriate procedures within the FRY jurisdiction. 42000
JUDGE ROBINSON: So the significance of this evidence is that it shows a culture of due process.
MR. KAY: There was, contrary to the Prosecution allegations that this was a police state, that the defendant connived and created the conditions that were in existence at the time, that he actually had in place, constitutionally as well as factually, processes within the FRY system, and warnings having been given to citizens, those involved in public duty such as the army, the police, which he's --
JUDGE ROBINSON: They would not by themselves serve -- this evidence would not by itself serve to contradict the allegation of a breach of Article 7(3) in relation to the crimes charged, and in a sense it would be contradictory if Mr. Milosevic were to try to do that, because his case, as I understand it, is that he's not responsible for those crimes.
MR. KAY: Yes. He's not responsible for those crimes and he's able to show that there were procedures in existence for dealing with those crimes. The issue of knew or ought to have known whether the acts of subordinates were such that they were committing crimes requires a balance and judgement as to what is exactly expected of a head of state. It's not an issue of negligence here and it's not an issue of absolute strict liability. If a crime is proven to have been committed, it can't be said that he has a 7(3) responsibility. What's got to be considered is what were the mechanisms in place and were these mechanisms applied to instances such as this. It would be far too high a standard to say that any crime that was committed, because of 7(3) responsibility, was 42001 something for which he was criminally liable. This is a matter that ultimately has to be judged to see what steps were taken and if they were reasonable and if he was in a position to have dealt with certain of the crimes that are alleged to have been committed.
JUDGE ROBINSON: All right. Thank you, Mr. Kay.
JUDGE BONOMY: General, can you find in that list that we're now looking at the case we looked at earlier, which was, I think, Topalovic?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
JUDGE BONOMY: Which one is it?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] 60.
JUDGE BONOMY: We don't have a translation of this document. What has happened?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The details of this soldier, it has to do with Article 146 of the Criminal Code of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, that is unlawful killing and wounding of the enemy. The place where the crime was perpetrated is Prizren and its surroundings, and the case was referred to the municipal prosecutor's office in Prizren.
JUDGE BONOMY: And then would you say that on the information we had earlier there was a basis for describing the victim as the enemy?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The victim was a civilian. All of this was compiled by the official organs. So I'm reading what was written.
JUDGE BONOMY: Why would he be described as the enemy in what you've just read to us?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm saying that that's the way it 42002 has been written in this report --
JUDGE BONOMY: I'm asking you --
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- of the professional organs. Probably because this was considered to be a crime, a war crime where higher sentences are envisaged for the perpetrator.
JUDGE BONOMY: I'm sorry, I don't understand on what basis this person could be described as the enemy.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Bonomy, he's not described as the enemy. What is mentioned here is Article 146 of the Criminal Code of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, that is to say unlawful killing and wounding of the enemy. That was the basis that was used to indict him for murder.
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Because that is an article that is valid in wartime, as far as I know.
JUDGE BONOMY: What happens if you kill a friend?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is a more serious qualification. The killing of a friend would be qualified as a killing, a murder, whereas Article 146 is a very grave crime.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Continue, Mr. Milosevic.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. General, with all due apologies, due to the fact that my documents are incomplete, probably through some technical error, I have nothing in tab 623. When speaking of the NATO operations, could you please just say something about this map. Through the kindness of the liaison officer I have the map now. This is a map of locations bombed using depleted 42003 BLANK PAGE 42004 uranium in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Could you please explain this map in the briefest possible terms.
A. In the briefest possible terms, the first map is a NATO map.
Q. The one that's in English?
A. Yes. It's a NATO map. They submitted it, and it shows the regions where they used depleted uranium in their attacks.
Q. Is that map on the overhead projector now?
A. It's not on the overhead projector. It's up here.
Q. Can you explain this map in the briefest possible terms.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] If we could please ask the technical people to show the map that's on the easel.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. So this is a NATO map. It says "NATO K4, unclass."
A. This map shows the territory that was targeted using cluster bombs, and especially those where depleted uranium was used. When looking at this map, we can see that part of Metohija just by the Albanian border was targeted very frequently, that is to say using large quantities of such ammunition. In other parts of Kosovo there is very little or, rather, considerably less. And then there is the area of Bujanovac and Presevo. In that area, Bujanovac-Presevo-Vranje, there were also attacks with depleted uranium. It was used 8/10s and seven barrel guns gatling were used for this depleted uranium.
Q. General, did you look at this using proper expertise, what this use of depleted uranium meant and the time required for the danger of radiation from this depleted uranium to be over? 42005
JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Kay, first if he can explain the relevance of this.
MR. KAY: Again it goes to the fear factor, the general climate of what was covering this region at the time.
JUDGE ROBINSON: And so might be related to the question --
MR. KAY: The forcible transfer, the migration of people. The conditions and climate created by NATO and the KLA, the manner of the bombardment, the weapons used, the missiles used, the fear that was engendered into the population caused them to migrate.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. Thank you. Proceed, Mr. Milosevic.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. Have you heard my question, General?
A. Yes.
Q. Tell me in the briefest possible terms what you know about that.
A. Anybody with at least a bit of knowledge in physics knows that depleted uranium, that is uranium 238, is highly radioactive, and 3.7 billion years is the time it takes to decompose. So practically it is limitless. It is very dangerous. If I can say a lethal dose or, rather, a person who takes a particle of --
MR. NICE: Frankly, I'm taken by surprise by so much of this material that another dose of expertise of this kind is perhaps neither here nor there but it is expert matter and I can't be expected to --
JUDGE ROBINSON: General, I think you have shown me up, because I didn't know that. What kind of background would you have that would enable you to give this kind of evidence? 42006
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Any officer knows this, I believe of any army in the world. As far as my army is concerned, with the training we've had, any officer who completed the military academy has to know about that, those who did not undergo additional training. It is simply ridiculous to say there is a lack of knowledge or, rather, that we would have a lack of knowledge of atomic weapons and their radioactivity. That is something that we learn at the military academy, as far as back as that. After all, this is something that is studied in physics.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. General, tell us in the briefest possible terms what it is that you know. We have established that you have the right kind of education for answering this because you have completed the proper schools. You studied this, and you took tests in this field.
A. Yes.
Q. So tell us briefly what you know about this.
A. This territory of Kosovo and Metohija, which was targeted with depleted uranium, is practically polluted forever because 3.7 billion years is such a long period. Scientists probably cannot prove even that the earth has been that -- in existence for that long and will it continue to exist for another 4.7 billion years. So forever this territory will continue to be dangerous.
JUDGE ROBINSON: [Previous translation continues] ...
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Absolutely.
JUDGE ROBINSON: It's not on the transcript. I was asking whether 42007 there were refugees in that area. What's the answer?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I have already said that that population had left the area. It had fled. As for my army that was in that territory and, generally speaking, the army of Yugoslavia, there is already a number of professionals and soldiers who have died of leukaemia and cancer. Some died soon after the war, others are still being treated. Also among the reserve soldiers, there is a large number of those who are sick.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. What quantity of uranium was dispersed through this area, General?
A. Since this is where the thrust of the attack came, a total of 30 and 40 -- between 30 and 40 tons of uranium was thrown there. That is our estimate. My zone and the zone of the 125th Brigade was targeted most of all.
Q. How much depleted uranium does one particular charge contain, do you know that?
JUDGE ROBINSON: [Previous translation continues] ... evidence now on this matter insofar as it is relevant. I rule we have had enough evidence. Move on to another question.
JUDGE KWON: The minefields in this map, are those mines the ones planted by the Serb army?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The Serb army set up minefields only by the border. If there are some minefields depicted, they're along the border with Albania or facing the Republic of Macedonia. Those could be our minefields except that we gave KFOR total records for each and every 42008 one of these minefields. If we are looking at the territory in-depth, then these are mines and minefields that were placed by the KLA.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. Does this include areas where cluster bombs were thrown that can also be considered to be mines?
A. Yes. NATO probably depicted that too. They actually showed areas where they used cluster bombs. That is practically throughout the territory of the state but particularly in the territory of Kosovo and Metohija.
Q. So these are dispersed mines throughout the territory.
A. Yes.
Q. Thank you, General. Could you please explain very briefly the organisational structure of the army in war and peace, then the schematic pertaining to the army command and of the 3rd Army. We have all of that in tab 628 -- or, rather, 626. And the diagram of the Pristina Corps. In the briefest possible terms. And finally you have the diagram of your brigade.
So you're a general, and you have the diagram of the structure from the top to the bottom.
A. If we start with the schematic of the General Staff of the army of Yugoslavia in peacetime, it is headed by the Chief of General Staff, who has his own office.
Q. Can we speed things up, because -- by putting it on the overhead projector, please.
MR. NICE: We can have these on the overhead projector because 42009 they're not translated, unless the Court has got translations.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, you're quite right. We must have it on the ELMO.
JUDGE KWON: Tab number should be 628, I assume.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. General, one by one could you explain these schematics briefly so we know what it's about. You have the army of Yugoslavia as a whole in wartime and in peacetime, then the command diagram in war and peacetime.
A. Yes. The Chief of General Staff, with his office and his deputy. Then the department for communications with foreign military representatives is there, and also the security department. Then also the sectors.
THE INTERPRETER: Could the speaker please be asked to slow down.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Again, Mr. Milosevic and the general, if you look at the transcript, you'll see that the interpreters are asking you to slow down. Please observe a pause between question and answer.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. General, I'm going to ask you not to read out abbreviations but to say the entire wording. Don't say "Cov," for example, say "land forces."
A. Let's move on from the beginning. The sector for operational and staff activities. Then the sector for the army, the land forces. The sector for the air force and anti-aircraft defence. The sector for the navy. The sector for communications, electronic surveillance and reconnaissance. The sector for mobilisation and manning. The sector for training. The sector for logistics and the inspection of the army of 42010 Yugoslavia.
And then we have the independent departments linked directly to the Chief of the General Staff, the department for information and moral guidance, information department, security department, and administration for housing, or department for housing.
The sectors that I have mentioned have within their composition certain departments or administrations, depending on what the sector is. I don't think we need go into those details.
Q. No, we don't.
A. So that is the General Staff in peace. Now we come to the General Staff in wartime, the next one.
So the Chief of the General Staff, the Deputy Chief of the General Staff. That part is the same as in peacetime. And then where we had the sector for operations and staff affairs, it has two administrations now and two departments. It is subdivided into those four. Instead of the sector for the land forces, we have the administration for the land forces. Instead of the sector for RV and PVO, or rather air defence, et cetera, we have the administration for air defence, the air force and air defence. Instead of the sector for the navy, we now have the administration for the navy. Then we also have the administration for electronic surveillance and anti-electronic defence systems; the administration for mobilisation, replenishment of cadres and systemic questions; the administration for information and moral guidance. We have the logistics sector that remains a sector. Then we have the administration for security and the inspection of the army of Yugoslavia. 42011 And directly linked to the administration of replenishment of cadres, mobilisation and systemic questions is the supreme military court and supreme military prosecutor, whereas for the sector for operations and staff affairs we have the centre for intelligence and surveillance linked to that one. And the administration security is linked or, rather, the counter-intelligence centre of the General Staff of the army of Yugoslavia is linked to the security administration. The other smaller departments I don't think we need go into at this point.
Q. Thank you. Now, on the next page is the schematic for commanding the Yugoslav army in peacetime and in war once again.
A. These direct lines, or chains of command down the line, denote the chain of command and management and command. The interrupted line, dotted line, denotes coordination and cooperation.
Q. But could you put your pointer to the dotted line so we can see what that means, because on the overhead projector you can't really see this properly or clearly.
A. This full line is the line of command and control. The interrupted line, the dotted line, shows the line of coordination and cooperation.
Q. So we have the Supreme Defence Council at the top there, and if you go down the line, the uninterrupted arrow, the full line.
A. Yes, here, the Supreme Defence Council, then we have the president of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, then the General Staff of the army of Yugoslavia, and then this goes further, further down towards the units and the individual commands. That's the chain of command from top to 42012 bottom.
Then we have the dotted line towards the federal government, the line of coordination and cooperation, and from the General Staff the dotted line going towards the Federal Ministry of Defence. Coordination and cooperation once again, that's the line.
Q. Now we have the schematic for wartime commanding.
A. Let's take it from the top. Here we can see that chain of command: The Supreme Defence Council is at the top, the president of the FRY, with his military cabinet or officers to which we have the Guards Brigade linked, and then the Chief of the General Staff with their cabinets and deputies. Then we come to the sectors of administration, which we saw previously and explained, and directly for the Chief of the General Staff we have the 1st, 2nd and 3rd Armies linked to him, the air defence systems and air force, the navy and the three smaller units; the 46th Motorised Brigade, the 72nd Special Brigade, and the Anti-terrorist Brigade, detachment. Kobra is its name.
Q. Now, General, since this is very important for the chain of command, could you show us the levels of command of the army of Yugoslavia, that schematic, which is the next schematic that we come to, the next diagram. We have groups here, groupings, and when you go down to the concrete specific units, we have six levels of command down that chain, lower down.
A. Yes. We have the Supreme Defence Council at the top once again. That is the supreme organ, the supreme body and supreme level of command, the top-most level. Then we have the president who is the -- presides 42013 over the supreme council of command.
Q. All right. And then those squares or -- we have the President of the FRY there, and to him we have the General Staff linked, and then after the General Staff, what are the levels? Could you show this, could you indicate this to us on the overhead projector. We can't see it.
A. Linked to the General Staff, we have the armies, the army level: Three armies, the air force and anti-air defence, and the navy.
Q. Right. So underneath the armies, we have the corps.
A. Yes, the corps.
Q. And then we come to the brigades and regiments.
A. We had the division, one division there. The division level is the first level, then the second level is the brigades level, then the third level is the battalion level, then the fourth level is the company level or battery level. Level five is the platoon level, and level six is [indiscernible] level.
Q. Right, General. That's that one. Now, let's take a specific example. The 3rd Army, for example, which the Pristina Corps came under, and your brigade specifically. Let's take a look at what that was like. I'd like to look at the schematic for the 3rd Army structure in wartime to save time. Not to go through the peacetime one but through the war diagram.
A. So this is the organisational structure the 3rd Army in wartime. The commander of the 3rd Army is at the top there, and then that is his command, and it is composed of a staff and headquarters. Do you want me to go down the line there, what the staff comprises 42014 of and the headquarters?
Q. No, you needn't go into those details.
A. Then we come to the box next door. It is the department for information and psychological and propaganda effects, the security department, the legal department, the personnel department, and the logistics department, and then linked to the commander directly we have two corps linked to him the Nis Corps and the Pristina Corps. Then once again the individual units at lower level linked to the army command. The Nis Corps has its brigades and regiments. Do you want me to go through that?
Q. No need. Let's look at the Pristina Corps.
A. The Pristina Corps has its own units there and they are the independent units within the composition of the 3rd Army, which means that we're now going down the Pristina -- the Pristina Corps. The commander.
Q. We have the direct link of the brigades linked to the commander. Let's go further down. The 78th Brigade, for example, and lower down we have its battalions, so I won't mention them, just the brigades. The 78th Brigade, the 125th Brigade, the 549th Brigade, the 354th, the 52nd Mixed Artillery Brigade, the 159th Artillery Brigade, PVO, the 15th Armoured Brigade, the 243rd Mechanised Brigade, and the 352nd Engineers Regiment. And the corps had independent battalions as well: The 52nd Battalion for special purposes, the 52nd Battalion for communications, the 54 for the medical corps, the 54 Battalion of the BHO, the 52nd Additional Battalion, and the 49th Pontoon Company, and some other units.
Q. All right. Fine. Now, we've seen where the brigades come in. 42015 Now look at the 549th Motorised Brigade of yours in wartime; the commander and then down the line, down the chain.
A. It is my 549th Motorised Brigade. I am the commander in that one. I have my staff, I have assistant commander for moral guidance, I have the organ for security and the organ for logistics. They are directly linked to me. Then we have directly linked to me three motorised battalions; the armoured battalion, the howitzer artillery battalion 122 millimetres, mixed anti-armoured artillery battalion, a light artillery battalion PVO, and Engineers Battalion or company. And then we have the subordinated units: The 40 Bofors millimetre unit, the Prizren unit with the 108th and 68th Detachment, the 354th Detachment, the 55th Border Battalion, the 3rd company from the 53rd Border Battalion, two batteries 128 millimetres, they are called Oganj, and one battery 155 millimetres from the corps artillery brigade.
Q. General, thank you for those explanations. Now would you go back for a moment to the schematic of the level of command of the army of Yugoslavia that we had previously, the command level where we can see the chain of command from the Supreme Defence Council, the president of the FRY, and the General Staff, the level of the armies, the corps level, the division level, brigades, battalions, companies, batteries, squads, et cetera.
Now, my question to you is this: At any point in time -- and this is also the chain of command, is it not?
A. Yes, that's right.
Q. At any point in time was the chain of command disrupted in that 42016 one and a half years about which you are testifying?
A. The chain of command was never interrupted or disrupted in any way. It always had three levels; strategic, strategic operative, and tactical, those three levels. The strategic level is that one, the strategic operations level at the level of the army and the corps, whereas the other six levels down the line are tactical levels; divisions, brigades, battalions, companies, regiments and squads, and the chain of command always went down that chain. That was the chain, those were the links towards the subordinate units or, rather, reporting from the ground roots level, subordinate level, up to the command level, and vice versa.
Q. At the second tactical level of command is where you were; is that right?
A. Yes. It was the tactical level is the second tactical level, just after the division level.
Q. Right. Fine. Now, since you have just the corps above you in your specific situation, you were, practically speaking, at the first level of tactical command; is that right?
A. Yes. Between us and the corps, that was the direct link, the direct chain line.
Q. Right. Fine. Now, you had from top to bottom and from bottom to top reporting and communication throughout that chain of command. During those -- that communication, did you have any orders, or coming down from your subordinates levels did you have any reports coming from top to bottom or from bottom to top about -- reports about any specific order or any kind of decision which can be tied up with any kind of war crime? 42017 BLANK PAGE 42018
A. No, absolutely not.
Q. Very well, General. Now let's move on. Just a few more questions. You have explained to us all the movements of units, what you did throughout the material time. Now, what was the relationship between the members of the army of Yugoslavia towards civilians and Albanian civilians? What was their attitude?
A. Speaking in general terms, globally, that attitude and relationship can be termed to be proper, correct, and professional, with exceptional -- with exceptions as individual cases.
Q. All right. The individual cases that we mentioned, for the ones you learned about, was -- were they sanctioned in keeping with the law?
A. Yes. Regardless of how we reached information, through which chain of command, security chain, or other state organs, each individual case was dealt with. Precisely because of the morale of the unit and combat readiness of the unit, it was sanctioned forthwith.
Q. Right. You said that the attitude of the members of the army towards Albanian civilians was professional, did you not? Proper and correct; is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, can we take a look at the DVD that we have and can we see some of that on the footage?
A. As there are quite a number of DVDs, a lot of footage, we've already seen some of those excerpts. We saw the army. We saw soldiers and -- and their relationship with other state organs and civilians, how they dealt with the problem of bombing, of the bombardment. We saw that, 42019 and we have more footage of that kind. We also have footage from the surrounding area of Djakovica, as far as I know.
Q. Yes, Djakovica and a DVD interviewing some Albanians, and that's the next one.
A. Yes, from Prizren and Prizren Has.
Q. We saw this one, the 14th of May. May we see the next clip. We saw this one yesterday. Let's go on to the next one.
[Videotape played]
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is another village, called Zjum, near Prizren.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. This is from May 1999?
A. Yes. This is this place called Prizren Has, and Zjum village is here.
Q. Let us see this one too.
[Videotape played]
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. You mentioned at one point, General, a village called Osik near Djakovica. That is the subject of the next video clip, tab 629. 479 is the one we've just seen. Let us see the last one, and then we'll move on to the last few questions.
MR. NICE: Your Honour, I suppose --
JUDGE ROBINSON: Just a minute. Mr. Nice is on his feet.
MR. NICE: I suppose a point arises about the admissibility of this kind of material. We have plenty of films of records of the conflict 42020 in Yugoslavia and they're typically not admitted. We have, the Prosecution, The Death of Yugoslavia as an example. Sometimes passages have been where there is a particular reason to admit them. Thus far, over our objections, documents have been admitted which have in some way been connected to the witness producing them, as in the case of Lituchy. He says he conducted the interviews himself, or in Andric he was present when they were conducted, things like that. I'm not sure that this witness has actually provided any particularly good reason why the Chamber should depart from its exception and admit this kind of material, but it's matter for the Chamber.
JUDGE ROBINSON: I'll ask the witness. General, tell us about the source of this film that we've just seen.
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This was filmed by the state television, Radio-Television of Serbia, the Prizren studio. The editor of that studio is Boris Ugrinovic, and the cameraman, as I said yesterday -- I said yesterday who the cameraman was. His name was Sanjevic.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. We have another clip that is directly relevant to the army. It says "Albanians, Turks and the Roma in the army --"
JUDGE ROBINSON: You will wait until the Chamber has considered this matter.
[Trial Chamber confers]
JUDGE ROBINSON: We'll admit the video -- or the film, rather. Proceed, Mr. Milosevic. 42021
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] This clip is entitled "Albanians, Turks, and the Roma in the Yugoslav army in April 1999." Can we see it, please.
[Videotape played]
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. Do we have another clip, General?
JUDGE ROBINSON: Well, if you have another one, I think that will have to -- that will have to be shown after the break.
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm not sure.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, are you now at the end of your examination-in-chief?
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, yes. I just have a few more questions related to certain counts in the indictment. Just a few.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Now, remember, no leading questions. And I do not want your usual tactic of asking questions in relation to the indictment that are properly the province of the Chamber.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I cannot underestimate the witness by asking him leading questions. If something sounds leading to you, that is certainly not my intention.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Many of the questions that you ask are, in my view, provocatively leading.
We will adjourn for 20 minutes.
--- Recess taken at 12.20 p.m.
--- On resuming at 12.45 p.m.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Milosevic. 42022
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. General, we left off at this last video clip where we saw Albanians, Turks, and the Roma in the ranks of the army of Yugoslavia. Could you tell me very briefly, in the units over which you had command, were there any Albanians, Turks, and the Roma?
A. Yes, certainly. Members of all ethnic communities were represented in the units. As far as Albanians are concerned, in combat units we had primarily Albanians who were natives of the entire Serbia, especially the southern part of Serbia around Bujenovac and Presevo. The greatest part of Albanians from Kosovo were not in the regular army. The men we saw were in the so-called military territorial unit because all the other Albanians, citizens of Serbia, were military conscripts and were on military records. Thus I had, for instance, a unit composed entirely of Turks. And there was a platoon commanded by a major, a Turk. I had a unit of 1.200 people manned by the Gorani, Muslims. They had their own commanders of the same ethnicity. Then I had another unit with only one Serb in it, and all the others, there were reservists, were Muslims from the area of Sredecka Zupa [phoen]. So you could say in my unit I had a lot of Hungarians, Slovaks. I think 70 per cent of men were Serbs and others were members of other ethnic communities.
Q. Well, that generally reflects the proportions of various ethnic groups in Serbia, doesn't it?
Thank you, General. We've gone through 1998 and 1999 by various incidents that happened in those years, and now I would like to tell you what is written in paragraph 53 of the indictment, which relates to 42023 Kosovo. Of course there are other people mentioned, but it says: "... beginning on or about the 1st of January, 1999, and continuing until 20th of June, 1999, he ... planned, instigated, ordered, committed or otherwise aided and abetted in a deliberate and widespread or systematic campaign of terror and violence directed at Kosovo Albanian civilians living in Kosovo in the FRY.
"Carried out by forces of the FRY and Serbia targeting Kosovo Albanians with the objective of expelling a substantial portion of the Kosovo Albanian population from Kosovo in an effort to ensure continued Serbian control over the province."
This was a quotation from the indictment. We looked at various levels of command and we located your particular level of command. That is the first out of six levels. So in view of your constant presence in Kosovo and your position that you occupied there, could this allegation be corroborated by any fact that is known to you?
JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, that is exactly what I said you are not to do. You have read to him substantially two paragraphs of the indictment and you're asking him whether that's correct. Ultimately, we'll decide that on the basis of the evidence.
You have led evidence from him which relates to these matters, and we'll make a determination on the basis of the evidence. You don't take the matter any further by asking the witness to offer a conclusion on these paragraphs of the indictment.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I don't understand, Mr. Robinson. 42024 In this paragraph it says that the forces of the FRY, and those are the forces that General Delic commanded within his area of responsibility, that they undertook a widespread campaign or systematic campaign of terror and violence. I'm putting a perfectly neutral question: Is that correct?
JUDGE ROBINSON: What is the question you're putting to him?
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I quoted all this about the widespread campaign of terror and violence and the objective why this was carried out.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. Do you know any of this?
A. I was present in that territory all the time. My area of responsibility was very wide. It covered a very wide territory. Such cases or such conduct by the security forces - I'm referring to the forces of the Ministry of the Interior and of the army - there is nothing that can be brought into this context.
Q. Thank you, General. In paragraph 55, it says that: "The forces of the FRY and Serbia, in a deliberate and widespread or systematic manner, forcibly expelled and internally displaced hundreds of thousands of Kosovo Albanians from their homes across the entire province of Kosovo." And they "... intentionally created an atmosphere of fear and oppression through the use of force, threats of force, and acts of violence."
General, did the army expel Albanians, as is said here?
A. These days we showed quite a few documents and now, to put in the briefest possible terms, the army protected the entire population of 42025 Kosovo and Metohija regardless of whether they were Serbs or Albanians. As for the departure of the population to Albania, there are other sources which were not all mentioned here either. I can also say that the departure of the population to Albania is part of a broader campaign against our country.
Q. General, have you ever heard of any plan of violence or of expulsion?
A. Never. I had different plans in my hands, but they were all plans of defending our own country, or parts of the territory of our country or of Kosovo and Metohija where I was commander. Absolutely never, except for when I listened to the charges here and the indictment here during the testimony of various witnesses, did I hear of such a plan. So such a plan never existed in the army and in the security forces.
Q. General, in paragraph 56, it says: "Throughout Kosovo, forces of the FRY and Serbia engaged in a deliberate and widespread or systematic campaign of destruction of property owned by Kosovo Albanian civilians. This was accomplished by the widespread shelling of towns and villages; the burning and destruction of property, including homes, farms, businesses, cultural monuments and religious sites; and the destruction of personal property."
Please, did the army do that, or the security forces?
A. It is a fact that at that time in the territory of Kosovo and Metohija and after that there were many damaged buildings that belonged to all ethnic communities. Throughout Kosovo and Metohija there was fighting against terrorists, and in this fighting there were some facilities that 42026 were destroyed. Some facilities were damaged or destroyed apart from combat, but they were investigated, especially by the Ministry of the Interior. The army absolutely did not take part in any kind of intentional destruction of facilities, deliberate destruction, or creating unbearable living conditions for the population.
Q. It is also claimed in the same paragraph that the forces of the army of Yugoslavia escorted expelled Kosovo Albanians to the borders, thus trying to keep them under control, and their movement under control too, that they came on foot and on -- in columns of thousands of people, tractors, buses, trailers and trucks, as well as on trains, buses or trucks which were organised and provided by forces of the FRY and Serbia for the purpose of their expulsion.
What is true in relation to this, General?
A. I've said several times that in my area the population left for the territory of the Republic of Albania through two border posts but primarily through Vrbnica. I cannot understand at all that the fact that I helped the Albanian population so that they would not sustain any losses in the minefields were considered to be escorting them, taking them out. With their own bodies my soldiers defended them. They protected them from getting into minefields because they would sustain losses that way. Or if I helped the elderly, women, and children who were standing by the road weak, exhausted, that that is considered to be use of vehicles for conducting ethnic cleansing.
I did what I believe any normal person would do: I did not allow women and children to suffer, to stand by the road. Where I could, I gave 42027 medical assistance, I ordered that kind of assistance, or I made it possible for women, children, and old people to be transported to where they wanted to go.
Q. All right, General. Paragraph 60 speaks of efforts of the forces of the FRY and Serbia to prevent the Albanians going back home by looting and robbing Kosovo Albanians of money and valuables, stealing personal vehicles and other property from Kosovo Albanians being deported from the province.
Do you know about any of this since it was stated here that it was done by the forces of the FRY and Serbia?
A. Deported? That is a term which is certainly inappropriate. Today as well we went through documents related to individual cases of theft of vehicles or individual cases of appropriation of personal property. When something like that happened in my zone, I reacted the same moment, as soon as I heard of any such case. Since most of the inhabitants left through my zone, no one can show me a single inhabitant who got killed when entering my zone, any person who was leaving our state territory. I explained only one case of lack of discipline, leaving the column and coming across a mine. The entire population that entered my zone survived and left my zone healthy and alive. As for individual cases, I did not count them. I did not give any numbers, but there were reactions in response to each and every case. I said that documentation was mentioned. I myself was surprised when I saw this.
According to my knowledge, that was only in that particular spot. 42028 At the other border post that is in my zone, that did not happen. I already said that border posts were not under my control. When I noticed that, I was with this TV crew from abroad because they wanted to go to the border. However, after having heard that and after having informed the head of the Secretariat of the Ministry of the Interior, this activity never occurred again. I think that this did not occur elsewhere either, especially refugees going to Montenegro or going to Macedonia, although I was not there myself. It all happened at this one particular place, and that was arbitrariness of individuals, of a group of people.
JUDGE ROBINSON: You just said that the borders were not under your control. Might it be, then, that the incidents did take place and you're not aware of them?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's not only the border posts that are under my control. You know what the border actually is. That's only 50 metres along the state border. That is where the customs facilities are and the border police. So it's only that section that was not under my control. All the rest was under my control. One is Vrbnica, one is Cafa Pruse. Those were the two that were under my control.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. General, you said that with regard to this observation of yours you informed the chief of SUP. You talked about that yesterday. You said that he was surprised and that he stopped that.
A. Yes. What I saw was very ugly. I was surprised myself, because quite simply I know that no such order existed and that what was done with 42029 these registration plates -- that's what I saw, I did not see the documents, that that is something very ugly, and I knew at the same moment that that was greatly harming our country.
Q. General, as an officer of the army of Yugoslavia throughout this time while you were there, while you were commander there, did you ever receive any orders to deport Kosovo Albanians from any part of Kosovo?
A. Absolutely never did I receive such an order.
Q. Did you ever get a report or a plan about this?
A. I got orders from the corps command, some orders we saw yesterday, to find in my zone appropriate places where, if there was large-scale fighting, the population could be grouped and which zones would be safe in accordance with the rules and principles of the United Nations, that these zones should be marked and that I should inform the corps command about this, which areas in which villages in my zone I propose for putting up the civilian population so that it would be protected.
Q. As an officer, did you have any knowledge as to what was going on on the ground?
A. I was on the ground myself all the time. My unit covered a zone of about 150 kilometres of the state border. My commanders were in their respective places. Every other day, my commanders reported except for the commander who was in the area of Djakovica who came only now and then. The rest came every other day to report and to be given their assignments. Every day they informed me about what happened in their zone or, rather, in the areas where they were, and about other events in the territory.
Q. All right. You had reports from your commanders. What about your 42030 superiors? Did they have daily information from you from the ground?
A. They had information every day, but as I've already said, people do not take a particular fact into account. You saw this video footage here. There is filming going on and aircraft are in the air all the time. For 78 days, day and night, all communications centres of the army were destroyed. All civilian communications centres were destroyed. There weren't even civilian communications in the territory of Kosovo and Metohija. So my communication with my superior command was reduced to me sending a report in writing during the day, and by the time the command receives it, I mean all of its resources had also been hit, and I managed to speak to them very briefly through certain means of communication because they are very powerful and they are, therefore, registered immediately by the electronic surveillance aircraft of NATO. So there was communication. And precisely because there was a problem with communications, my superiors, the commander and Chief of Staff, who was otherwise in Djakovica, used each and every opportunity to come and visit my unit and to give me assignments directly. I can say that on average every fourth or fifth day the commander would come to my zone.
Q. Thank you, General. Very briefly, what was the relationship between the army of Yugoslavia and the MUP like?
A. These are two state organs. Relations are correct and proper. They cooperate. They have their own scope of authority, we have our own scope. In 1998 and 1999, since this was the time of fighting terrorism, it so happened that some of our duty overlapped. I have a military police under my command, too, and also the Ministry of the Interior has some 42031 BLANK PAGE 42032 authority over members of the military as well. I can assess that this cooperation was as it was supposed to be between state organs; professional and correct.
Q. Thank you, General. What can you say about the Joint Command, which was referred to several times here? Was it within the chain of command or not? And who gave orders to you; the joint command or somebody else?
A. I heard of the term "Joint Command," although as a matter of fact I received some orders, and I did not pay any attention to this term "Joint Command" because I usually received, on a regular basis, orders from my superior command of the Pristina Corps. Of course, this was on TV every day that a group of politicians, state officials from the republican and federal governments was in the territory of Kosovo and Metohija, that in Pristina there was a staff of the MUP for combatting terrorism. That's where the command of the Pristina Corps was as well. There was certainly meetings taking place between the two, but as for this group of politicians, they were there primarily to monitor the development of the political and security situation of Kosovo and Metohija, to cooperate with diplomatic, humanitarian and other organisations which were present on a daily basis, probably also to conduct certain talks and negotiations with the Albanians, to coordinate with the MUP and the army, and to express due interest in the security situation in Kosovo and Metohija. For me, the joint command -- I mean, I know that there was no joint command of any kind. My only commander was my commander, the commander of the Pristina Corps, and that was General Pavkovic in 1998. 42033 And in 1999 and during the war, it was General Lazarevic. So from time to time, very rarely, actually, I would receive orders from the Chief of Staff from the Pristina Corps. So those are the only two men who had the right to command me and to issue orders to me and it was only their orders that I would carry out. And of course, the commander of the army could order me something, or his Chief of Staff or somebody else from the chain of command. However, in practice that never actually happened.
Q. Mention is made here of a joint criminal enterprise. That's the term used, joint criminal enterprise. I'm sure you've heard it mentioned many times. Tell us now, please, General, briefly, what kind of enterprise did we have in Kosovo, undertaking?
A. In Kosovo we had the fight against terrorism, against the terrorism that had support outside our country, and for that reason, that kind of terrorism was not able to be suppressed in the way in which it is usually suppressed and done in every other country, because in Kosovo we were fighting against terrorism. There was no -- the term "criminal enterprise" I don't know. I cannot accept that term because that would mean that I myself would have been in that criminal enterprise, involved in that criminal enterprise, and that in Kosovo and Metohija my area was very large, and I know what I did. I know full well what I did, I know full well what my unit did, what my men did.
Q. Thank you, General. Finally, tell me this: I don't have a clear idea of all of this. From the office of Mr. Nice, did they call you to be an expert witness for Kosovo and Metohija, an expert for Kosovo and 42034 Metohija? You said you had a number of contacts with them, so how -- what did they say when they called you up?
A. It wasn't Mr. Nice's office. It was the office of the main Prosecutor, the Chief Prosecutor.
Q. Well, it's the same thing.
A. It was Mrs. Carla Del Ponte, through her team located in Belgrade. So for two and a half years I worked on this intensively. I spent about 3.000 hours amassing documentation that the Prosecution had asked me for. Mr. Nice is trying to undermine in some way this kind of work, which I don't think is proper.
Q. Thank you, General. I have just one more question which I would like you to comment on. It is very specific and concrete. During the examination-in-chief, I received, as did you, this map. It was linked to the testimony of Ashdown, and it would appear that he was standing on the very border, the line of the very border, the frontier line between Yugoslavia and Albania, what can be seen from that point and so on.
Now, as my associates, looking at it from that point which theoretically speaking is the most favourable position, although he says that he was by the village of Gegaj and not that particular point, he asked the Military Geographical Institute to mark this. So could you take a look at what we received from the Military Geographical Institute. It is on a scale of 1:50.000, the scale of the map, and we can have it placed on the overhead projector. So with your comments on that I will have completed my examination-in-chief. Would you be brief, please. 42035
A. As the Trial Chamber asked me to do, and as indeed Mr. Nice asked me to do, and as the subject I taught was topography, I did this for Mr. Nice in a short space of time.
MR. NICE: Just one minute. I don't know what this map is. This is not the map that was handed by the witness to Ms. Dicklich. The map that was handed by the witness to Ms. Dicklich looks like this. It doesn't look to me to be the same unless I'm confused. So I don't know what this map is nor the writing on it.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, what map have you handed to the witness? What map is on the ELMO?
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] On the ELMO is exactly the same map. It is the identical map. Of course not Mr. Nice's, but I assume that geographical maps don't differ in any way. And my associates asked for the experts from the Military Geographical Institute mark down and shade in the areas that can be seen from the point that Mr. Nice marked on the map, which is the most favourable map, the vantage point, and it would appear as if he was standing at the very border, the frontier line, that is to say Ashdown, that he was at that point. And they did this very precisely at the Geographical Institute, Military Geographical Institute, more precisely than the witness could have done or could do now, so I just ask him to comment.
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] After that we can also see the map that I drew up, because I had a lot of problems. The map that I was provided with was of an unknown scale, so I had to determine the scale and I had no technical means to do this, technical equipment to help me to do 42036 that. But I did more or less the same thing that the experts from the institute did, and --
JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic --
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- institute is 155 years old. It's been in existence for that time.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, I'm asking this question because the witness challenged Ashdown's testimony. So I just want him to tell us whether everything that Ashdown spoke about could actually be seen from the point he was at.
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The map confirms that Mr. Ashdown could only have seen this first village, the first village that is found right up by the border watchtower of Morina and the valley there.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Could you point to that.
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] So if that's the point, if that's the point that Mr. Ashdown was standing at --
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. And that's the most favourable point, let's assume, because that's on the very line of the actual border, the frontier line, although I doubt he was actually on that particular line but Mr. Nice took this as being the most favourable point.
A. What I did pursuant to requests from Mr. Nice is I moved this several hundred metres perhaps, the point -- I moved the point several hundred metres. But the map I was provided with, of course this map is far more precise. So from this point you can see -- here we have three or four kilometres and there is just one village that you can see from that 42037 point with the hamlets, the surrounding hamlets. I was there often. They are groups of houses in -- where certain households live. So that's the only village you can see.
These other villages, Ponosevac and so on, cannot be seen. There are quite a number of valleys here and the shaded-in surfaces show that can be seen, these dark areas, and they are the slopes which, according to their altitude, are higher than the valleys. So the darkened-in areas is what you can see. The other areas are the valleys of the various streams that cannot be seen from that particular point.
JUDGE ROBINSON: General, what stands in the way of their being seen?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, every point has its absolute height, as we call it, absolute altitude. So if in front of you you have -- if you're at a point and you have another point that is lower from the point where you are standing, it can be quite a lot lower, or if it is your same height, it prevents you from seeing everything that is behind that point, although you can have the feeling that what you can see is continuous. However, in your angle of vision you don't see the valleys and everything beyond these natural obstacles.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Since I am not a cartographer, show us on the map the points which are so high that they prevented him from seeing the villages.
JUDGE KWON: General, could you --
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson --
JUDGE KWON: Just a minute. 42038
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] May I answer your question briefly, what hampers seeing it? Nobody can see through a hill. Nobody can see through a mountain. That's the obstacle. So the darkened-in areas are the places that could be seen from the point. The areas in the valleys beyond those points cannot be seen.
Here we have Skoza, which prevents you from seeing anything further in the distance along that way. Here we have another feature. This is a black and white copy so I can't read what it says, but it's a feature which, according to its altitude, is higher than this first point and limits vision. You cannot see further along that side. So this is your angle of vision.
Under Ponosevac you have Planik. That's one feature there, Planik, and I know that from the map I drew up for Mr. Nice. It is at an altitude of 571 metres, I believe, I remember correctly. Everything below it is lower, so that area you cannot see up until this next feature, the next dark line, darkened-in area.
JUDGE KWON: General, could you indicate the point where Junik is on this map.
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Junik, no, you can't see it at all here. It would be -- if this is Ponosevac, it would be in that general direction, in this general direction, but it is far beyond that next hill. So there's no possibility --
JUDGE KWON: Can we see Morina on this map?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, you cannot see Morina. Morina is here. It is covered. You can't see it. Morina cannot be seen, Batusa 42039 cannot be seen, and after that you come to Junik. Junik is a village which is between -- situated between two hills, and you can only see Junik if you're right up on that adjacent hill above Junik, because it's in a gorge.
JUDGE BONOMY: Have you seen a film that was taken of the view he had?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] How do you mean film?
JUDGE BONOMY: Well, the view was video recorded, I think.
MR. NICE: Different incident.
JUDGE BONOMY: Sorry. Sorry.
MR. NICE: Could I have a copy of this map, please.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. The Prosecution is to have a copy of the map.
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If you want me to show the map I drew up here --
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. General, I'm sure Mr. Nice in his cross-examination will get to that. I don't want to waste time on it now.
Thank you, General. I have no further questions for you. I have completed my examination-in-chief, Mr. Robinson. The opposite side is going to ask you some questions now.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I apologise. Just a moment, please. I apologise. Mr. Robinson, this video clip, the 21st, I assume that you understood my request to have that admitted into evidence, and tab 288 should contain one more document related to the KVM mission. It was 42040 omitted from my set of documents and from your set of documents by mistake. So I have that here. Tab 288 and 288A, which means the Serbian and English text. So I'd like to tender that into evidence and have it admitted as well. Thank you.
MR. NICE: [Previous translation continues]... is one of the things we don't understand that the accused is talking about. And the tab number for the Zjum near Prizren video is not clear to us either.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The videos that I provided, we can check the numbers of the documents.
[Trial Chamber confers]
JUDGE ROBINSON: We are trying to identify the tab number for the video.
JUDGE KWON: So, Mr. Nice, you are referring to 629, additional videos?
MR. NICE: If that's what it is. Well, 629 is Albanians, Turks, and Romas, and that was digging in the trenches. 627 is said to be Osek-Hilj Djakovica, and neither of those would seem to be Zjum near Prizren, and therefore we don't have any detail, date, or anything like that to go on. We don't know what it is. It was played without being one of the itemised exhibits or indexed.
[Trial Chamber confers]
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's tab 627, where mention is made of the village of Zjum, Prizren, from May 1999. It's near Djakovica. Tab 627.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson. 42041
JUDGE KWON: It appears in B/C/S, not translated into English. Yes. Only the first part of that index was translated into English. You follow?
MR. NICE: Yes, I think so. We'll work on that basis. There's the rest of his exhibits to be dealt with. Rather than waste what limited time there is today, I don't know if that could be reviewed. My position would be we skipped so many documents in this file that anything that isn't skipped I'm not going to object to having been overruled in respect of the television programme but anything that has been skipped we needn't bother with. That would be my submission.
JUDGE KWON: Are you in the position to identify those tab numbers skipped?
MR. NICE: Sorry, I'm not. I should have been doing it but I wasn't. I was tied up with other things.
MR. KAY: Can I just raise one matter on that, on the skipping of documents? During the Prosecution case there was a witness called Karleusa who produced the investigation file concerning the lorry from Prizren that was found in the lake, and it's the corpses in the lorry. He produced investigation file full of statements by various people during his investigation of that matter, and the tabs were skipped. It was a collective, it spoke for itself, and the whole exhibit did go into evidence. So if sometimes there is a collective of materials by which looking at a few of those tabs is sufficient to describe the general nature, in my submission, that should not prevent the rest of the documents going on if they are part of that collective. The Trial Chamber 42042 may attach what weight to it they wish, but --
JUDGE ROBINSON: In this particular situation, we sanctioned the procedure whereby Mr. Milosevic dealt with a group of documents.
MR. KAY: Yes.
JUDGE ROBINSON: So wouldn't it be reasonable to assume that if he didn't -- if he skipped something -- I'm not talking about the documents in the group. If there are documents in the group that were not specifically referred to, then those are admitted as part of the group. But if they're outside the group --
MR. KAY: Then of course --
JUDGE ROBINSON: -- it's reasonable to assume he wasn't seeking the admission of those.
MR. KAY: I don't have an issue with that. I was being careful about missed documents because there might be a misunderstanding between the parties on such an issue.
[Trial Chamber confers]
JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, you heard what I said to Mr. Kay, that we allowed you to deal with documents in groups. So if a group had ten documents and you only mentioned four, all of the ten will be admitted. But it's another question in relation to documents outside of the groups which were not -- which were not mentioned at all.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson, I think in principle you are quite right, but in this specific case I didn't skip one single document. Let me remind you. I asked from you and from the witness to go through certain documents in groups, such as documents related to the KVM, 42043 and whenever I asked the witness to do so, I asked for your consent, such as in the case of reports for April and May. I asked that they be dealt with as a group with the witness highlighting only the main points, and with the proviso that all of them be admitted into evidence. We dealt with documents either by period or by type with your approval.
[Trial Chamber confers]
JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, are you saying you didn't skip any documents?
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Not if you bear in mind that I asked for your prior approval to go through certain documents by group as dealing specifically with only some of them.
JUDGE ROBINSON: [Previous translation continues] ... deal with. You dealt with in the groups.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes.
[Trial Chamber confers]
JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, for today's evidence, did you proceed by way of groups?
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Partially today, too, because I received your approval yesterday to go through April and May documents as a group. So we just flew through these documents.
JUDGE ROBINSON: [Microphone not activated]
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I suppose until the end of April and May.
JUDGE ROBINSON: The tabs.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, I cannot see that now. I 42044 cannot find that paper, but it was somewhere up to 610 or maybe 612. Let me just see.
I went through -- specifically through 607, the criminal report that we've seen. That's the beginning of June.
Certainly all the way until 600, and then I went individually through the most important documents all the way to the end. I dealt with them one by one together with the witness.
JUDGE ROBINSON: All right. We'll give a ruling on the admission of the remaining documents on Monday.
In the meantime, Mr. Nice, you may start. Cross-examined by Mr. Nice:
Q. I only have time for a couple of details. Just dealing with Lord Ashdown, can I have a copy of that map, please.
And the second thing is, the map you've been referring to as marked by the Prosecution is in fact a map that was handed to you blank, like this, you marked in it yourself the proposed position of Lord Ashdown, and then you marked in the shading in red; is that correct?
A. Yes. But you have to know that you provided me with an unacceptable map, totally inadequate to such precise work.
Q. Please make such comments if you think they're going to be helpful. We actually provided you with two maps, one too detailed; you asked for another one, we provided you this one, the best we could find, you marked it, we sent it to Lord Ashdown, and I'd now like a copy of the map you've got and we'll send that to him as well. So if I can have that, please. 42045 BLANK PAGE 42046 Right, let's just deal in the remaining time with one topic. Where were you stationed in 1989?
A. 1999 and 1998 I was stationed in Prizren. That's what -- where my --
JUDGE ROBINSON: [Previous translation continues] ...
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In Prizren. That's where my command was. In 1999.
MR. NICE:
Q. 1989? 1989?
A. In 1989, I was in Belgrade, of course.
Q. In 1990?
A. In 1990, also in Belgrade.
Q. In 1991, where were you based then?
A. All of the time from 1987 until 1995 I was working at the military academy in Belgrade, except for the fact that in certain periods, such as in 1991 and 1992 and another period in 1993-1994, I was on the battlefield, once in Croatia and another time in Bosnia-Herzegovina.
Q. Precisely. In 1991, you were on the battlefield in Croatia. Whereabouts; at Dubrovnik?
A. No, not in Dubrovnik itself but in the surrounding area.
Q. Oh, really? Which part of the surrounding area?
A. It was the location of the command for civilian affairs, called Cavtat.
Q. And you indeed appeared at the Cavtat talks, didn't you?
A. Yes. 42047
Q. 1992, what part of the battlefield, if any, did you appear on in 1992?
A. In 1992, that was that period. I was responsible for civilian affairs at the command for civilian affairs, as I said, which was based in Cavtat.
Q. In Cavtat. Very well. In 1993?
A. In 1993, until April, I was working at the military academy in Belgrade, and from April until September I was in Bosnia-Herzegovina around Ljubinje.
Q. Yes. What was your -- what was your role there?
A. You mean 1993?
Q. Yes.
A. For a month I was Chief of Staff of the 715th Brigade, and after that I was the officer for intelligence and security.
Q. 1994?
A. In 1994, I was working at the military academy.
Q. You didn't leave Belgrade?
A. No.
Q. 1995?
A. From the 6th of February, 1995, onwards, I was in Prizren occupying the position of Chief of Staff until the 26th of July, when I became commander.
Q. Are you saying you stayed in Kosovo, so far as duty is concerned, from that time onwards?
A. Yes. From that time onwards I was in the 549th Motorised Brigade, 42048 apart from the period that I spent in training. But throughout that time I continued to occupy my position in the brigade. From the 2nd of September until the 26th of July, 1997, I was at the school for national defence in Belgrade.
MR. NICE: One last question because I suspect it's time that we have to rise unless we --
JUDGE ROBINSON: Another two minutes, until a quarter to.
MR. NICE:
Q. About 20 minutes ago you gave a very long answer about the Joint Command, something that you had been questioned about extensively by the Judges in respect to an earlier document. Have you discussed the question of the Joint Command with anyone in order for you to be able to give that long answer?
A. I'm telling you I was the commander, and after the corps commander and Chief of Staff of the corps, the next line of command is the commanders of brigades.
Q. May I repeat the question, with Your Honour's leave, so the witness can understand it.
It's a very simple question, but I'm going to repeat it word-for-word: About 20 minutes ago you gave a very long answer about the Joint Command, something you'd been questioned about extensively by the Judges in respect to an earlier document. Have you discussed the question of the Joint Command with anyone in order for you to give that long answer that you gave about 20 minutes ago?
A. Well, I discussed that also with my colleagues, commanders of 42049 other brigades.
Q. Since you were giving evidence here? Since you answered the learned Judges about the Joint Command?
A. No.
Q. So the long answer that you gave was simply a long answer you've always been able to give; is that right?
A. Absolutely --
Q. Very well.
A. -- I've always been able to answer that question.
Q. We'll compare it next week with the answers you gave earlier. Thank you.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson, could I be informed how long the cross-examination by Mr. Nice will take so that I can plan my schedule?
JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Nice?
MR. NICE: My considerable pleasure to do my best. As you know, I aim to take no more than 50 per cent of the time taken by the accused in evidence in chief, but I can't guarantee that. That would take me to the beginning of the week after next. It would, of course, be a matter for the accused and how long he takes with re-examination -- and I can't guarantee that, but assuming I were to finish at the beginning of the week after next, it would be a matter for him and his re-examination whether he can fit in another witness.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, that should be helpful to you. We will adjourn until Tuesday of next week, 9.00 a.m., or is it 42050 BLANK PAGE 42051 BLANK PAGE 42052 BLANK PAGE 42053 BLANK PAGE 42054 BLANK PAGE 42055 BLANK PAGE 42056 Monday? Monday of next week. Monday of next week, 9.00 a.m.
--- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.47 p.m., to be reconvened on Monday, the 11th day of
July, 2005, at 9.00 a.m.